Early Retirement Extreme Forums

jacob wrote: Plants respond to an initial boost in CO2 but the effect levels off with a permanent boost. The increase in temperature soon becomes detrimental---plants only thrive in a narrow temperature range---note that we only grow wheat and corn in a relatively narrow belt around the globe rather than at every latitude.

So, then; why wouldn't the usa, russia, ukraine gain a larger food growing belt over the near to mid term, now to maybe 50 years ? one would think that if there is an increase initially for plants, that would also increase the land area available for plant growing for food.

signed curious.

@leeholsen - I'd say the US is already suffering somewhat (California) but there are a ways (many decades) to go before we run out of land in the lower 48 and hit the Canadian border or wall ;-P In the mid-term food production should continue to rise (even if population will riser faster and cause issues for food importing nations. The Middle East will get worse and worse and I think more and more in the ME leadership are realizing this. See e.g. SA's recent change of strategy.) but on the flip-side the world will be more subject to food shocks. See https://www.lloyds.com/~/media/files/ne ... 202015.pdf ... However, if scientists can come up with a way to engineer food plants with yields that are permanently better under a high CO2 atmosphere, I expect to get very rich because I'm long in companies that supply the missing NPK fertilizer (see Liebig's law).

This assumes that the systemic response doesn't change. This is not a good assumption because the food system has a lot of slack(*) because [modern] meat production is a very inefficient producer of calories. This can go two ways. Either we stop eating as much meat or poor people get priced out, meaning they die of malnutrition. IOW, people might stop eating burgers before they bid up potash and nitrogen fertilizer to astronomical levels.

(*) Just like the modern oil system. When oil supply got squeezed, the price didn't shoot up into the stratosphere. Instead consumers drove less and switched to more efficient cars. Similarly, people might eat less (a very good thing for all developed nations) or switch to more calorie efficient diets.

In any case ... in the long term, when we're all dead, and our grandchildren are old geezers, Canada/Alaska will benefit as will Scandinavia and Russia.

Augustus wrote:Sooo, as long as it's not cutting off water, I think these experiments show that farming with current methods is safe (and actually more productive) at least up to 550 ppm.

We'll know the exact answer to that question sometime around 2060.

WRT growing plants: Another issue is that, while the mean overall temperature/precipitation may change slightly in a region, the variability of that weather is incredibly important. Relatively short term droughts, heat waves, or early/late frosts can seriously damage an entire crop. Said another way, it doesn't matter if 90% of the growing season is ideal if 10% is inhospitable at the wrong time.

So, with regard to regional impacts .... anyone know which regions are expected to have less variable weather patterns* going forward? Or is everywhere going to become more erratic?

*and favorable - it doesn't count if it is consistently awful.

http://qz.com/674284/incredible-heat-co ... w-decades/
http://link.springer.com/article/10.100 ... 016-1665-6
http://eltahir.mit.edu/wp-content/uploa ... /Paper.pdf

If five million Syrian refugees are hard to absorb, consider the issue of dealing upwards of five hundred million refugees ... They can't all go to Europe?

jacob wrote:They can't all go to Europe?

that's not what brute heard. all are welcome. brute is on his way now.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Fort ... y_wildfire

Caused by unusually high temperatures/low humidity (90F/15%) for May (note that temperatures are increasing much faster than the average global temps when you go inland and towards the poles).

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/fort-mcmurr ... oil-sands/

Currently, the fire has reached downtown areas and the entire city has been evacuated (80000 people). McMurray is home of the world's biggest deposit of tar sands, so today's oil price is up.

jacob wrote: I'm long in companies that supply the missing NPK fertilizer

I'm interested in a view from 10,000 feet of the current agricultural system. I.E. who the major producers and transporters are, what the major inputs are, etc. Do you recommend any books?

Maybe time to invest in US East Coast skiing? https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/cap ... re-likely/

Here is the Greenland Block study referenced in the article: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/96798/

The snow pack is melting out about 2.5-3 weeks ahead of schedule in Alaska. The entire sub-arctic is practically free of snow. Barring an unusually wet summer. there will be lots of fires

I thought this was a good visual depiction of the rate of change.

http://www.climate-lab-book.ac.uk/2016/ ... peratures/

@JL13 - I'm not aware of any books describing the system company by company. The audience would be rather limited. This is the info you find in trade journals or financial reports. I just read the news for specific companies which mention other companies and then I read their news. There aren't that many operators out there. For a big picture view, maybe this one http://www.amazon.com/Coming-Famine-Glo ... 0520271238

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-36339523 ... India records hottest day ever(*) at 51C/124F.

"Even my mobile phone gave up and stopped working when I was trying to take pictures today," he said.

"I was able to switch my mobile phone on after putting a wet cloth on it for about 20-25 minutes."

(*) Presumably meaning in recorded history.

All the more reason not to move to the Southwest US: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/cap ... a-new-low/

If you want to act, act against poverty. You'll do actual good on a very real and current matter, and if climate change happens, people will be rich enough to not care too much.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2 ... /86173664/

Also the chances of La Nina in the fall is now 70% -> Drier conditions in the SW.

After a pair of mild summers it's pretty miserable in my little corner of the southeast so far in 2016, and very dry. Not getting close to breaking temp records however (very difficult to displace the dustbowl era around here). On a more pleasant note, it's 68 and sunny right now in my future summer home north of Lake Superior.

It's hard for me to understand why people would want to stay in the Southwest. Of course, it's not unusual for people to wonder why in the world I'd want to hang around in northern Minnesota either.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/weather/2 ... /86173664/

Jacob I know it's "news", but 110 is nothing new or unusual in the southwest. Honestly, it is why people live there. I remember leaving alabama for el paso. I got off the plane in 116 degree heat. I was there for 3 years, and it was up in the 110-115 degrees, every year. There's plenty of places that don't get that hot. Living in the desert southwest, and complaining about the heat is as bad as moving to Seattle, and complaining about the rain. Yes, people do it, but they should not be listened to, or quoted.

I say, if that's what you want, go there while there's still some water. The population vastly exceeds the carrying capacity of the land, so this is a door that is closing. Get in, while the getting is good! (That this encourages those who are in Seattle complaining about the rain to leave, is entirely coincidental.)

@Riggerjack - I'm not posting these as news or records but to show what things look like from a more relateable perspective than scientific reports.

It has been really dry the past few weeks in our region, and last night we got dumped on. We got 3-4 inches in our rain gauge. Local regions west of Cedar Rapids got 8-10 inches. Near Peoria it looks like some spots topped 10+ inches of rain over night. Lots of flash flooding.


Despite this, not a drop of water in my basement. All my waterproofing is paying off.