Climate change divides the Alps down the middle
Global warming is already causing flooding in the north and water shortages in south, report says
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Reddit
Google
Stumble Upon
Fark
Newsvine
YahooBuzz
Bebo
Twitter
Independent Minds
The dramatic effect of climate change on the Alps comes into focus as never before this week with the publication of a major report which reveals that the mountain range is rapidly dividing into two contrasting climatic zones, each posing new problems.
The Convention on the Protection of the Alps is a statutory EU body set up in 1991 and its magisterial second report, published tomorrow, which has been seen by The Independent, reveals that the northern ranges of the Alps are suffering ever more serious flooding while the parched southern mountains see less and less snow.
According to the report, precipitation in the south-east of the region has fallen nearly 10 per cent in the past 100 years while rain and snowfall in the north-west ranges has increased by the same amount over this time.
"Predictions that the European climate is dividing into two are becoming all too real," said Marco Onida, secretary general of the Convention, who will present the report at the organisation's headquarters in Bolzano, Italy, tomorrow, in the presence of EU officials and national representatives. "The result will be havoc for the Alps and the communities and wildlife that rely on area."
Changing patterns of rain and snowfall, shrinking glaciers and rising temperatures will affect not only the mountains but also the communities which rely on their resources, the report warns. Already some Alpine villages in the north of the range face flooding, while areas further south are seeing tourist and other trades increasingly threatened. Some areas have already suffered water shortages.
The Alps' most famous high peaks, Mont Blanc, The Matterhorn and Monte Rosa mark part of the dividing line between the increasingly wet north of the region and Italy and Slovenia in the dryer south.
North of the dividing line, flooding and mud slides are becoming a common threat in some Alpine communities. In the south, some of the Europe's most celebrated Alpine beauty spots, including Italy's Dolomites are under threat, although some micro-climates mean the dividing line does not following a rigid north-south line.
As a result of these changes, only one Alpine river – Italy's 178-mile-long Tagliamento in the north-east of the country – has not suffered drastic modifications, the reports says. And even the Tagliamento may not be safe: the wildlife charity WWF has warned that even this, the Alps' last river system, is threatened by water abstraction in the upper Tagliamento valley, organic pollution, and gravel exploitation.
The situation across the Alps is made worse, the Convention report says, by the increasing demand for artificial snow created during the winter months by snow machines working on the ski slopes. This is needed to sustain the winter sports industry which is an economic mainstay of the slopes, but places a further heavy burden on water and energy supplies which are already under great stress.
"The Alps are the water tower of Europe," Dr Onida told The Independent, "But increasingly much of the water is not reaching the places downstream where it is needed, for ecosystems, agriculture and energy production."
Around 16 million people in eight countries, from France in the west to Hungary in the east, live in the arc of Europe's biggest mountain range. Rain and snow from its mountains provide the Danube, Rhine, Rhone and Po rivers with up to 80 per cent of their water.
Representatives from all eight Alpine countries – France, Italy, Germany, Switzerland, Austria, Lichtenstein, Slovenia and Hungary – together with the European Union – signed up to the Alpine Convention in 1991.
The report warns not only that the destruction of the Alps is accelerating, but that disruption to water supplies will be felt much further afield than originally thought.
Glacier shrinkage earlier this year led the Italian and Swiss governments to propose the first changes in the border line between the two countries in more than a century.
Dr Onida said there was "a battle between agriculture and tourism for control over water supplies" owing to the increasingly intensive exploitation of the slopes.
Climate change is also driving Alpine species further up the mountains while exotic species including palms get a foothold lower down.
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited
Comments
As for shrinking glaciers, many of them have uncovered the remains of ancient forests and human settlements. Nothing is happening here except the natural variation in climate and micro-climates.
The ski holiday industry built up during the cooling period from the late 40s to the mid 70s, presumably under the illusion that the climate would always remain the same. That is understandable because climate variability was not well understood at that time. The inference here is that some kind of runaway global warming is destroying the industry. But the evidence shows that is not true, as we are now in the 10th. year of a global cooling cycle.
I take it you had an advance copy of the second report of the Convention on the Protection of the Alps, as the article clearly states the report won't be published until tomorrow? You had plenty of time, I hope, to consider the contents of the report and perhaps carry out your own research or analysis of the data before dismissing the report as an 'alarmist' story?
Or was it just your usual kneejerk reaction?
I understand your first point, and I was inferring that this report might well be looking at weather, rather than climate. As some scientists are predicting the present cooling phase could go on for 20 to 30 years, the climate picture for the alps could look very different by 2040.
If you want to use snowfall as an indicator of weather, best off using the winter/annual snowfall stats rather than anecdotal evidence of one week/month or another.
Plus, avalanches often occur as a result of instability brought about by warm snow/air - snow is usually more stable in colder temperatures. Sudden heavy snowfall on top of a thin snow-base, as is often the case at the beginning of a winter preceded by a mild autumn, will also be unstable and highly avalanche prone. So, the existance of avalanches alone is not evidence of cold weather/global cooling.
This article is typical of the selectivity of the AGW-faithful. Is Global warming global or local? The Alps are just one small part of the globe. Because the changes 'can' be associated with climate change, then the are 'further proof'. The USA - a much bigger part of the globe is not warming - its warmest year in the past century of so being in the 1930s. Ar, but this is just a 'local' effect. Same with Antarcica. Most of the continent is cooling. But one peninsula shows warming = evidence of global warming. Blah, blah, blah. I'm enjoying this AGW debate more and more - as the faithful become more and more desparate. I totally support protection of the environment, but based on science, not waffle. I'm please that AGW is just waffle. As soon as the truth becomes evidently clear, then we can spend more time, effort and money on the REAL problems in the world.
Ahh. The famous data processing flaw. Check out "http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2
We could bind up excessive CO2 in improved soil depth and tree cover, give sanctuary to wildlife, create real jobs in nature conservation and localised food production. Real organic food production is more sustainable, and produces higher yields per acre. Its labour intensive, and that has a cost. But surely better to give people productive jobs back on the land like most of humanity has lived. Trade should be there to create additional food security, not destroy local producers. We have capabilities to trade that is vastly greater than historical times, but support to industrial farmers puts local / organic producers at a massive disadvantage. Industrial produce is low in nutrients, so it makes people crave extra food and suffer from obesity and sub-clinical illnesses.
If we nurtured our ecosphere properly, the CO2 and other elements that we have mined get adsorbed back into the ground as vegetation and increased soil depth. Forest holds more water in the soil, and the rainfall pattern is affected by the cover. We created the deserts of the world by deforestation. We can build vast industrial scale greenhouses to extract water from seawater, to restart this process, protect shorelines from erosion, and even create power, jobs and industry where none is feasible for our homeless and desperate.
The article talks about longer term timescales than the feared tipping points. The effects of mankind on our world is not something that has happened in the last 10 years, and neither is it to be fixed in 10. We have to start now, though as mass starvation and deforestation is a catastrophe for our total world ecology. The levels of extinction we are creating is unnatural and devastating. We need to take less from the world, nurture what is left, and put back more than we took. Noone needs the level of extraction that most westerners are accustomed to. Anyone who tries seriously to reduce their acquisition of new possessions might end up with a less cluttered lifestyle, and have time to actually enjoy their life.
I thank you
Firozali A. Mulla
I thank you
Firozali A. Mulla