Capitol Hill Blue Forums Political Issues Climate Change and Environmental Issues Billions face food shortages, study warns

High heat does not help plants grow. By midsummer in Florida gardening is impossible. The insect population overpowers most insecticides and WEED growth overpowers the foodcrops.
The sun burns up tender shoots or the bugs eat them. Constant irrigation is required and if you happen to be in town the water bills can be higher than what the vegetables you harvest are worth. If you happen to be in a third world country where the river is dry you might well starve. You can deny study after study, you can cite contrary scientific studies but you really can't change the facts, people are starving. Climate is getting just a little bit warmer, fresh water is becoming more scarce, chemicals becoming more expensive, tractor fuel probably also going up again, crops like bananas are failing, genetically engineered crops may or may not be sustainable,
populations are rising. The study we are discussing here says Billions face food shortages, it isn't alarmist it's just a study that shows how this could happen. You aren't managing to sound convincing despite all your claims. You paint a far rosier picture than the facts on the ground indicate as truth.

Odd, as they continue to ship crop after crop, all through the summer. In fact, much warmer tropical nations grow food just fine. Even farms in the desert, where heat regularly reaches 120+, grow food...long as you pipe in some water.

As a percentage of world population, starvation is at its lowest point in human history. That's a fact. Everything else is baseless supposition.

Every year people are better fed. In 1965, many "experts" claimed world starvation would kill billions by the year 2000. Today, our largest health problem is overeating.

A study that ignores a huge number of real-world factors, and a study that also sounds amazingly similar to any of the hundreds from the 1960s, all of which failed utterly in their doomsayer predictions.

Yes there is that water thing again. Can you show me figures on just where you will pipe this water in from?
If so I guess you have convinced me. The world has never been in better shape. I had doubts about this climate change thing from the very start, I see now that even at it's worst it will usher in a new age of prosperity.

RomeoTango, I enjoy discussing many topics with anyone who is here not to sell me on their point of view, but truly discuss matters. I do not get the impression you are open to other views so I am not interested in batting my head against what you post.

I am impressed by the depth of information you have amassed, but frankly none if it seems based in reality.

Good luck on Reader Rant.

THE PREDICTIONS:

The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970's and 1980's hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now.

- Stanford Professor and famed Environmentalist Paul Ehrlich, from his 1968 book "The Population Bomb"

Farmers...can no longer keep up with rising demand; thus the outlook is for chronic scarcities and rising prices

- Lester Brown, founder of World Watch Institute, speaking in 1971.

"This trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century"
- Newsweek, 1976.

THE REALITY:

Fat Britain: Tackling the obesity epidemic:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-301419/Fat-Britain-Tackling-obesity-epidemic.html

Obesity rising at alarming rate in China

Extreme Obesity Among Americans Alarming...
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,99934,00.html

Interesting comments, especially given the threatening PMs you sent me after I did no more than say, "you only believe you have refuted me". You called it a TOS violation, saying, and I quote, "What did what you posted have to do with the thread? Nothing, it related entirely to the value of his posts"

Have you looked in a mirror lately? Physician, heal thyself. The hypocrisy is getting a bit thick.

And while you're threatening me for replying, another moderator is threatening me for NOT replying, saying its "unacceptable behavior" I failed to answer him. In the meantime, continual cheap shots at me from a couple others don't raise eyebrows.

I think I'll move on now. Some people can handle dissenting opinion...unfortunately, some cannot.

Duly noted.

Coastal Southern California has its own climate change problems: We grow most of the US avocado production here, but during 2008 most growers were ordered to cut their water use by 30% or face fines and ultimately disconnection. This has severely cut production! But the reservoirs are too low, so we have no choice.

And you can't grow avocados anywhere but in the coastal zone: Temperatures above 92 degrees F shut down avocado photosynthesis. Full sun burns the skin of new fruit and the combination of high temperatures and low humidity burn the leaves into crispy brown flakes. So this is one crop that will NOT benefit from higher temperatures. Of course, avocados can't tolerate any frost at all, so it isn't just a matter of moving the growing zone north.

Our grove used to produce tons (literally) of avocados every year. Not any more.

RT, if you are still here, I have a couple of questions. No tricks here; I am asking what you think.

1) You refer to desalinization plants. I'd like to know whether you think people in general and ag users specifically, currently pay the real cost of the water they use? Do you think they should? I used to live near an early desalinization plant on the Colorado and it was considered an expensive way to recover water at the time so I'm out of date on water issues. When I left the West there were still serious difficulties with the amount of water we were(n't) sending to Mexico in the Colorado River.

In summary, do you think there are problems with the quantity of water available for relatively inexpensive use in the West?

A corollary question: which of the methods you recommend for the the US would work in third-world countries currently facing drought and food shortages?

2) You also refer to farming with chemicals - I presume you are talking about fertilizers, insecticides, fungicides, and (in animals) growth hormones. Current use of chemicals has a serious effect on the environment, including deformed fish and large algae blooms. Do you think there is any reason to be concerned about increasing the use of chemicals on the food supply?

Interesting that their results depart so radically from those of the IPCC. Do you think maybe this departure invites a scrutiny of these findings for possible sources of error of interpretation in your cited study? Perhaps their results arise from dependence on a simple single-compartment energy balance model?