2 ms·

Yep, was thinking the same thing. Climate change is also (at least partially) responsible for instability in the polar vortexes that shoot south more often now.

Yep, was thinking the same thing. Climate change is also (at least partially) responsible for instability in the polar vortexes that shoot south more often now. Between Winter Storm Uri in Feb 2021 and "icemageddon" in Feb 2023 we lost a ton of plants and trees. We have a retaining wall in the back of our property and had a couple giant, cascading rosemary bushes that completely covered the wall - they were so pretty and always smelled amazing. I still get sad thinking about how Uri took those beauties out...

galangalalgol 2y ago
Yeah... Ok, my average temperature increased by %4.x percent, but my variance increased by quite a bit more than that. The assumptions underlying the growing zone approximation were never great ones, but I find the whole idea largely irrelevant now. Cold snaps a good ten degrees below normal have now repeatedly killed established natives (as in you could find them in local wildlife preserves). And the long dry spells averaging what used to be the yearly high, now kill plants adapted to live in actual deserts. Is it wrong that part of me is fascinated to see what comes next?
- voisin 2y ago
  > my average temperature increased by %4.x percent Can you do that with temperatures not in kelvin (with true zero)?
  - cozzyd 2y ago
    you can do what you want but it doesn't make it meaningful
  - DangitBobby 2y ago
    It's not more meaningful in Kelvin. 1 to 4 is a 300% increase and so is 200 to 800. So hearing 300% tells you absolutely nothing, without the added context of "from the previous average temperature of the region".
    - voisin 2y ago
      My point is that a 4% increase in numbers on a scale where zero does not equate tot he total absence is not actually 4% hotter.
    - smolder 2y ago
      Yes, it is. Percentages don't mean anything in temperature unless it is Kelvin where 0 is truly 0. 1 to 4 degrees Celsius is not a 300% increase in anything but the integer representing temp. Try that in Fahrenheit or with a negative value. Edit: I think I initially missed your point that percentages are kind of silly to use anyway.
      - dragonwriter 2y ago
        > Percentages don’t mean anything in temperature unless it is Kelvin where 0 is truly 0. Well, technically any absolute scale: Kelvin is the most common, but Rankine has the same feature. (It just uses Fahrenheit-sized degrees instead of Celsius-sized.)
        smolder 2y ago
        I wondered if there might be others but left it up to you to correct me. :)
aftbit 2y ago
Things like this make me want to install some kind of heaters near my most prized plants. The power cost would be pretty high, and they wouldn't be sufficient to make it through the winter or anything, but they might allow us to weather a night or two of freezing temperatures in the early spring.
- hn_throwaway_99 2y ago
  You can do this with soil heating cables and plant frost covers. Our problem during winter storm Uri is that the Texas electrical grid almost failed and we had to power for nearly a week in subfreezing temps.

galangalalgol 2y ago

Yeah... Ok, my average temperature increased by %4.x percent, but my variance increased by quite a bit more than that. The assumptions underlying the growing zone approximation were never great ones, but I find the whole idea largely irrelevant now. Cold snaps a good ten degrees below normal have now repeatedly killed established natives (as in you could find them in local wildlife preserves). And the long dry spells averaging what used to be the yearly high, now kill plants adapted to live in actual deserts. Is it wrong that part of me is fascinated to see what comes next?

voisin 2y ago
> my average temperature increased by %4.x percent Can you do that with temperatures not in kelvin (with true zero)?
- cozzyd 2y ago
  you can do what you want but it doesn't make it meaningful
- DangitBobby 2y ago
  It's not more meaningful in Kelvin. 1 to 4 is a 300% increase and so is 200 to 800. So hearing 300% tells you absolutely nothing, without the added context of "from the previous average temperature of the region".
  - voisin 2y ago
    My point is that a 4% increase in numbers on a scale where zero does not equate tot he total absence is not actually 4% hotter.
  - smolder 2y ago
    Yes, it is. Percentages don't mean anything in temperature unless it is Kelvin where 0 is truly 0. 1 to 4 degrees Celsius is not a 300% increase in anything but the integer representing temp. Try that in Fahrenheit or with a negative value. Edit: I think I initially missed your point that percentages are kind of silly to use anyway.
    - dragonwriter 2y ago
      > Percentages don’t mean anything in temperature unless it is Kelvin where 0 is truly 0. Well, technically any absolute scale: Kelvin is the most common, but Rankine has the same feature. (It just uses Fahrenheit-sized degrees instead of Celsius-sized.)
      - smolder 2y ago
        I wondered if there might be others but left it up to you to correct me. :)

aftbit 2y ago

Things like this make me want to install some kind of heaters near my most prized plants. The power cost would be pretty high, and they wouldn't be sufficient to make it through the winter or anything, but they might allow us to weather a night or two of freezing temperatures in the early spring.

hn_throwaway_99 2y ago
You can do this with soil heating cables and plant frost covers. Our problem during winter storm Uri is that the Texas electrical grid almost failed and we had to power for nearly a week in subfreezing temps.