Tag Archives: food

IPCC AR5

1 Reply

IPCC’s 5th Assessment Report is out. It’s a long, exhausting document that I will probably slog my way through little by little. I’ve pulled out just a couple passages here about food production and fisheries, which are two risks I tend to think about. I think humans can generally deal with higher temperatures and more frequent storms and coastal flooding, because there is such a wide range of these things now and we deal with them. Food production is the intersection of water, energy, and ecosystems.

Assessment of many studies covering a wide range of regions and crops shows that negative impacts of climate change on crop yields have been more common than positive impacts (high confidence). The smaller number of studies showing positive impacts relate mainly to high-latitude regions, though it is not yet clear whether the balance of impacts has been negative or positive in these regions (high confidence). Climate change has negatively affected wheat and maize yields for many regions and in the global aggregate (medium confidence). Effects on rice and soybean yield have been smaller in major production regions and globally, with a median change of zero across all available data, which are fewer for soy compared to the other crops. (See Figure 1.11C) Observed impacts relate mainly to production aspects of food security rather than access or other components of food security. Since AR4, several periods of rapid food and cereal price increases following climate extremes in key producing regions indicate a sensitivity of current markets to climate extremes among other factors (medium confidence)…

Global marine species redistribution and marine biodiversity reduction in sensitive regions, under climate change, will challenge the sustained provision of fisheries productivity and other ecosystem services, especially at low latitudes (high confidence). By the mid-21st century, under 2 °C global warming relative to pre-industrial temperatures, shifts in the geographical range of marine species will cause species richness and fisheries catch potential to increase, on average, at mid and high latitudes (high confidence) and to decrease at tropical latitudes and in semi-enclosed seas (Figure 2.6A) (medium confidence). The progressive expansion of Oxygen Minimum Zones and anoxic ‘dead zones’ in the oceans will further constrain fish habitats (medium confidence). Open-ocean net primary production is projected to redistribute and to decrease globally, by 2100, under all RCP scenarios (medium confidence). Climate change adds to the threats of over-fishing and other non-climatic stressors (high confidence).

We talk so much about the atmosphere, but our oceans, forests, and soils are absorbing a lot of the carbon emissions, and are the reason our planet and current civilization are as resilient as they are. We better take care of them.

meat

Leave a reply

Here is the BBC raising the alarm about meat consumption:

Global consumption of meat needs to fall to ensure future demand for food can be met and to help protect the environment, a study says.

Research from two universities estimates greenhouse gases from food production will go up 80% if meat and dairy consumption continues to rise at its current rate.

Meanwhile National Geographic has a long, interesting article about what our ancestors actually ate. The answer: pretty much everything and anything they could get their hands on. Some societies ate a lot of meat while others did not. Some made a big deal of meat, but filled up on a steady diet of twigs and berries in between successful hunts.

In other words, there is no one ideal human diet. Aiello and Leonard say the real hallmark of being human isn’t our taste for meat but our ability to adapt to many habitats—and to be able to combine many different foods to create many healthy diets. Unfortunately the modern Western diet does not appear to be one of them.

more on drought in California

Leave a reply

From the BBC:

For many years rainfall, reservoirs and irrigation canals have allowed this sunny expanse in California to produce half of America’s fruit, nuts and vegetables.

But after three extremely dry years, the farmers are turning to groundwater to keep their crops and their precious trees alive.

There’s a water-rush as drilling companies are burrowing ever deeper – and there’s no restriction on how many wells can be sunk underground…

In some parts of the Central Valley, the water level has dropped more than 20m in less than a year…

This year, for the first time, farmers in many parts of the Central Valley have received no rainwater or runoff allocation for their crops from the water district…

“If this drought situation is the new normal we are going to have to completely re-think how much food we can grow – and a lot of people depend on California for growing food,” he said.

It can be hard to separate the long-term signal from the short-term noise, but still this seems like it may be climate change finally coming to bite us. That’s what happened in Australia and it took them a decade to accept their “new normal”.

Water, energy, and food supplies (and prices) all fluctuate constantly and affect one another. Here’s NPR talking about a few of these fluctuations but ultimately coming back to, yes, drought.

Across the country, the virus killed several million piglets, adding up to a lot fewer hogs at market. So tighter supply means Lewis gets paid more per pound, per hog.

“It’s been remarkable what the price has done,” says Lewis. “The last couple of years, hog farmers dug a real deep equity hole. And so it’s really nice to have that hole start to get filled up.”

He’s referring partly to the cost of feed — a major expense here on the farm. After record high corn prices in 2012, feed has now gotten cheaper, and Lewis can raise bigger hogs.

It’s a different story with cattle, which take much longer to bring to market. When feed prices skyrocketed two years ago, many ranchers sold off more cattle than they might have otherwise.

That extra beef is long gone, and ongoing drought in the Plains states means herds aren’t growing fast enough to meet demand.

The headline suggests that higher meat prices “aren’t scaring consumers”, but later they say that “Shoppers who can may spend more to eat the same amount of meat. Others will spend just the same, but get less.” That’s how it works in this economic system of ours – those who can pay more, do, and those who can’t, do without.

more on climate change and U.S. farming

Leave a reply

This NPR article says that climate change is allowing North Dakota farmers to switch from wheat to corn.

“Especially the increase in moisture has allowed for better yields and more profit in corn than, say, if we had some of the lesser moisture we had in the ’70s and the ’80s,” Ritchison says.

Corn and soybeans, which also like the moisture, now cover about 15 percent of North Dakota’s cropland, says Ritchison, and the number of acres keeps expanding. The Slabaugh farm is a prime example of corn’s advance. They will plant at least 1,500 acres this year — compared to none 10 years ago.

Changes in weather patterns aren’t the only reason for the move to corn. The crop is also more lucrative: Corn produces much bigger yields per acre than wheat.

All well and good for those farmers, but this doesn’t strike me as an upbeat story in the larger context. If we are in danger of losing productive farmland in many states due to a combination of heat, drought, and groundwater depletion, is it really so helpful that productive farmland in other states is now able to switch from one crop to another? Even if biotechnology helps and yields get higher, it seems like it would be a net loss. This is the United States. What is the story in the tropics, where there is generally less farmland and more people?

you know nothing, snow

Leave a reply

From Wired Science:

The western United States is undergoing a major shift in precipitation patterns. Large swaths of the West that have historically been dominated by snow in the winter months are starting to see a lot more rain instead. A new study that maps out the predominant form of precipitation shows that this trend could result in an average reduction in snow-dominated area of around 30 percent by the middle of this century.

The western US depends heavily on snowpack to sustain its water supply through the dry summertime, but the new research, published in Geophysical Research Letters in July, suggests this may have to change.

Hmm…here’s the abstract of the paper…not quite so sensational sounding although it still clearly says there is going to be a lot less snow:

This approach identifies areas most likely to undergo precipitation phase change over the next half century. At broad scales, these projections indicate an average 30% decrease in areal extent of winter wet-day temperatures conducive to snowfall over the western United States.

climate change, water, and corn

Leave a reply

Here are a couple stories on U.S. corn yields:

From the “Risky Business Project“:

Shifting agricultural patterns and crop yields, with likely gains for Northern farmers offset by losses in the Midwest and South.

  • As extreme heat spreads across the middle of the country by the end of the century, some states in the Southeast, lower Great Plains, and Midwest risk up to a 50% to 70% loss in average annual crop yields (corn, soy, cotton, and wheat), absent agricultural adaptation.

  • At the same time, warmer temperatures and carbon fertilization may improve agricultural productivity and crop yields in the upper Great Plains and other northern states.

  • Food systems are resilient at a national and global level, and agricultural producers have proven themselves extremely able to adapt to changing climate conditions. These shifts, however, still carry risks for the individual farming communities most vulnerable to projected climatic changes.

From Ceres:

  • 87% of irrigated U.S. corn is grown in regions with high or extremely high water stress, meaning there is limited additional water available for expansion of crop irrigation. The most vulnerable regions are in Nebraska, Kansas, California, Colorado and Texas.
  • 27% of rainfed corn is grown in regions with high or extremely high water stress, meaning that there is limited water available should climate change make irrigation necessary. The most vulnerable regions are in Illinois, Wisconsin and Michigan.
  • Twelve ethanol refineries above the High Plains aquifer – with nearly $1.7 billion in annual corn ethanol production capacity – are sourcing corn in areas experiencing cumulative declines in groundwater levels. Six of these refineries are in regions of extreme water-level decline (between 50-150 feet).

To me, this sounds like a lot of today’s productive farmland may not stay that way due to a combination of higher temperatures and drought. Can we really open up enough farmland and/or increase yields in “Northern States” to make up the difference? I suppose maybe there are areas of Canada that could go from ice-covered to prime farmland, as long as they stay wet enough.

fish passage on the Mekong

Leave a reply

According to NPR, Laos is building several dams on the Mekong and there’s an argument about whether the fish passage systems that have been designed will be effective:

“I’m confident that the mitigation measures we can employ here will allow fish to pass the barrier we’re going to create. From studies we’ve done, the impacts people are saying the project will cause, change in flow, quality, sediment distribution, fish food, none of those things are going to arise from this project.”

The risks the dolphins downstream face are real, Hawkins says, but he says that’s because of bad fishing practices, tourism and poor management. As for migratory fish that use the Hou Salong channel, Hawkins says, the fish passageways his company, Megafirst, are building around the site should take care of the problem…

“The effectiveness of such fish passage mechansims is quite OK, let’s say, quite well proven for European or North American rivers, where we have small number of species that are well known,” Meng says. “But in the Mekong, we don’t have five fish species which we have to take care of, we have 70, maybe even more, and we have no clue about them. So building something for them to migrate up and down with, that’s just guessing at the moment.”

Trandem of International River says fisheries experts estimate that at least 43 species of fish are likely to go extinct because of the impact of the dam, including the Mekong giant catfish, the world’s largest. Sedimentation — the silt the river carries downstream to Cambodia and Vietnam — is another problem. The Xayaburi will have major food security implications as well, Trandem says.

“By blocking sediment, we know that where there’s a lot of agricultural productivity and rice growing, these areas are going to suffer a lot because they’re no longer getting the same nutrients,” she says. “And so this will have a significant impact, especially in the Cambodian flood plains but also in Vietnam’s ‘rice bowl,’ which is really the center of rice production for region.”

This is all interesting to me because of the question of whether technology like fish ladders can mitigate our environmental impacts. Even if it can, I don’t doubt for a second that there is a lot of bad development going on that will impact the ecosystem regardless of what is done with fish passage.