food is good, right?
2009-Feb-05, Thursday 11:32 amThe big problem with global warming is not just changing rainfall patterns. Another issue is that warmer soil will evaporate its moisture at a faster pace. So even if rainfall patterns remain constant (which they won't), the soil still dries out sooner than it would have in the past. So existing farmland requires more water than it did before just to maintain the same crop cycle.
The thing is, though.... the water (rainfall and snowmelt) are also changing.
Now that we have actual scientists reporting on... you know... science-y things, here's what our new U.S. energy secretary, Stephen Wu (Nobel-prize winning physicist, but not a climatologist), has to say about our dire need to change our energy needs away from fossil fuel resources which are causing global warming.
http://www.grist.org/news/2009/02/04/AustraliaHeat/index.html?source=rss
So what's the solution? In my opinion, it's already too late to reverse global warming in any profound way before these changes take effect. The only alternative is to relocate our farmlands and train a new generation to produce food at higher latitudes. In an interesting twist, something like this plan is already underway.
Montana is trying out a lease-to-own program that tries to match people who want to become farmers with old farmers who want to give up their business to someone who will continue farming it. Here's a perfect opportunity to have new people try out new methods and new crops.
http://www.newwest.net/city/article/land_link_montana_launches_to_match_farmers_with_ground/C8/L8/
http://missoulian.com/articles/2009/02/04/news/local/news01.txt
With changing energy needs and changing climate, I hope that more states (especially northern states) adopt programs like this! I'd certainly do it if I knew how to navigate the bureaucracy.
The thing is, though.... the water (rainfall and snowmelt) are also changing.
Now that we have actual scientists reporting on... you know... science-y things, here's what our new U.S. energy secretary, Stephen Wu (Nobel-prize winning physicist, but not a climatologist), has to say about our dire need to change our energy needs away from fossil fuel resources which are causing global warming.
"I don't think the American public has gripped in its gut what could happen," he said. "We're looking at a scenario where there's no more agriculture in California." And, he added, "I don't actually see how they can keep their cities going" either.Much of California is actually desert, as I learned in my geology class a few years ago. With dwindling water resources for people to dump (in ever-increasing frequency, remember) onto their false, human-planted ecosystem, it will certainly return to its native condition: desert. There goes America's most productive domestic food supplier. Similar crop-loss changes are already happening in Australia, where they have a farm area nearly twice the size of France, according to this article:
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-warming4-2009feb04,0,7454963.story
http://www.grist.org/news/2009/02/04/AustraliaHeat/index.html?source=rss
So what's the solution? In my opinion, it's already too late to reverse global warming in any profound way before these changes take effect. The only alternative is to relocate our farmlands and train a new generation to produce food at higher latitudes. In an interesting twist, something like this plan is already underway.
Montana is trying out a lease-to-own program that tries to match people who want to become farmers with old farmers who want to give up their business to someone who will continue farming it. Here's a perfect opportunity to have new people try out new methods and new crops.
http://www.newwest.net/city/article/land_link_montana_launches_to_match_farmers_with_ground/C8/L8/
http://missoulian.com/articles/2009/02/04/news/local/news01.txt
With changing energy needs and changing climate, I hope that more states (especially northern states) adopt programs like this! I'd certainly do it if I knew how to navigate the bureaucracy.