Who told us to plant exotics.

Because 20 years ago we were told to expect a mediterranean climate by 2010.

Its like a double bluff. Deny that the planet is warming(which it isn't). Then accept what the minority is saying(despite what thousands of scientists are telling us) Then tax us all to buggery telling us that the planet will cook unless we all use green fuels & pay more money :dh::dh:

Olive processing involves a lengthy brining session to remove the bitterness.

 

So you were obviously "caught" 20 yrs ago the same as me Ziggy.

I think its now 2040 before we get the Med climate, so its just a case of hanging on for another 30 yrs.

 

Seems I was Pete. Not hanging on any more, as soon as Evil wife is done, then i'm thinking about a small holding in Spain, apparently they do have a mediterranian climate there.

 

Technically most of what we all grow is exotic as they are not native.

However to most of us exotic means giving the illusion of the tropics, and there are many plants that will give this effect. I may well lose a few plants this winter, but the vast majority of what I grow for the exotic effect will cope with what a typical winter (and even this one so far) will bring. Even a very harsh winter wont totally trash the garden, its all about looking into what your local conditions are like. The good old Trachycarpus palm has been grown outside all over the UK for over 150 years and has taken some very bad winters in its time.

Yes the DIY sheds and garden centres have caught the exotic bug and tried to sell fast growing (and therefore cheap to produce) palms as hardy when they are not. But a small number of 'disposable' palms go into my garden as bedding each year, probably at no more cost than most people would spend on more typical bedding.

We get winters in the UK, we have just had a period of milder winters up to 2008 that allowed a few more tender plants to survive.

I will keep growing an exotic effect and will learn from what dies this year, but look for hardy exotic looking plants for the effect - plus add a few pots of tender plants that can be moved for winter!

Have a look at my blog for a bunch of photos of palms in the snow - all of which I fully expect to still be looking good in the Spring!

 

I suspect that we won't know what we have lost till the spring. Some might be knocked back very hard but could come back again from the base, and some won't.

Last winter I lost an Abutilon megapotamicum, which I gather is not very hardy at all - though it had survived for several years. As I was digging out the remains I saw a green shoot in the base - but too late. :D

 

Well John,over the last couple of years I have lost Canna's,Echiums and my big Cordialine has taken quite a hit but I am nurturing it back,spose that is some of the fun of gardening.
It is the ordinary gardener I am talking about who has been encouraged to buy these often expensive plants not the experts like Gaz,Pete,BM etc. who have the knowhow the protection and indoor space to protect these plants.
KEYWORDS.....Ordinary gardener and encouraged.

 

I know what you mean Roders and "expert" is stretching the truth a tad, but I think we all started out "ordinary".

Its the challenge of growing something different that keeps me going and I have lost loads of strange plants over the years, some I often dont remember till someone mentions them.

Gardening has always been just one big experiment to see what I can grow and what I cant, if you cant you just move on.

 

:snpl: Good post Pete.....you are a legend ........
On here anyway...:gnthb:

 

Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is lower now than its EVER been since the Carboniferous period 300 million years ago. Why are they lying to us ?

Ziggy, I am afraid I am going to have to disagree with you. I see two seperate aspects of global warming. 1) the past and present. These have already happened and are consequently a matter of record and can be verified by many different scientists.

and 2) The future, which is conjecture. I think this is where people disagree most because nobody really knows.

As far as the present is concerned, the current level of carbon dioxide is 390 parts per million. This is about 100 parts more than it was 100 years ago, when they first started to be concerned, and is believed to be the highest level for 800 thousand years. But its not just the absolute level that is cause for concern - it has been even higher in the very distant past, but then our climate has been quite different too. I believe the real concern is the rate at which it is increasing. It is stated that it is increasing faster than anything ever seen for 600 million years. I don't know what will happen in the future, but I do know that CO2 is a greenhouse gas that is rising at an alarming rate.

 

Hi Pete,

Never be afraid to disagree :thumb:

I agree that the rate of change should be a cause for concern & that human kind should take control of what we are doing to the atmosphere.

But I think we should have a contingency plan for the release of green house gasses in the event of a sudden climate shift.

The world would be thrown into chaos if the ice sheets advance again, possibly more so than if they melted. If sea levels rise & we loose low lying lands like the Nederlands then yes we would have a huge tide of refugees, but picture having to evacuate Canada, half the USA & half of Europe and Asia.

And "if" the southern countries let us in, how will they feed us on the impoverished desert soils that exist there, just because the climate shifts wont make the Sahara or the gulf states deserts fertile.

Geologically speaking, atmospheric Co2 has been much higher,

540 million years ago - 6000ppm

490 mya - 4500ppm

425 mya - 3000ppm

365 mya - 2000ppm

295 mya - 400ppm This was the end of the Carboniferous, loads of co2 removed from the atmosphere by the coal measures.

230 mya -2500ppm

190 mya -1100ppm

160 mya -2100ppm

70 mya -1000ppm

27 mya - 500ppm

10 mya -400ppm

1 mya -385ppm

Sorry for all the stats but it does give the clear view that despite Co2 being off the scale compared to now the planet has always had a landmass.

If all the ice in the world were to melt we will always have dry land as long as the geological processes of plate tectonics continue. If the core cools & they stop then erosion would continue untill we are all ankle deep in water & we'd better develop a rice that will grow in salt water.

Now, despite phenominal atmospheric Co2 in the past, there was a time when the North & South polar ice caps grew & grew until they all but met at the Equator.

This leads me to believe that its not the Co2 levels but the Suns' output that we have to consider.

You can put a blanket on the bed but if the heating goes off eventually you're going to get cold.

 

Thanks Ziggy for the reply.

Your figures were very interesting and encouraged me to have a good long Google. There is such a lot of information out there - some of it in disagreement, but mostly there is a scientific consensus. But it certainly isn't all cut and dried.

1) Science has a pretty good direct record of CO2 levels and temperatures from ice core and other samples that go back 800,000 years. And until the last few decades the CO2 level was between 180 and 300 ppm. And this correlated with temperatures.

2) To go back further, you must rely of proxies such as the ratios of various isotopes, This becomes increasingly inaccurate the further back you go. Within the last year a new method has been used by studying the ratio of the chemical element boron to calcium in the shells of ancient single-celled marine algae. This appears to be a more accurate method and correlates better with the recent information from other sources. It indicates that earlier methods were overstating CO2 levels. The view now is that CO2 levels have never been higher that 1,500 ppm over the last 250 million years.

3) Even so, it is clear that CO2 and temperature levels have been a lot higher in the past, but then the world was a very different place, with sea levels up to hundreds of feet higher than today and land masses quite different shapes and with different climates. There is also no question that there are important natural cycles at work. A cycle of 100,000 years of ice ages going back over the last 800,000 years can be seen in the data and there will be other cycles. I am sure these forces are still at work, but I am also sure that they will wipe out large parts of our civilisation in due time.

5) However the problem seems to be in the here and now. The CO2 levels are increasing at a much higher rate than in any natural cycle, and our civilisation is so precarious that just a 5 foot rise in sea levels will cause chaos, let alone the 500 feet rise that could occur during a natural cycle.

6) My conclusion is that there is cause for alarm. However you could be fatalistic and say that natural cycles will wipe us out anyway. In fact I am tending towards the fatalistic approach. I think the chance of nations seriously (and we are not serious yet) tackling the problem before it is too late is very low. I see a clear comparison with the banking crisis. In spite of what they said, most bankers knew there was a crisis coming. I remember one banker on the radio, before the crash, saying that there was no question that the house of cards would collapse, but not to worry as there was still time to make another fortune before it happened.

 

Thats a great reply Peter,

I like the Boron to Calcium method, I was not previously aware of that one. That would give a better picture geologically.

I also agree that a rise in sea level would be a real problem. Although I think it would be less of a problem than a new ice age.

I agree that the rise in Co2 is out of proportion to the natural cycle too.

As for the fatalistic aproach, even when the ice sheets met at the equator, life managed to hang on and survive.

I think we need to incorporate all this information and concerns into the Gardeners Corner Manifesto. As the Con/dem pact goes tits up, we level headed gardeners will be in prime position to take control of the country.


Next, we need to decide on our cabinet.

Who will be our leader ?

 

Thanks Ziggy - but it does concern me, because I am an optimist. Its easy to say that the current world will last me out, but I don't think it will.

You see, science is improving at an increasing pace. I take great solace that for every 24 hours that I live, my life expectance has increased by another 7 hours, and that that figure itself is increasing. So by I reckon that when that 7 hours increase has reached 24 hours increase I am going to live for ever. Its going to happen - I just hope it happens early. :hehe:

So during my infinite lifetime, there is a good chance that I will see the LibDems in power in their own right - or maybe not. :D

 

I'm going to live forever.
And, so far, so good!

:hehe: :hehe: