Live data from Hacker News

Climate change will alter where many crops are grown

economist.com

131–140 of 188 posts

Re: Climate change will alter where many crops are grown

#131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, hang on. Which was the correct climate? At various times, the planet has apparently completely encased itself in ice and then thawed itself out. According to the climate historian Scotese, the average temperature has varied between 10C and 25C for two billion years. "Recently" it's been about as cold as it ever gets. Is it actually sad that it's warming up? What was it supposed to do, stay cold forever or get e…

This bad take reminds me of an old George Carlin joke about environmentalism: people often use(d) the term "save the planet", but it's in fact us that need saving - "the planet" will go on regardless. So yes, there is no "correct"\"natural" temperature for the Earth. But there very much exists a correct temperature for human (and many others) organized life, and that is basically the temperature of ~200 years ago. As…

George Carlin, maybe?

Re: Climate change will alter where many crops are grown

#132

Sorry for being off topic here: I get pushback on this opinion from my friends, so I expect this to be an unpopular opinion here also: the cost of meat should be priced to also cover external costs of water and harm to the environment. I enjoy a steak once or twice a month, so I am not talking from a vegan-purity perspective. I think that there should be a tax on meat that directly supported research and infrastructu…

> the cost of meat should be priced to also cover external costs of water and harm to the environment

I think that should apply to everything, and not just meat. Air travel, vegetables, plastic, you name it.

> I think that there should be a tax on meat that directly supported research and infrastructure for water and energy efficient farming, lower cost desalinization, etc.

I don't agree with that. As long as you pay the full cost of everything, adding a tax over it seems unfair to me.

> In some ways I think that “meat hurting the environment deniers” are even a little worse than climate change deniers because industrial meat production hits chaotic climate change and water resources.

I think you're oversimplifying things. For example, nuts use a lot of water. More than sheep, goat, pig and chicken according to this https://www.statista.com/chart/9483/how-thirsty-is-our-food/. Vegetarians and vegans both consume more nuts than omnivores (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5707691/). We should take that into account to.

I also wonder, how much of the water consumed by animals is just rainwater on non-arable land? Animals put on land where you can't grow anything but grass anyways is a smart utilisation of resources. Animals put on land where you could grow cereals, vegetables, or legumes is a waste. Having a way to make the distinction between the two when buying meat would be great.

Re: Climate change will alter where many crops are grown

#133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This bad take reminds me of an old George Carlin joke about environmentalism: people often use(d) the term "save the planet", but it's in fact us that need saving - "the planet" will go on regardless. So yes, there is no "correct"\"natural" temperature for the Earth. But there very much exists a correct temperature for human (and many others) organized life, and that is basically the temperature of ~200 years ago. As…

> As it will get hotter, hundreds of millions will die of heat stroke and water and food shortages We used to die in droves from heatwaves and water and food shortages, but we don't anymore, because of technology. Is increased CO2 going to harm crop yields? No, it's the opposite. Was increased CO2 bad for life on ancient earth? No, it was the opposite -- earth used to be an endless jungle teeming with life. It seems…

We still die because of heatwaves and water and food shortages. It doesn't happen so much in the colonial empires of Europe and the USA, but it is still happening in most other places on Earth. Any attempt to export the lifestyle of average US and European citizens to the billions of other people would accelerate the problem even more, requiring an ever-increased rate of energy use to maintain livable conditions. The solution is precisely the opposite: dial down energy use (from all sources - industry, consumerism, travel etc) in the parts that consume too much.

Increased CO2 is creating higher temperatures, which in turn is disrupting temperature-regulation mechanisms everywhere on earth - leading not only to higher temperatures, but to more temperature variability throughout the year, more than has been seen in 10,000 years. It's also leading to more water remaining trapped as vapor, creating longer and more devastating droughts.

> Was increased CO2 bad for life on ancient earth? No, it was the opposite -- earth used to be an endless jungle teeming with life.

This only happens if forests and jungles are allowed to grow to use up the extra CO2. The opposite is happening today: everywhere in the world, jungles and forests are being actively cut down and the land cleared for agricultural use - capturing significantly less CO2 than an entire forest ecosystem.

> because they insist that the warming is the fault of humans, despite the fact that the climate seemed due to warm up anyway

They insist on this because we can actually quantify almost precisely how this is the fault of human activity. The rate of global warming is almost perfectly matched to greenhouse gas emissions. Historical ice age / warm age models entirely fail to account for this miraculous coincidence, and are in fact propaganda held up by massive industrial and financial interests that have an institutional lack of care for the long-term viability of current societies.

Re: Climate change will alter where many crops are grown

#134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This bad take reminds me of an old George Carlin joke about environmentalism: people often use(d) the term "save the planet", but it's in fact us that need saving - "the planet" will go on regardless. So yes, there is no "correct"\"natural" temperature for the Earth. But there very much exists a correct temperature for human (and many others) organized life, and that is basically the temperature of ~200 years ago. As…

George Carlin, maybe?

Ooops, yes, thank you for pointing it out....

Re: Climate change will alter where many crops are grown

#135
post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. C. S. Le…

> C. S. Lewis Figures. Back then, corporations weren't such a huge thing. Now we've got growthism. No matter how much money a megacorp makes, it's always gotta make more for its shareholders. If the CEO and board are not going along with that, they will be replaced. Corporations are stuck on a hedonistic treadmill divorced from the finite capacity of a human stomach to be sated. Conscience? Since when did a corporati…

Lewis came _after_ the East India Trading Company (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_India_Company) - he's talking about corporations that resemble the fever dreams of _Neuromancer_ and _Snow Crash_, not the (relatively) puny things we have today. He didn't lack imagination at all - he's saying that the moral busybody is _worse_ because their impetus is a better one, so they have more focus and energy to pursue their goals than the hedonist / greed-driven individual.

Re: Climate change will alter where many crops are grown

#136
post #90
post #25

Canada, Russia and China seem to be the big winners of climate change. It will be interesting how that changes geopolitical dynamics.

Overall, perhaps, but on the local level it's causing a lot of problems. The region I grew up in, in eastern Ontario, is an area with fairly thin soil. Fortunately, summer rains were generally frequent and mild- light rain all day a few days per week, and sunny and warm otherwise. This balanced out the thin soil, and made it work well for certain crops, corn especially. The last 15 years have seen a huge shift to dry…

> […] their farmer friends, staunch conservatives who used to believe climate change was a political stance, are suddenly getting more and more worried.

This whole ordeal is a lesson in fucking yourself over… Making up your own "thruth" may work for some things, but does not for most.

Re: Climate change will alter where many crops are grown

#137

Sorry for being off topic here: I get pushback on this opinion from my friends, so I expect this to be an unpopular opinion here also: the cost of meat should be priced to also cover external costs of water and harm to the environment. I enjoy a steak once or twice a month, so I am not talking from a vegan-purity perspective. I think that there should be a tax on meat that directly supported research and infrastructu…

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. C. S. Le…

True, the current cruelty of making all living things on earth suffer so that overweight Americans can continue cheaply eating meat 3 times a day is a pretty crushing tyranny.

Or were you going the other way, and absurdly suggesting that not subsidizing the costs of meat would be tyranny?

Re: Climate change will alter where many crops are grown

#138

Stage 5 climate denialism: "It's too Late!" https://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97... Isn't HN an "ideology free" zone? Why do they allow nonstop ideology from The Economist? Not to mention the paywall.

I have a friend who always uses this argument, and I hate it. It‘s like realizing you are not going to be able to break in time, then deciding to step on the accelerator instead, because: "We are going to hit the wall anyway.“… so stupid

Re: Climate change will alter where many crops are grown

#139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This bad take reminds me of an old George Carlin joke about environmentalism: people often use(d) the term "save the planet", but it's in fact us that need saving - "the planet" will go on regardless. So yes, there is no "correct"\"natural" temperature for the Earth. But there very much exists a correct temperature for human (and many others) organized life, and that is basically the temperature of ~200 years ago. As…

> As it will get hotter, hundreds of millions will die of heat stroke and water and food shortages We used to die in droves from heatwaves and water and food shortages, but we don't anymore, because of technology. Is increased CO2 going to harm crop yields? No, it's the opposite. Was increased CO2 bad for life on ancient earth? No, it was the opposite -- earth used to be an endless jungle teeming with life. It seems…

Cold is still the big killer. 20x that of heat. According to this scientific study. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/05/150520193831.h... "Cold weather kills 20 times as many people as hot weather, according to an international study analyzing over 74 million deaths in 384 locations across 13 countries. The findings, published in The Lancet, also reveal that deaths due to moderately hot or cold weather substantially exceed those resulting from extreme heat waves or cold spells."

Re: Climate change will alter where many crops are grown

#140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One friend in particular eats met every day and doesn’t want to pay more for it.

What people don‘t realize is that they ARE paying the price either way, just indirectly.

What some people on hn do not realise is that meat is too expensive already for most. The cost of living in the West is already too high for young people to have families of their own. This is what Bill Gates and his mates want. They will never go without cars, planes, houses, meat etc. That is why some have you have been brainwashed by billionaires into wanting the further impoverishment of your fellow 99% brethren.
Post reply on HN