Support the Arctic Sea Ice Forum and Blog

Author Topic: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD  (Read 965426 times)

oren

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 10084
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3800
  • Likes Given: 4381
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2950 on: September 30, 2024, 12:01:49 AM »

I read a study that we currently have 5 billion hectares  of agricultural land. They calculated that using current technology you need about 1 hectare per person if evereyone wants to eat like people do in the West (lots of meat). That's clearly not possible, since we already have 8 billion people.

However on a diet containing some milk/eggs (perfectly sufficient for humans) you can feed 6-8 people per hectare. So with current technologies we could feed 30-40 billion people on a vegetarian diet. Even on a near vegetarian diet containing some but not too much meat we could easily feed 20 billion.

So even if we lose half of that production (a tall order!!!) due to tighter envrionmental rules and/or climate change we could still feed 10 billion. There really is no lack of food. As for crude oil we have enough for many more decades. So feeding humanity is absolutely not a problem even if we can produce half as much as modern farms do - provided most people reduce their meat intake.
We could feed 10 or maybe 20 billion using current technologies and with everybody sharing nicely and giving up steak, but the whole point is current food growing technologies are not sustainable. Neither the energy part of it which is huge, nor the spraying, nor the soil slowly being lost, the oceans being acidified, and quite a few other issues mentioned on this forum over the years.
We won't run out of oil soon enough, unfortunately. We will destroy our habitable climate, forests, animal species, marine species, lots of good soil. Thinking peak oil will stop all of this is way too optimistic.
« Last Edit: September 30, 2024, 12:29:42 AM by oren »

zenith

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3839
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 193
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2951 on: September 30, 2024, 12:07:01 AM »
We could feed 10 or maybe 20 billion using current technologies and with everybody sharing nicely and giving up steak

what an absolute delusional nut. cite your sources. this is why we're doomed - literally. keep enjoying your profits from your sweat free investments while you're living in the holy land though.

freaks.
Where is reality? Can you show it to me? - Heinz von Foerster

Bruce Steele

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2737
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 879
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2952 on: September 30, 2024, 01:20:51 AM »
We won’t see it until it’s in our rear view mirror.  It is getting harder to find new fracking plays, conventional  oil went into decline years ago and the energy return on tar sands isn’t very good nor are the increasing amounts of produced water that have to be pumped back to maintain flow in very important fields like the Permian . We don’t need to run out we only need to reach that point where more money, more pumping, and even new fields fail to maintain production. As production falls while we increase drilling etc. the reality of all the bets on perpetual economic growth will meet the reality of fewer and fewer energy slaves to power growth. It is when people realize we are entering the long decline in oil production that things get interesting.
 What has this to do with the climate?  Well I hope the day is sooner , for the sake of the climate and the rest of the biosphere. If we really do maintain modern agricultural methods thirty or fifty years we will maintain flying, space shots, $100,000 passenger vehicles, and  vacations in Fiji fifty years in the future also. . But again I would prefer oil to decline sooner and avoid the climate costs of the above. That is optimism, plus maybe a little getting ready for that day.

zenith

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3839
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 193
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2953 on: September 30, 2024, 01:32:37 AM »
We won’t see it until it’s in our rear view mirror.

it's already in the rear view mirror. the height of the middle class and price purchasing power in the west was the early 1970's.

all of of this stuff has been studied to death. it's really a psychology problem and there's no easy fix for that, if there is one at all.

Where is reality? Can you show it to me? - Heinz von Foerster

zenith

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3839
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 193
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2954 on: September 30, 2024, 01:47:39 AM »
the early '70's was the beginning of the end of "the new deal" and the start of neoliberal economics which got it's kick off with the overthrow of allende in chile, he was replaced by the dictator pinochet thanks to the united states and milton friedman.

we don't have to guess how we got here, it's all been documented.

there are too many people consuming too much stuff. new tech. and consumer goods is just more of the same. bill gates owns lots of farmland and he wants to sell his lab grown "meat"... and bugs.

Yes Men - Post Consumer Waste Recycling Program (WTO)
Where is reality? Can you show it to me? - Heinz von Foerster

kiwichick16

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1263
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 150
  • Likes Given: 68
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2955 on: September 30, 2024, 03:10:55 AM »

kiwichick16

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1263
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 150
  • Likes Given: 68
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2956 on: September 30, 2024, 04:22:31 AM »

El Cid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2667
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1023
  • Likes Given: 242
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2957 on: September 30, 2024, 07:55:50 AM »
We could feed 10 or maybe 20 billion using current technologies and with everybody sharing nicely and giving up steak, but the whole point is current food growing technologies are not sustainable. Neither the energy part of it which is huge, nor the spraying, nor the soil slowly being lost, the oceans being acidified, and quite a few other issues mentioned on this forum over the years.
We won't run out of oil soon enough, unfortunately. We will destroy our habitable climate, forests, animal species, marine species, lots of good soil. Thinking peak oil will stop all of this is way too optimistic.

Oren, please do not move the goalpost. The original proposition by Bruce was that

a) we will very soon run out of oil and therefore
b) most of the population will have to go back to subsistance agriculture

I do not believe these to be true. That's what I was writing about.

As for current large scale agriculture being unsustainable and in need of reform I wholeheartedly agree, but that is another subject. I think there are ways to incorporate effective machinery into sustainable/regen agriculture and we are absolutely able to feed the world that way.



oren

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 10084
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3800
  • Likes Given: 4381
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2958 on: September 30, 2024, 08:02:43 AM »
There was no intention to move any goalposts, sorry if it appeared that way.

Quote
a) we will very soon run out of oil and therefore
b) most of the population will have to go back to subsistance agriculture

I do not believe these to be true. That's what I was writing about.
I agree with you. I wish we would run out of oil soon, but that ain't hsppening soon enough.

zenith

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3839
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 193
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2959 on: September 30, 2024, 08:17:28 AM »

I agree with you. I wish we would run out of oil soon, but that ain't hsppening soon enough.

just casually dropping fantastic scenarios like it's just another monday. first you want to add 25-50% human population to this spaceship and now you casually want to run out of oil. what do you imagine the world, with 8 billion people, would look like without oil?

there wouldn't be any civilization, that's for certain. take it away...
Where is reality? Can you show it to me? - Heinz von Foerster

Paddy

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1142
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 189
  • Likes Given: 217
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2960 on: September 30, 2024, 09:23:05 AM »
There’s a degree of truth to a lot that’s being said here, but there’s more to the whole picture. Here are a few of my thoughts, with apologies for not offering much up in the way of solutions:

- Food prices are indeed tied to the oil price (from the costs of fertiliser and using farm machinery to the costs of transport and the market for biofuels)
- Oil is not running out any time soon, but neither does a return to the era of cheap oil appear at all likely, despite progress in electrification of road and rail, general engine efficiency etc.
- Food production may well get squeezed in much of the world as seas rise and groundwater depletes
- Demand will continue to rise with population, with a projected population increase to 9.8 billion by 2050.
- There are savings to be made by reducing food waste and by reducing meat consumption… how feasible it would be to make major savings in these ways is a complex issue, however. Public engagement in making change in particular may be a sticking point.
- Many of us could grow a bit more food at home, but this kind of cottage gardening won’t feed the wider world.
- Those of us who don’t know much about farming should probably be very cautious in commenting about how feasible electrification of farming machinery is (and this would include me, so I’ll stay out of that debate). It seems niche at present, and perhaps it is, but electric cars seemed niche until very recently too.

Florifulgurator

  • Grease ice
  • Posts: 842
  • Virtual world alter ego / अवतार of Martin Gisser
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 254
  • Likes Given: 395
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2961 on: September 30, 2024, 03:25:51 PM »
Speaking of Bavaria and hydrogen powered tractors:

https://www.fendt.com/int/fendt-shows-first-hydrogen-tractor-at-german-hydrogen-summit

On February 27th 2023, the Bavarian State Ministry for Economic Affairs, Regional Development and Energy hosted a hydrogen summit. Fendt presented the prototype of a hydrogen tractor there for the first time.
(...)
A Barvarian classic. Laptop and leather pants... The populist (why not say Nazi) minister of Barvarian economics proudly uses a BMW iX5 Hydrogen car, and wastes millions for hydrogen car industry subsidies. Will not end well for BMW &c.

https://www.historisches-lexikon-bayerns.de/Lexikon/Laptop_und_Lederhose

---
We could feed 10 or maybe 20 billion using current technologies and with everybody sharing nicely and giving up steak

what an absolute delusional nut. cite your sources. this is why we're doomed - literally. keep enjoying your profits from your sweat free investments while you're living in the holy land though.

freaks.
10 billion would also be my estimate/guess (it remains guesswork, whatever numbers you crunch).
At the current state of the biogeosphere.
And if we don't run out of soil...

20 billion would need quite some investment and restructuring of capitalism (carbon based currency) and a cultural revolution :) that I think is utopian.

(...) what do you imagine the world, with 8 billion people, would look like without oil? (...)
Summary: More quality food.
-- Farmer population up to at least the level of 1960. Private gardens as in Germany of 1955. More solar panels, portable normed batteries, more electric motorbikes (like e.g. in Rwanda today). Energy autonomous permaculture villages flourishing in Africa, selling world-wide (e.g. cashew nuts from Sierra Leone: https://climatenuts.de/dorfladen/ ) and hosting happy software engineers in their traditional mud huts. ...
-- Not much difference in my neck of the woods, except Barvarian car industry ruined, food prices high but still affordable (true Bavarians love Demeter organic farming https://www.solidarische-landwirtschaft.com/ ) and the economics minister, being economic, has a Chinese EV. My horror is all the chicken in every backyard crowing when I want sleep.
« Last Edit: September 30, 2024, 04:05:50 PM by Florifulgurator »
"The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or committed communist, but rather people for whom the difference between facts and fiction, true and false, no longer exists." ~ Hannah Arendt
"Солдаты всех стран, соединяйтесь!" ~ Florifulgurator 1986

Bruce Steele

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2737
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 879
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2962 on: September 30, 2024, 04:31:39 PM »
My premise is that we will reach peak productivity of oil and start the descent , not that it will all be gone. This I believe will cause great problems to a financial system built on eternal growth.
 But my interest is in how to maintain our food systems. Yes we can redirect oil from discretionary to essential items but that isn’t likely to free up lots of extra funds as the economy crashes.
 There will be lots of government efforts to cook the books by changing what we call oil , gas distillates , bio diesel, alcohol, and conflating gallons produced with energy available. Government isn’t going to warn us of impending declines, they will try to cook the books.
 I agree with Zenith that there is a phycological issue with the acceptance of this issue and what it means to our money systems. Cities will not be a good place to sit and wait for somebody else to figure out how we keep our food systems going, but denial will help for a little while. War may be a way to deflect attention and provide governments a way to ration food without actually admitting the problem.
 I think places that already have falling oil reserves or never had any to start with will be  the first indicators of how this problem will play out for countries with better fuel resources. So watch England and countries in Europe with falling petroleum outputs. Watch the Greek Islands, or any other Island state without reserves. If any of those places begin to change what food they grow or how they grow them it will be a good sign. Look to see if meat consumption patterns change . And importantly look to see if rural populations begin to grow as cities shrink.
 If anyone wants to move all this to a thread  that is about how food systems react to a decline in petroleum , feel free. My apologies to Kassy… but it is the freezing season .
 
 
 

kassy

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9162
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2225
  • Likes Given: 2045
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2963 on: September 30, 2024, 08:45:16 PM »
Well we know that peak oil is a thing at some point but this is just another argument to transfer over to renewables. The other being that using the fossil fuels breaks our climate system by taking us far from the comfort zone of Holocene temperatures which we and our coevolved crops love so much. More floods and droughts to take them out

I think the latter will be the bigger problem going forward. But we all disagree on details.

The real challenge is to do agriculture which uses less then 1 earth. The dutch export model uses 3 earths per year so that does not really work long term. Local sources are preferable but then you run into odd things like Hawaiians not liking the local oranges because they are more yellow  despite the taste being as good. Everyone on TV has those orange ones so we want them too.


Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 27523
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1464
  • Likes Given: 451
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2964 on: September 30, 2024, 10:08:04 PM »
The real challenge is to do agriculture which uses less then 1 earth.

The Alt Food and Tony Seba threads describe advances that address this, not by cutting back, or starvation, or using hand tools, but by producing food using new methods which are orders of magnitude more efficient than animal industry or field crops. 

 
Vertical farming requires a much smaller footprint (can even be in the city); no fuel oil for tractors, little or no fertilizer, no pesticides, a fraction of the water, provides protection from the ravages of climate-changed weather, is easier to harvest, and can run independently on solar power.

 
The millions of acres now growing Cane and Corn for Sugar can be replaced by the production of small amounts of proteins that are thousands of times sweeter, and thus requiring thousands of times less product, acreage, and water.

 
Quote
Precision fermentation and cellular agriculture (PFCA) will disrupt meat, milk, and other animal products.
 
SECOND DOMESTICATION OF PLANTS AND ANIMALS: “We’re making with micro-organisms what we used to make with macro-organisms,” he said, citing how PF is much more efficient than livestock and animals in producing everything food, with 100 times efficiency in terms of land use. “These five foundational sectors – food, energy, transport, information technology and materials–are all being disrupted at the same time. It’s happening in the 2020s and 30s. And it’s happening for economic reasons,” said Seba.

 
Example:
Production of Milk Proteins today is a huge industry, and is ripe for disruption.  A costly, environment-destroying cow is no longer required!
 
“Precision fermentation proteins are 5X – 100 X more resource efficient than the cow
10-25x less feedstock
5x less energy
10x less water
100x less land”

 
While traditionalists bemoan the state of farming today, we have the means to produce additional food, requiring no fossil fuel, which frees millions of acres to help the environment rather than harm it.  And the biggest food companies will be quick to adopt it, for the basest of reasons: it will be cheaper.
« Last Edit: September 30, 2024, 10:23:28 PM by Sigmetnow »
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

Bruce Steele

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2737
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 879
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2965 on: September 30, 2024, 10:16:44 PM »
Kassy, The ocean where I spent a good part of my life has changed from what it was in the early 1970s when I started fishing/diving . I can remember SST at 45F which is almost 10degrees lower than the lowest temperatures we see during our recent phase of La Niña . On land ,here within the sea breeze off the Pacific , it is hard to see any long term changes at all. We had a long drought, and some big rain years, a couple very hots days  but nothing that really stands out as different from fifty years ago.
 In Southern Calif. the effects of climate change are not uniform and most people are insulated from nature enough that they never feel its effects. As a farmer I don’t see climate change, well maybe changes in insect populations from when I was a boy but after planting buckwheat I wonder about my insect population anecdotes. Plant things that attract insects and you do get more insects. I  do think there are official insect counts that show declines in both insects and birds but it isn’t uniform across all ecosystems. If I don’t see huge changes locally I doubt most other people see anything either.
 Cities have grown , flattened, and paved tens of thousands of acres in the same timeframe. There is less nature even if what is still there somehow holds on. But the millions of extra inhabitants now here are just as buffered by the Pacific as I am and there just isn’t enough change locally to ever inspire a radical change in attitudes or lifestyles.
 So maybe our local situation affects our view on how we see things play out over the next decade or so.  I doubt climate will change much locally , my opinion is the ocean will change faster than land . I do believe our energy situation could change rapidly over that same ten year period.
People who believe in the markets like El Cid  or Oren aren’t worried about our financial borrowing so why should I? If farmers like John aren’t worried about food production then I am probably just a fluke, a mild nut job, or that eccentric relative we all have.
 That damn e -tractor bugs me however. I want low tech solutions I can do by myself, and tools I can fix . I like healing the soil by growing things. I like animals that can help me , and critters to keep the nutter company because nobody thinks it’s important enough to help.
 The big assed tractors feeding you don’t think, don’t see , don’t care and eventually wear out just like I will.  I hope to leave behind some nice dirt, the tractors could care less.  People should be happy that anyone fights against competing horsepower with empathy , care, and hopefully a little hard earned vision.
 

Bruce Steele

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2737
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 879
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2966 on: September 30, 2024, 10:27:06 PM »
Sig, pure hype but carry on. If it was so damn efficient you see cheap replacement burgers , you don’t. Chris Smaje has done much work rebutting the efficiency numbers that you and the fake food tromp are promoting. Is is interesting that the far left are so willing to do the political hype to promote machines over human labor.  Amazingly daft.

sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6847
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1404
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2967 on: October 01, 2024, 02:05:44 AM »
Re: That damn e -tractor bugs me however. I want low tech solutions I can do by myself

The Amish do horses ... but some bishops are allowing e tractors (no steel wheels either ...)

sidd

etienne

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2373
    • View Profile
    • About energy
  • Liked: 368
  • Likes Given: 2334
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2968 on: October 01, 2024, 06:13:43 AM »
Bruce,
I'm surprised that you don't see climate change so much. Maybe the ocean is keeping things under control near your place.
We see the bigger impacts on trees. Many require watering on the dry years, but you can't bring water to a forest.
During the dry years, we have a much higher fire problem during harvest of wheat, farmers are really scared.
During the wet years, we have slugs invasions, tomatoes and potatoes have much more mildew...
Each event itself is not the issue, but the increasing frequency of the events make the situation complicated. This year's gardening season was a very bad one in Luxembourg, but professionals could handle the issues.

Bruce Steele

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2737
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 879
  • Likes Given: 52
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2969 on: October 01, 2024, 09:36:11 PM »
Etienne, I lived in Thorpness England back in 1957-1959 . There was a shallow man made lake that was the centerpiece of a town designed to please children. In the summer you could row around the lake( meare) on rented boats but in the winter ,one year , it froze hard enough that hundreds of people ice skated out on the meare. It doesn’t ever freeze that hard there any more. The East coast of the US has seen very elevated SST for many years now but here on the West coast our coastal currents move from North to South and upwelling of older cold water cools it even more. The Pacific is about twenty miles from my farm in three directions and it does moderate most heat extremes unless a lot of inland air gets pushed out to sea during strong inland high pressure ridges.
 Inland areas of Calif. have a historic propensity to go through wet the dry cycles that include fire.
I don’t think inland temperatures have warmed as much as part of the East coast or Europe but it has warmed . Problem is millions of people built homes in the fire prone forests and chaparral , nice to get a little shade in the heat of summer but hard to defend when the inevitable fires return.

Sid, Maybe horse or human labor are the only zero carbon options. We know they both self replicate. I wonder why the Amish decided fossil fuels were bad/taboo? What did the rest of us miss
and are there leasons  to be learned by their decision process?
 The problem with the little tractor is for a new technology it is just too damn complicated. I don’t need turn signals, emergency lights, or  kill sensors in the seat and parking brake. I need something with an on/off switch, a couple three gears, a PTO and bucket are nice to have but I would prefer a tool that was way more dependable and was fixable with a simple electric harness that only had a few wires going to power the machine . Maybe even a walk behind version that could be utilized like an electric horse to pull things.  Something very simple that would last decades would be nice. The Solectrac has trouble with multiple breakdowns after only a hundred hours of use and the most hours I have seen was a tractor with four hundred hours before it broke. 

sidd

  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 6847
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1404
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2970 on: October 01, 2024, 11:45:12 PM »
Re: Amish

I've seen a team of horses pulling a wagon with an engine on it that was powering a harvester ... worked well. Some use gas/diesel engines to power their shops, I use a welder who does this, wants to make his own biodiesel. (But he drives a buggy to the shop, no electric in his house. And he grows tobacco to sell to the 'English', i.e. non Amish). Some drive regular diesel/gas pickups. Some use cellfones. All depends on the bishops and the elders.

sidd



oren

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 10084
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3800
  • Likes Given: 4381
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2971 on: October 02, 2024, 01:56:50 AM »
Quote
People who believe in the markets like El Cid  or Oren aren’t worried about our financial borrowing so why should I? If farmers like John aren’t worried about food production then I am probably just a fluke, a mild nut job, or that eccentric relative we all have.
Just to clarify Bruce, that I understand the markets does not mean I am not worried about financial borrowing or any other kind of borrowing from our future. In fact, I am much more worried because I understand it well. It will all come crashing down eventually, like any kind of excessive borrowing.
The same applies to our food system, our unsustainable methods will ultimately result in much reduced ourput, both via feedback through the climate system (temperatures, moisture and rain, seasonal shifts etc.) and via feedback through the agricultural system (loss of topsoil, overuse of fertilizer, species extinction or depletion, etc.), while global population keeps on growing and food consumption per capita is also growing. I am speaking in generalities as I know little about agriculture details (my father has been a farmer and then in the seed prodution business throughout his professional life, but I went on a separate path). However the overall situation is quite clear, we are using more Earths than we actually have, and it cannot continue indefinitely.

I believe your simpler food growing methods may eventually prevail, but this could feed 1-4 billion people imho, and certainly not the 9-10 billions projected to grace us in 2050. There are simply not enough garden plots to feed the entire population.
In order to transition to sustainable food growing methods AND feed 10 billion people, we would first need to revamp our energy system completely, and then somehow also change food production. The energy system has the solutions but they are implemented way too slowly. The food system has no solutions that can delived food for 10 billion people sustainably, unless perhaps if the rich world gives up its meat-based diet.
Sig's solutions from Tony Seba and the like are science-fiction at best, so no fix there.
The bottom line is I see no solution that will be implemented in time across the globe to prevent disaster, so disaster it is. And then let's hope someone can use you simpler methods to provide some food, and manage to avoid the city dwellers in the process. Apologies for being pessimistic but no matter how you slice it and dice it, this problem has no practical solutions that humanity will actually inplement (though it should, and perhaps could).

The Walrus

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3330
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 201
  • Likes Given: 531
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2972 on: October 02, 2024, 03:23:17 AM »
Sorry, but I do not share your pessimism.  Most of the world is fed from small farms.  It is just the West that has industrialized farming.  Granted, they use human labor, not large machinery.  It is not the machinery that produces more food - that just eliminates human labor.  The land will produce the same amount of food.  There is plenty of land available to grow enough food to feed our growing population, and global warming is leading to more.  Consequently, I see no evidence that an agricultural disaster is imminent.

Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 27523
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1464
  • Likes Given: 451
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2973 on: October 02, 2024, 03:36:18 PM »
Quote
Sig's solutions from Tony Seba and the like are science-fiction at best, so no fix there.

Perfect example of the incumbent mindset.
 
“It’s too different.  Too expensive now. Therefore, it will never catch on.”

Do tell:  What part of this video is ‘science fiction’?
 
It’s only 17 minutes long.
 



Our history is full of radical transformations. ⬇️
« Last Edit: October 03, 2024, 02:31:39 PM by Sigmetnow »
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

etienne

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 2373
    • View Profile
    • About energy
  • Liked: 368
  • Likes Given: 2334
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2974 on: October 02, 2024, 10:05:37 PM »
Tony Seba talks about producing meat and milk more efficiently than with cows, very nice, but you still need the cereals to feed the machine. For the cereals,  you still need oil, water,  sun... efficiency helps (couldn't find when peak oil per capita was, but I remember something around 1975) but is not miraculous,  one of the problems being Jevons Paradox https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox

vox_mundi

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 11266
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3695
  • Likes Given: 817
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2975 on: October 02, 2024, 10:08:11 PM »
Global Drought Threatens Food Supplies and Energy Production
https://www.alphagalileo.org/en-gb/Item-Display/ItemId/250718?returnurl=https://www.alphagalileo.org/en-gb/Item-Display/ItemId/250718

... A rare combination of three major climate factors — El Niño, the positive phase of the Indian Ocean Dipole, and the warm phase of the Tropical North Atlantic — has contributed, along with climate change, to intensify drought conditions in South America, southern Africa, and parts of the Mediterranean and eastern Europe.

The Global Drought Overview – September 2024, published by the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre (JRC), shows the gravity of these temperature and rainfall anomalies.

https://publications.jrc.ec.europa.eu/repository/handle/JRC139423

Several regions of the world have experienced very pronounced warm temperature anomalies. In July 2024, these anomalies exceeded 3 °C in north-western North America, eastern Canada, the Mediterranean, eastern Europe, south-eastern and central Africa, Iran, western and central Russia, Japan, and Antarctica.

... Droughts, together with heatwaves and warm spells, affected crops productivity in several regions of Europe, southern Africa, Central and Southern America, and Southeast Asia.

Farmers in areas affected by prolonged droughts are facing reduced crop yields and crop failures, with potential impacts on income and local economies. These effects are particularly pronounced in areas without sustainable irrigation systems or direct access to fresh water.

The extreme drought conditions have pushed millions of people from food stress to crisis levels in many regions of the world. With less food available, vulnerable populations will be further exposed to hunger and malnutrition. In southern Africa, millions of people are expected to require food aid in the coming months.

The impact of drought on energy and transport

Rivers, lakes, and water reservoirs have been drying up as a result of the combination of prolonged lack of rain and high evaporation caused by the high temperatures.

In South America, rivers such as the Amazon have been at alarmingly low water levels, threatening agriculture, drinking water supplies, transportation and hydropower production.

In southern Africa, the very low water flow of the Zambezi River — a critical source of hydroelectric power for several countries — has been causing power shortages and blackouts, with several indirect consequences.

Severe water shortages in Morocco, Spain, Italy, and South Africa are forcing governments to apply water-use restrictions. In the Nile Basin and in some parts of South America, disputes over water rights are already a pressing concern.
There are 3 classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus

P-maker

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 400
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 77
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2976 on: October 03, 2024, 08:15:24 AM »
Sig, just for your information.

The announced Remilk plant in Danmark - supposedly replacing dairy products from 50,000 cows - actually never flew - for some reason or the other.

It could be due to shortage of staff, ingredients (water, sugar etc.) or simple opposition from local farmers. We will never know, but the fact is we still have 50,000 cows too many letting out methane and polluting our groundwater and nearshore waters with their feaces, simultanously adding to the destruction of rainforest in Amazonas in order to produce enough soy protein to be shipped by polluting bulk carriers across our ever warmer oceans.

Call it sci-fi, or whatever you like, but we are still so far away from a sustainable and regenerative type of agriculture, as we possibly can be.


Sigmetnow

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 27523
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1464
  • Likes Given: 451
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2977 on: October 03, 2024, 01:41:47 PM »
The announced Remilk plant in Danmark - supposedly replacing dairy products from 50,000 cows - actually never flew - for some reason or the other.
 
Remilk has not yet built its big factory, but continues to obtain funding and licensing for its product.
https://www.remilk.com/newsroom

Many other companies are also engaged in bringing precision fermentation products to market. 
 
 - MeliBio: They are working on producing honey without bees through precision fermentation. Their approach involves creating honey that mimics the taste, texture, and nutritional properties of traditional honey but is derived from plant-based sources.
https://www.melibio.com

  - EVERY (formerly Clara Foods): Known for their work in precision fermentation-derived egg proteins, EVERY has been scaling up after years of R&D, focusing on products like egg whites without chickens.
 
“As creators of the world’s first egg proteins that are fermed rather than farmed, our animal-free proteins are highly versatile, bringing superior performance to a variety of categories, from baking and snacking to meat alternatives, beverages and bars. Whether you’re looking to replace eggs in a current recipe, unlock new-to-the-world offerings, or plus-up plant-based foods, EVERY can help you get there.”
https://www.every.com/see-our-solutions

  - Bright Green Partners has highlighted several companies in the precision fermentation sector, not only focusing on dairy but also on other animal products like meat and fats.
 
“Our expertise
Bright Green Partners is a global strategy consultancy with a top tier consulting team powered by a 2500+ expert network and a dedicated focus on sustainable food alternatives. We provide comprehensive strategies, M&A advisory and due diligence for corporate clients and investment firms in the plant-based, fermentation (traditional, enzymatic, biomass & precision), cultivated and molecular farming markets.
 
We operate globally across the entire value chain, from ingredient suppliers, technology and equipment companies to manufacturers and consumer packaged goods (CPG) companies. This combination ensures we provide comprehensive and actionable strategies, helping our clients navigate complex decisions, maximize strategic objectives and investment returns in the sustainable food sector.”
https://brightgreenpartners.com/about/

 
Tony Seba talks about producing meat and milk more efficiently than with cows, very nice, but you still need the cereals to feed the machine. For the cereals,  you still need oil, water,  sun...
 
But PF requires only a fraction of the feedstock needed for animals.  It requires Carbohydrate and Nitrogen, but that can come from, for example, algae.  All the effort and feed we put into making milk from a cow, and it’s 87.7% water!
Quote
Full product range
“Our solids require 1% of land compared to regular milk, 4% of the emissions of pollutants compared to regular milk, and 5% of the water required to produce a liter of milk in the traditional industry,” explains Wolff. “We produce dairy products with the same taste, texture and cost as the traditional dairy industry. We produce milk that is 100% identical to cow’s protein, without lactose, and without the negative environmental impact. Our product enables a full range of milk products, not just a one-off solution. Our goal is to change the milk market.”
https://vegconomist.com/products-launches/general-mills-bold-cultr-remilk/

Precision fermentation is not new — the process been used for decades for pharmaceuticals and cosmetics — and for centuries, if you include beer.
 
Costs are decreasing rapidly, and are already nearly cost-competitive with traditional food products.  Making food from micro-organisms is so much more efficient, less wasteful and less polluting than raising animals, which is exactly the kind of solution we are looking for, is it not?
People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it.

The Walrus

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3330
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 201
  • Likes Given: 531
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2978 on: October 03, 2024, 02:36:42 PM »
While drought conditions persist in Southern Africa and around the Mediterranean, other areas are receiving ample rainfall.  Consequently, crop harvests are increasing this year.

https://apps.fas.usda.gov/psdonline/circulars/production.pif

Drought is a constant occurrence somewhere on this planet as global atmospheric conditions shift rainfall around the globe.  In times past, droughts led to severe food insecurity.  International trade has limited those consequences for all but the poorest of regions (which cannot afford imported food).  As a result, global hunger has decreased remarkably. 

gerontocrat

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 22821
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5670
  • Likes Given: 71
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2979 on: October 03, 2024, 03:15:20 PM »
While drought conditions persist in Southern Africa and around the Mediterranean, other areas are receiving ample rainfall.  Consequently, crop harvests are increasing this year.

https://apps.fas.usda.gov/psdonline/circulars/production.pif

Drought is a constant occurrence somewhere on this planet as global atmospheric conditions shift rainfall around the globe.  In times past, droughts led to severe food insecurity.  International trade has limited those consequences for all but the poorest of regions (which cannot afford imported food).  As a result, global hunger has decreased remarkably.
The World Bank article from last January paints a mixed picture.
It points to widening differences between well-off countries and Low-income countries, and a possibility of food insecurity increasing over the next few years.

We also do not know the extent to which the increasing frequency of severe weather events from AGW and environmental degradation will disrupt food production locally, regionally and globally.

https://blogs.worldbank.org/en/agfood/food-security-trends-2024-and-beyond#:~:text=As%20a%20result%2C%20the%20October,across%20regions%20and%20income%20groups.
Quote

Global Food Security Conditions Are Slowly Stabilizing
The global recovery from COVID-19 and Russia's invasion of Ukraine is slow, impacting economic stability. Elevated inflation, tighter monetary policies, reduced fiscal support, and extreme weather events contribute to continued pressure on global economic growth. As a result, the October 2023 Outlook tentatively suggests a global peak in the prevalence of severe food insecurity was reached at 11.9% globally in 2020-2022, with only a slight near-term improvement to 11.8% (2021-2023) and 11.6% (2022-2023), showing significant variation across regions and income groups. Short-term food insecurity improvements may however stall, posing a risk of reaching a new high of 943 million people facing severe food insecurity by 2025. Looking to 2028, the global severely food insecure population is projected to hit 956 million, narrowly avoiding a billion in a downside economic scenario if central banks fail to control inflation and respond with further tightening, leading to suppressed growth.

Disparities Among Income Groups: Widening Divides
The October 2023 WFSO shows stark disparities among income groups, revealing that the overall stabilization in global food security masks underlying challenges. While upper middle-income countries show promising improvements, lower middle-income nations experience only short-term gains, and low-income countries face a projected further increase in food insecure populations. The data exposes widening gaps compared to previous outlooks, with low-income countries expected to witness only a slight improvement in severe food insecurity rates by 2027-2029. Additionally, heavily indebted poor countries are particularly vulnerable, facing both economic challenges and elevated levels of food insecurity.

A Continued Shift to low-income countries in Global Financing Needs

As global food security conditions evolve, the financial requirements to establish safety nets are escalating. The WFSO projects an annual financing need of $41 billion in International Development Association (IDA) countries and $47 billion in International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) countries, nearly doubling pre-pandemic estimates. The shift toward lower-income countries intensifies, highlighting the urgency to reinforce measures safeguarding vulnerable populations. Projections indicate a continuous increase in safety net costs for low-income counties and lower middle-income countries, emphasizing the need for effective monetary and fiscal policies to restore stability.

What will it take to address food security globally?
To provide a basic social safety net that covers 25 percent of daily caloric needs for the acutely food insecure, the World Food Security Outlook (WFSO) estimates annual global financing needs at approximately $90 billion from now until 2030, based on projections up to 2027-2029. This assumes no significant changes beyond these projections. However, in scenarios of heightened inflation, lower economic growth, and high commodity prices, these needs could rise substantially, potentially reaching 1.3 times the current estimates. This would elevate the annual financial requirements to around $120 billion. Additionally, addressing malnutrition among women and children is estimated to cost over $11 billion annually while transforming the global food system may demand $300-400 billion each year. Collectively, these expenses could total up to $500 billion annually, necessary for addressing worldwide food and nutrition security. This figure, while substantial, represents roughly 0.5% of global GDP. It's important to note that this estimate is likely conservative, as it does not fully account for complete caloric needs or adequate nutrition, nor does it reverse the long-term impacts of current malnutrition. Furthermore, the burden of these costs is disproportionately heavy for low-income countries, where the required funding instead equates to about 95% of their total GDP. This highlights the need for a shared global responsibility in addressing these challenges.
"I wasn't expecting that quite so soon" kiwichick16
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

The Walrus

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3330
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 201
  • Likes Given: 531
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2980 on: October 03, 2024, 03:29:42 PM »
Yes, the world bank stated the growing disparity.  However, the major causes were market instability, caused by conflict and Covid.  Climate issues were not among them.

gerontocrat

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 22821
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5670
  • Likes Given: 71
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2981 on: October 03, 2024, 04:12:34 PM »
Yes, the world bank stated the growing disparity.  However, the major causes were market instability, caused by conflict and Covid.  Climate issues were not among them.
Exactly the point. Climate change ignored by the World Bank. Farmers like predictable weather. In Peru, for example, farmers plant crops according to the ENSO cycle.
But when extreme weather breaks the pattern? Plenty of farmers in the UK have watched their crops rot this year.

In the last year or three, examples reported of disrupted food production from droughts and floods seem to have become more common.

After a wander around google scholar it ssems that while some scientists are thinking about it, there is little quantification of the possible impacts, and little collated hard evidence on impacts to date.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0963996920302817
Quote
Mitigation of emerging implications of climate change on food production systems
Abstract

Crops, livestock and seafood are major contributors to global economy. Agriculture and fisheries are especially dependent on climate. Thus, elevated temperatures and carbon dioxide levels can have large impacts on appropriate nutrient levels, soil moisture, water availability and various other critical performance conditions. Changes in drought and flood frequency and severity can pose severe challenges to farmers and threaten food safety. In addition, increasingly warmer water temperatures are likely to shift the habitat ranges of many fish and shellfish species, ultimately disrupting ecosystems. In general, climate change will probably have negative implications for farming, animal husbandry and fishing. The effects of climate change must be taken into account as a key aspect along with other evolving factors with a potential impact on agricultural production, such as changes in agricultural practices and technology; all of them with a serious impact on food availability and price. This review is intended to provide critical and timely information on climate change and its implications in the food production/consumption system, paying special attention to the available mitigation strategies.
"I wasn't expecting that quite so soon" kiwichick16
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

The Walrus

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3330
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 201
  • Likes Given: 531
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2982 on: October 03, 2024, 05:48:12 PM »
Yes, the world bank stated the growing disparity.  However, the major causes were market instability, caused by conflict and Covid.  Climate issues were not among them.
Exactly the point. Climate change ignored by the World Bank. Farmers like predictable weather. In Peru, for example, farmers plant crops according to the ENSO cycle.
But when extreme weather breaks the pattern? Plenty of farmers in the UK have watched their crops rot this year.

In the last year or three, examples reported of disrupted food production from droughts and floods seem to have become more common.

After a wander around google scholar it ssems that while some scientists are thinking about it, there is little quantification of the possible impacts, and little collated hard evidence on impacts to date.

Yes, it has been ignored because it has had little impact.

Are the droughts becoming more common or is the reporting become more frequent?  Recent droughts do not compare to past episodes.  The American dust bowl, Indian and Chinese famines, Soviet Russia famine, and the Ethiopian drought were all more devastating and occurred between 50 and 150 years ago. 

Quantification of possible impacts is difficult to project, especially considering that the recent warming has not resulted in reduced crop production.

Floods are much harder to characterize due to massive dams and irrigation projects.

Alexander555

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2515
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 192
  • Likes Given: 49
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2983 on: October 05, 2024, 05:41:40 AM »
Yes, the world bank stated the growing disparity.  However, the major causes were market instability, caused by conflict and Covid.  Climate issues were not among them.
Exactly the point. Climate change ignored by the World Bank. Farmers like predictable weather. In Peru, for example, farmers plant crops according to the ENSO cycle.
But when extreme weather breaks the pattern? Plenty of farmers in the UK have watched their crops rot this year.

In the last year or three, examples reported of disrupted food production from droughts and floods seem to have become more common.

After a wander around google scholar it ssems that while some scientists are thinking about it, there is little quantification of the possible impacts, and little collated hard evidence on impacts to date.

Yes, it has been ignored because it has had little impact.

Are the droughts becoming more common or is the reporting become more frequent?  Recent droughts do not compare to past episodes.  The American dust bowl, Indian and Chinese famines, Soviet Russia famine, and the Ethiopian drought were all more devastating and occurred between 50 and 150 years ago. 

Quantification of possible impacts is difficult to project, especially considering that the recent warming has not resulted in reduced crop production.

Floods are much harder to characterize due to massive dams and irrigation projects.

The events you are talking about all happend in a far less global world, Indian and chinese famines......What they lose in one place this year, they will grow somewhere else. That brings the risk that it want be the Indian or Chinese famines but the global famine. And that crop production is not reduced is because they non-stop clear more land. And some innovation, but all that innovation requiers one thing on a large scale.

Paddy

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1142
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 189
  • Likes Given: 217
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2984 on: October 13, 2024, 07:50:30 AM »
The FAO food price index spiked upwards rather suddenly when the September figures came in on October 4th, with the biggest month on month increase since 2022, thanks partly to wet conditions causing poor harvests in Europe (with the EU having the worst grain harvest in years ) and Canada, alongside wildfires and drought in Brazil, and drought in Russia too. And that’s before the damage done by the recent hurricanes in the USA, with Helene in particular [url= https://www.agriculturedive.com/news/assessing-the-farm-damage-Hurricane-Helene/729097/] devastating crops and livestock ; so I expect there will likely be a further rise once October’s figures come in.

vox_mundi

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 11266
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3695
  • Likes Given: 817
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2985 on: October 16, 2024, 08:38:10 PM »
Global North's Growing Appetite for Farmed Salmon Imperils Communities' Access to Local Fish, Study Warns
https://phys.org/news/2024-10-global-north-appetite-farmed-salmon.html

A paper published in Science Advances exposes the global aquaculture sector's growing dependence on wild fish. Despite industry claims to the contrary, these findings highlight how the growing appetite for expensive farmed salmon can leave coastal communities struggling to access affordable local fish like sardines and anchovies.

Instead, these small pelagic fish are frequently caught, processed, and "reduced" to fishmeal and fish oil, almost all of which is used to feed farmed fish. These 'reduction fisheries' account for 26% of the global ocean catch.

The authors debunk the industry's use of the "Fish-in-Fish-out" (FIFO) ratio—the standard metric used to quantify how much wild fish is used to produce farmed fish. The FIFO ratio is often used as an indicator of the impact of aquaculture on wild fish stocks.

In the paper, the authors showcase several misleading practices about the FIFO ratio, such as averaging fishmeal and fish oil inputs of carnivores and herbivores together to conceal the high feed requirements of carnivorous species.

This lowers the FIFO ratio, reaffirming the aquaculture industry's claim that its dependence on fish oil and fishmeal is decreasing. But fish oil, especially, is a limited commodity that is increasingly in demand by salmon farms, which now supply 70% of all salmon consumed worldwide. In 2020, farmed Atlantic salmon alone accounted for 60% of fish oil usage, the authors calculated.

Quote
... "The salmon industry is a not a food production system—it's a food reduction system. It benefits the few who can afford it, but reduces access to nutritious fish for those who need it the most"

For example, processing plants in West Africa are exploiting vast amounts of small pelagic, highly nutritious fish, mostly sardinella, to produce fishmeal and fish oil for export. "This is an equity issue—it puts local fishmongers at an unfair disadvantage because they cannot compete with the prices the plants are willing to pay for this global commodity," Dr. Skerritt said.

Additionally, the authors note the turbulent future ahead for fishmeal and fish oil production. Climate change is impacting fish populations around the world, including the main source of fishmeal and fish oil—the Peruvian anchoveta.

The catch from some fisheries, such as the anchoveta in Peru or Gulf menhaden (Brevoortia patronus) in the US are almost exclusively used for reduction purposes.

Like many others, this species in warmer waters contains less fish oil. Moreover, continued poor management of these fisheries allows for ever higher catches of juveniles, which also contain less oil.

"Combined, these factors are driving feed manufacturers to look elsewhere for additional oil, including in fisheries which typically provide fish for direct human consumption, like mackerel," said Dr. Majluf.



Patricia Majluf, A review of the global use of fishmeal and fish oil and the Fish In:Fish Out metric, Science Advances (2024)
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adn5650

------------------------------------------------------

... the menhaden harvest  for fish meal has destroyed the local bluefish (Pomatomus saltatrix) runs. Shame  :(
There are 3 classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus

vox_mundi

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 11266
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3695
  • Likes Given: 817
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2986 on: October 17, 2024, 01:23:30 PM »
Water Crisis Threatening World Food Production: Report
https://phys.org/news/2024-10-crisis-threatening-world-food-production.html
https://economicsofwater.watercommission.org/

Inaction on the water crisis could put more than half of the world's food production at risk by 2050, experts warned in a major report published Thursday.



"Nearly 3 billion people and more than half of the world's food production are now in areas where total water storage is projected to decline," said the report by the Global Commission on the Economics of Water (GCEW).

The report also warned the water crisis could lead to an eight percent drop in GDP on average for high-income countries by 2050 and as much as 15 percent for lower-income countries.

Disruptions of the water cycle "have major global economic impacts," said the report.

The economic declines would be a consequence of "the combined effects of changing precipitation patterns and rising temperatures due to climate change, together with declining total water storage and lack of access to clean water and sanitation".

While water is often perceived as "an abundant gift of nature", the report stressed it was scarce and costly to transport.

Report: THE ECONOMICS OF WATER: Valuing the Hydrological Cycle as a Global Common Good
https://economicsofwater.watercommission.org/report/economics-of-water.pdf
There are 3 classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus

vox_mundi

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 11266
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 3695
  • Likes Given: 817
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2987 on: October 19, 2024, 07:21:15 PM »
Grassland study shows that elevated levels of CO₂ nearly tripled species losses attributed to nitrogen pollution
https://phys.org/news/2024-10-grassland-elevated-tripled-species-losses.html

During the most recent eight years of the study, experimentally elevated levels of carbon dioxide nearly tripled species losses attributed to the long-term application of simulated nitrogen pollution.

Specifically, plots that received added nitrogen saw species richness—the number of plant species per plot—reduced by an average of 7% at ambient carbon dioxide levels and by 19% at elevated carbon dioxide levels.

"If rising carbon dioxide generally exacerbates the widespread negative impacts of nitrogen deposition on plant diversity, as observed in our study, this bodes poorly for conservation of grassland biodiversity worldwide," said University of Michigan ecologist and study lead author Peter Reich.

Both nitrogen and carbon dioxide can promote plant growth. In the grassland experiment, called BioCON, application of the two resources spurred growth that allowed a few dominant species to hog the sunlight while throwing shade on plants beneath them, eventually eliminating many of them.

It's a phenomenon that ecologists call competitive exclusion.

This type of heightened light competition is likely to occur in many grasslands around the world—resulting in both winners and losers—due to the increased availability of carbon dioxide and nitrogen from fossil fuel emissions and nitrogen pollution, respectively, Reich said.

elevated carbon dioxide amplified losses of diversity from nitrogen enrichment, nearly tripling those reductions over the last eight years of the study.

Big bluestem, or Andropogon gerardii, a tall grass native to much of the Great Plains and grassland regions of central and eastern North America, gradually emerged as the most dominant species. As its relative abundance increased, so did shading and the loss of other plant species.

Losers in the experiment included the purple-flowered Amorpha canescens, commonly called lead plant, a shrubby member of the pea family that prefers full sunlight, and yellow-flowered Solidago rigida, one of the goldenrod species commonly found in grassy fields across the country.

Previous observational and experimental studies suggest that nitrogen pollution decreases plant community richness by as much as 20 to 30% across herbaceous plant ecosystems on multiple continents. Herbaceous plants do not produce a woody stem and include grasses, forbs and ferns.

Peter Reich et al, High CO2 dampens then amplifies N-induced diversity loss over 24 years, Nature (2024)
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-08066-9
There are 3 classes of people: those who see. Those who see when they are shown. Those who do not see

Insensible before the wave so soon released by callous fate. Affected most, they understand the least, and understanding, when it comes, invariably arrives too late

Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus

morganism

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2892
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 304
  • Likes Given: 190
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2988 on: October 24, 2024, 11:44:43 PM »
Fall Chinook Salmon returns to date are shockingly low on Upper Sacramento River

After discussing the return of the first Klamath River salmon to Oregon last week for the first time in 114 years just a few weeks after the completion of the river’s dam removal project, we are faced with this week with news of shockingly low numbers of fall-run Chinook salmon returning to spawn to date at the Coleman National Fish Hatchery.

Coleman is located on the upper stretch of the Sacramento River on Battle Creek, a tributary of the Sacramento River below Redding.

The hatchery, after opening its gates to spawning salmon on the first Saturday of October, has taken only 1.68 million eggs as of October 19, 2024. This is only a small fraction of the typical 20 million eggs harvested during the spawning season, according to Scott Artis of the Golden State Salmon Association (GSSA), who described the hatchery as a “salmon ghost town” in a statement.

“The extremely low number of adult fish present follows the last several years of consistently poor salmon returns, which led to the closure of California salmon fishing and federal fishery disaster declarations in 2023 and 2024,” stated Aris.

Because of the low numbers of salmon that returned to the Sacramento and Klamath River Basin in 2022 and 2023, all ocean commercial and recreational fishing for salmon has been closed in California and most of Oregon this year and last.

Artis said the low number of fish is indicative of “overall poor returns” of salmon in California’s Sacramento Valley. He said the low number of salmon returning to the river “is a direct result of excessive water diversions in the most recent drought, which left insufficient water in northern California rivers to successfully spawn and rear salmon.”

“Those excessive water diversions also drained precious cold water from behind Shasta Dam, leading to high levels of what biologists call ‘temperature dependent mortality’ for salmon eggs and juveniles. For the layperson, those salmon eggs were cooked before they even hatched,” he argued.

“In 2023 the Coleman hatchery saw such a small number of adult salmon that it was forced to import salmon eggs from other hatcheries to meet its quotas. Although the spawning season will continue for weeks, the early signs are that the hatchery may be forced to import millions of eggs again this year,” he continued.

He said, “All of this is extremely bad for California’s salmon fishery that supported tens of thousands of jobs and more than $1 billion in economic activity until it was decimated by the Newsom administration’s water policies.”

“October is supposed to be an exciting time of year for thousands of fishing families to welcome the return of salmon that not only support their livelihoods, but are critical for sustaining a healthy Bay-Delta watershed,” said Artis. “Instead, those families, already suffering from 2 consecutive years without work, are watching another potential salmon horror show unfold because state and federal water policies continue to divert the cold water salmon need to survive.”

The question of whether there will be a California Salmon fishery next year won’t be answered until late February or early March when all of the data on spawning returns has been compiled by state and federal fishery scientists at the Pacific Fishery Management Council (PFMC) to determine whether or not there there are  enough fish in the ocean to allow a season. The Sacramento River and its tributaries have traditionally provided the bulk of Chinook salmon caught off the California coast.   

“It’s not a good sign when the hardworking hatchery staff have only been able to procure less than 10% of the total egg take goal by this time of year. They’re using what they’ve been given as a result of failed state water policies,” said Artis. “The fishing industry, conservationists, and entire fishing-based towns and communities have a right to be really worried.”

California’s Sacramento-San Joaquin River system supports four distinct Chinook salmon runs: fall, late-fall, winter and spring. The winter- and spring-runs have declined dramatically in recent years, despite being designated as endangered and threatened, respectively, under the Endangered Species Act.

For example, only 100 spring-run Chinook salmon returned to spawn in Butte Creek, a tributary of the Sacramento River, last year. 

State and federal fishery agencies have attributed the current Central Valley salmon collapse to drought, changing ocean water and forage conditions and climate change and other factors. While conservationists agree that these issues factor in the collapse, they point to the massive state and federal water project water diversions at the Delta pumping facilities and the lack of cold, oxygenated water during a drought as the leading causes of the salmon disaster.

“The fall-run — currently the only commercially and recreationally fishable stock, was closed in 2023 and 2024 due to low numbers of adults that survived the hostile conditions encountered in Central Valley rivers. The late-fall run has been eliminated from most of its native spawning habitat. All four Chinook salmon runs are dependent upon cold water flows and releases from reservoirs for migration and spawning,” stated Artis.

While Newsom has supported the dam removal on the Klamath River and various habitat restoration projects, Artis said, “Fishery observers note that salmon in California have declined more under Gavin Newsom’s governorship then at any other time in history.”

“California’s salmon fishery targets fall-run Chinook salmon. Other salmon stocks are protected under the federal Endangered Species Act. Their plight has only gotten worse under Newsom,” he concluded.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2024/10/24/2279198/-Fall-Chinook-Salmon-returns-to-date-are-shockingly-low-on-Upper-Sacramento-River
Kalingrad, the new permanent home of the Olympic Village

gerontocrat

  • Multi-year ice
  • Posts: 22821
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 5670
  • Likes Given: 71
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2989 on: November 03, 2024, 04:27:15 AM »
I still look for encouraging news concerning Life on Earth but the harvest is pitifully meagre. Instead news like this is in record abundance.

Fishing for Krill in Antarctica has been relentlessly increasing in recent years and is about to get a lot worse, and protection of Antarctica biodiversity to be significantly weakened instead of strengthened.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/nov/02/china-russia-team-up-krill-fishing-restrictions-antarctica
Quote
Very bad precedent’: China and Russia team up to undermine krill fishing restrictions in Antarctica

Conservationists warn actions and ambitions of two super powers could lead to overexploitation of vital food source for whales, penguins and seals


China and Russia are working together to block new Antarctic marine parks and loosen krill fishing restrictions, undermining a major international convention designed to protect the region from overexploitation, according to analysts and conservationists.

With the support of Russia, China reportedly used its veto rights at a meeting of the 26-nation Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) in Tasmania to prevent the renewal of an agreement restricting krill fishing.

The two countries also blocked the declaration of four marine parks around the southern continent.

Experts said it reflected a push to resist and reverse environmental protections in Antarctica. Krill is an important food source for keystone species including penguins, seals and whales, and fishing restrictions have previously been backed by scientists and member countries to ease pressures on wildlife as the region is affected by global heating.

Dr Tony Press, a former head of the Australian Antarctic Division and adjunct professor at the University of Tasmania, said the precautionary principal that had been supported by countries at CCAMLR meetings for three decades had “gone backwards” at the meeting that finished last week. “That sets a very bad precedent for the future,” he said.

The commission has a rule restricting the annual krill take in four neighbouring zones around the west Antarctic peninsula to 620,000 tonnes a year. The four zones cover the west Antarctic peninsular, neighbouring waters in the Weddell Sea and around the South Orkney and South Georgia islands.

A separate rule, known as measure 51-07, says no more than 45% of that catch can be taken from any one of those zones. Countries at the meeting were seeking to renew that rule, in place since 2009.

Dr Lyn Goldsworthy, from the University of Tasmania and a longtime observer at CCAMLR meetings, said China had refused to support the renewal of 51-07 and been backed by Russia.

She said the Chinese government’s most recent five-year plan included an expansion of international fishing and the country had committed to building five new vessels to catch krill, four of which were almost complete.

“China has a long-term strategy. They have a directive to expand that krill fishery [in Antarctica],” she said.


Goldsworthy said China was also seeking to exert its influence in the region for geopolitical reasons, with an eye on future exploitation. She said Russia’s interest was likely part of a broader strategy to “disrupt the world’s rules-based order” as the country had “very little skin in the game”.

Press said other countries needed to resist. “The fact that Russia and China together worked to diminish that precautionary approach needs to be challenged diplomatically,” he said.

A May report from the commission on the krill fishery found 14 vessels were planning to take krill in 2024, including four ships each from China and Norway, three from South Korea and one each from Chile, Russia and Ukraine. China and Norway use a factory fishing method that continuously pumps krill from nets on to the vessel.

The fishery report showed the amounts taken in recent years were the highest on record. The annual average take of krill from 2019 to 2023 was 415,800 tonnes, compared to 266,000t for the previous five years.

An Australian Antarctic Division spokesperson said it had pushed for a system of marine protected areas, wide-ranging krill management rules and improved data collection and monitoring. They said the three elements were a “package deal” that should be adopted together.

“We will not consider increased catches for krill without the proper data collection and conservation measures in place. It was disappointing that some members were pushing for adoption of revised krill measures without any intention of agreeing to [marine protected areas],” they said.

“Most concerning though, was the failure of some members to support the extension of existing krill management measures while the harmonisation process is progressed.

“This is a backwards step for CCAMLR and puts krill, and the ecosystems and predators it supports, at risk.”

Guardian Australia approached the Chinese government for comment.

"I wasn't expecting that quite so soon" kiwichick16
"Para a Causa do Povo a Luta Continua!"
"And that's all I'm going to say about that". Forrest Gump
"Damn, I wanted to see what happened next" (Epitaph)

P-maker

  • Frazil ice
  • Posts: 400
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 77
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2990 on: November 03, 2024, 10:37:04 AM »
It is a bloody nuisance. First, they take out the whales, then they take out all their feed, and finally, they let out all the ice in order to flood our coasts. I don’t like the way these folks are behaving.

Paddy

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1142
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 189
  • Likes Given: 217
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2991 on: November 03, 2024, 04:18:17 PM »
Acute food insecurity is set to increase in magnitude and severity across 22 countries and territories , according to a new UN report.

“ According to the report, Palestine, the Sudan, South Sudan, Haiti and Mali remain at the highest alert level and require the most urgent attention. Conflict is the primary driver of hunger in all these areas. All hotspots of the highest concern have communities already facing or at risk of famine or facing catastrophic conditions of acute food insecurity.

Chad, Lebanon, Myanmar, Mozambique, Nigeria, the Syrian Arab Republic and Yemen are hotspots of very high concern, with a large number of people facing critical acute food insecurity, coupled with worsening drivers that are expected to further intensify life-threatening conditions in the coming months.

Since the previous edition of the Hunger Hotspots report (June 2024), Kenya, Lesotho, Namibia and Niger have joined the list of hunger hotspots, alongside Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Malawi, Somalia, Zambia and Zimbabwe, where acute food insecurity is likely to deteriorate further during the outlook period. ”


kassy

  • Moderator
  • First-year ice
  • Posts: 9162
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 2225
  • Likes Given: 2045
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2993 on: November 19, 2024, 10:55:43 PM »
Denmark agrees deal for livestock emissions levy

Denmark has agreed on how to implement the world’s first tax on agricultural emissions, including flatulence by livestock.

This comes after months of negotiations between the country’s major parties, farmers, the industry, trade unions and environmental groups. The Green Tripartite agreement was first announced in June.

From 2030, farmers will have to pay a levy of 300 kroner ($43; £34) per tonne of methane (as per carbon dioxide equivalent) on emissions from livestock including cows and pigs, which will rise to 750 kroner in 2035.

The Green Tripartite minister said they will “do what it takes to reach our climate goals” after receiving a “broad majority” in parliament.

...

Part of the Green Tripartite agreement between the government, the agriculture industry and environmental organisations is to also reduce nitrogen pollution in an effort to restore the coasts and fjords. Nitrogen emissions could be reduced by 13,780 tonnes annually from 2027, AFP news agency reported.

A concerted effort will also be made to improve the country's biodiversity.

According to Danish daily The Copenhagen Post, 250,000 hectares of new forest will be planted, and 140,000 hectares of peatlands that are currently being cultivated will be restored to natural habitat.

Peatlands are wetlands characterised by waterlogged conditions and are known carbon stores.

Around 60% of Denmark's territory is currently cultivated, making it together with Bangladesh the country with the highest share of cultivated land, according to a Danish parliamentary report.

"Danish nature will change in a way we have not seen since the wetlands were drained in 1864," Mr Bruus said, as quoted by AFP news agency.

...

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c20nq8qgep3o

now the rest needs to catch up...
Þetta minnismerki er til vitnis um að við vitum hvað er að gerast og hvað þarf að gera. Aðeins þú veist hvort við gerðum eitthvað.

kiwichick16

  • Nilas ice
  • Posts: 1263
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 150
  • Likes Given: 68
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2994 on: November 20, 2024, 12:49:50 AM »
Congratulations to the Danish  !!! :) :)........ well done them

The Walrus

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3330
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 201
  • Likes Given: 531
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2995 on: November 20, 2024, 02:17:32 PM »
Overall, 2024 was a very good year for agricultural production.  The major growing regions in Asia showed favorable growing conditions, as did Brazil, Turkey, and Northern Europe.  The U.S. had an exceptional growing season, with a bumper harvest.  A few area in Ukraine, Africa and the Middle East were taxed, mostly due to conflict (as mentioned previously).  The worst areas due to weather occurred in the remaining regions in Europe. 

Global harvests increased for most agricultural products.  While they was a slight decline in a few commodities, that was largely due to reduced planting area, as yields increased for almost all crops.

https://downloads.usda.library.cornell.edu/usda-esmis/files/5q47rn72z/j6732z73r/7w62h400b/production.pdf

SteveMDFP

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2730
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 656
  • Likes Given: 73
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2996 on: November 20, 2024, 02:31:29 PM »
Overall, 2024 was a very good year for agricultural production. 
https://downloads.usda.library.cornell.edu/usda-esmis/files/5q47rn72z/j6732z73r/7w62h400b/production.pdf

So we have at least another year without risk of global famine.  That's moderately reassuring.

El Cid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2667
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1023
  • Likes Given: 242
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2997 on: November 20, 2024, 03:22:20 PM »
Denmark agrees deal for livestock emissions levy

Denmark has agreed on how to implement the world’s first tax on agricultural emissions, including flatulence by livestock.

....

From 2030, farmers will have to pay a levy of 300 kroner ($43; £34) per tonne of methane (as per carbon dioxide equivalent) on emissions from livestock including cows and pigs, which will rise to 750 kroner in 2035.

The Green Tripartite minister said they will “do what it takes to reach our climate goals” after receiving a “broad majority” in parliament.

.

This sounds great but won't solve the major problems of animal husbandry. In fact, it won't solve any.

Firstly, we keep animals in prisons, so tightly packed that if any of us had to live like that we would go insane in a week. There are so many of them that they need to get antibiotics in their food daily. That of course helps create antibiotic-resistant bacterial strains that endanger human lives later on (already happening). Then, we give them food that was never intended for them. Also, we grow that animal fodder using all sorts of pesticides, fungicides and destroy the soil while we do that. Taxing methane won't solve any of those problems, it will not even reduce methane emissions much.

Animals should be kept outside, eating food that is good for them, eg. cows should be grazing. If they are not tightly packed they wouldn't need antibiotics, their meat would be much higher quality and their methane emissions would not be a problem: there were 50 million bison roaming North America before Columbus.

Of course if we kept animals like that then the West couldn't consume 100 kg of meat per person per year but only 10-20 because we would have only a fraction of animals relative to today.

This methane tax is classic greenwashing to avoid acknowledging the solution: the reduction of harmful consumption (in this case meat, but also true for petrol and many other things)

El Cid

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 2667
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 1023
  • Likes Given: 242
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2998 on: November 20, 2024, 03:29:02 PM »
Overall, 2024 was a very good year for agricultural production. 
https://downloads.usda.library.cornell.edu/usda-esmis/files/5q47rn72z/j6732z73r/7w62h400b/production.pdf

So we have at least another year without risk of global famine.  That's moderately reassuring.

We already have extreme overproduction of food that is why we use corn for high fructose corn syrup and ethanol production because we don't know what to do with it. Most of our corn and soy production is for animal feed, very inefficient from a global calorific point of view.  The West also consumes cca 30% more calories than needed, and much more meat than necessary. We don't have any risk of global famine. We have agricultural overproduction. We could easily use corn and soy directly for feeding at least an extra billion of humans if we had to...

(we produce globally 1.1 billion tons of corn and 300 million tons of soybeans. These contain cca 10^15 kcal, enough to feed 1,2 billion people)
« Last Edit: November 20, 2024, 03:39:46 PM by El Cid »

The Walrus

  • Young ice
  • Posts: 3330
    • View Profile
  • Liked: 201
  • Likes Given: 531
Re: Climate change, the ocean, agriculture, and FOOD
« Reply #2999 on: November 20, 2024, 04:22:25 PM »
Overall, 2024 was a very good year for agricultural production. 
https://downloads.usda.library.cornell.edu/usda-esmis/files/5q47rn72z/j6732z73r/7w62h400b/production.pdf

So we have at least another year without risk of global famine.  That's moderately reassuring.

We already have extreme overproduction of food that is why we use corn for high fructose corn syrup and ethanol production because we don't know what to do with it. Most of our corn and soy production is for animal feed, very inefficient from a global calorific point of view.  The West also consumes cca 30% more calories than needed, and much more meat than necessary. We don't have any risk of global famine. We have agricultural overproduction. We could easily use corn and soy directly for feeding at least an extra billion of humans if we had to...

(we produce globally 1.1 billion tons of corn and 300 million tons of soybeans. These contain cca 10^15 kcal, enough to feed 1,2 billion people)

Which is why any prediction of global mass starvation is misguided.