There’s a surging current of alarm that we’re headed for a food doomsday by 2050—that the world’s food-producing capacity will crash before population peaks at 10 billion. Don’t you believe it! Smart technology and better management policies will let us feed the hungry hordes to midcentury and beyond. —IEEE Spectrum, Summer 2013
World total cereal production is forecast to increase by about 7 percent in 2013 compared to last year, helping to replenish global inventories and raise expectations for more stable markets in 2013/14, according to the latest issue of the UN Food and Agriculture Organization’s quarterly Crop Prospects and Food Situation report. —Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 11 July 2013
Africa’s economy is growing faster than any other continent, according to the African Development Bank (AfDB). A new report from the AfDB said one-third of Africa’s countries have GDP growth rates of more than 6%. The continent’s middle class is growing rapidly – around 350 million Africans now earn between $2 and $20 a day. The AfDB’s Annual Development Effectiveness Report said the growth was largely driven by the private sector, thanks to improved economic governance and a better business climate on the continent. —BBC News, 11 July 2013
After nearly a decade of drought, Israel has decided to make its freshwater rather than wait in vain for enough of it to fall from the sky. The Sorek desalination plant opening next month will be the largest facility of its kind in the world. Once it’s operational, Israel’s four desalination plants will be capable of producing 60 percent of the country’s freshwater. There’s speculation that the country will soon see a water surplus, something that was almost unthinkable during the arid 2000s. –Walter Russell Mead, Via Meadia, 30 May 2013
Humans may never have to worry about the supply of fresh water again. The University of Texas at Austin reports that some of the university’s scientists have found a new way to desalinate sea water, potentially easing concerns over one of the crises facing human civilization we’ve been told is just around the bend. –Walter Russell Mead, Via Meadia, 13 July 2013
Thanks to The GWPF and Dr. Benny Peiser for that roundup.
Compare that news to the gloom and doom of Paul Ehrlich from juts a few months ago:
=============================================================
Contemplating Collapse
by Paul Ehrlich
It’s been three months since Anne and I summarized our views on this topic for the Royal Society, and we’ve been pleased that it has generated a fair amount of discussion and particularly, invitations to share our take on the future in various forum in the U.S., Australia, and New Zealand. So far the paper has not elicited any significant attacks, save one “rebuttal” based on climate denial that was rejected by a journal. But it has also not yet generated some of the discussion we might have hoped for, especially on key issues such as how to buffer the global agricultural system against global change so as to retain a real possibility of at least maintaining today’s nutritional situation and steps that need to be taken to increase human security against vast epidemics (such as that which now may be threatened by the H7N9 “bird flu” virus).
============================================================
Source: http://us4.campaign-archive2.com/?u=88e1f9157b8a1070712b4dd12&id=22001abf1d&e=f8b6a6b78b
I’d love to see him explain how the world agricultural system will collapse in the face of gains like this, it should be entertaining.
Ehrlich’s views have been proven wrong. Updating does not change that fact. But the IEEE (international electrical and electronic engineering) is hardly an authority either on future food security. Their article, which I studied carefully, is nothing more than a pastiche of current anecdotes that does not even begin to deal with the longer term food issues. Worse than most CAGW nonsense. This article obviously could not get published in journals traditionally dealing with agricultural topics.
Just because it’s conclusions might accord with the worldviews of many AGW sceptics does not make it right. It is actually very wrong. Detailed specifics can be found in the food, water, (and climate impacts on both) chapters of Gaia’s Limits.
Bottom line, irrigation has reached limits, best practice limits (feetilizer, planting types and practices) are being reached for some (not yet all, e.g. Rice) crops, intensification limits have been reached for most important crops (wheat, rice, alfalfa, potatoes, sorghum, taro…). Corn, soybeans, and vegetables are the notable intensification exceptions to date. And, some recent crop intensification practices are threatened by reversals from Darwinian pest evolution (best and most worrisome example being Ug99 wheat rust).
Even the optimistic FAO explicitly does not see any present way forward to feed its projected 2050 population, save some hoped for not yet in evidence miracle. A more detailed analysis shows feeding projected 2050 popularion is just possible under a specific set of limiting assumtions (lower average daily calories than at present, no growth in certain meat proportions, unlimited ‘virtual water’) but represents a fairly certain ‘soft’ limit on global population at boutmthatntime and population.
IMO Best this site stick to its expertise, climate, rather than air ill informed biases on fundamentally different topics.
Has anyone ever met a happy activist environmentalist? How about an optimistic one? You see their entire worldview is that we are ‘cereally’ doomed (pun intended) and it’s all our fault. They are the most miserable bunch of sods you could ever hope to meet. Really sad.
Keitho says:
July 22, 2013 at 12:21 pm
America , like other advanced societies , will take advantage of this situation and why shouldn’t it. Until Haiti, and others , learn that being useless has big consequences they will never get their act together. That is nobody’s fault but their own.
=========
A large wealthy country can afford to flood a small poor country will cut rate goods, driving local producers out of business. At which point the large country can increase prices and take advantage of its manufactured monopoly to reap enormous profits.
Such a situation is not free trade, it is market manipulation, and it kills people. Either through poverty or through force of arms to try and resist. A rich country does not need to profit in this fashion. As you sow, so shall yea reap.
Jimbo says: @ur momisugly July 22, 2013 at 6:26 pm
….What I don’t understand is why, with so many spectacular failed predictions, does Paul ‘Nostradamus’ Ehrlich continue? How will history remember him? Not for being right that’s for sure.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” ~ H. L. Mencken
How history will remember Ehrlich depends entirely on who wins the current undeclared war between the tax payers and the parasites. Remember it is the winner who writes history.
You only have to look at the true story of Thanksgiving to see how history is being rewritten. link 1 and link 2
Paul Ehrlich, the definitive alarmist … but only in our lifetimes because he is merely a modern day clone of the alarmists of centuries ago blaming all ills of the moment like earthquakes, floods, droughts, plagues, crop failure, fire and ice on a comet in the sky or God’s wrath and sacrificed a hundred oxen and friars.
The word “Science” should never appear in the same sentence as “Paul Ehrlich”, except for purposes of drawing a stark contrast, like this one. They are antonyms, polar opposites.
Paul Ehrlich is no different than the kooks we used to see around Times Square and Bryant Park wearing sandwich boards that proclaimed: “The End Is Near. Repent!“. He is also a symbol of the state of decay of higher education in the USA, naturally granted tenure to ensure his continual ridiculous prophecizing with no possible accountability.
Rud Istvan says: @ur momisugly July 22, 2013 at 6:27 pm
…. Bottom line, irrigation has reached limits, best practice limits (feetilizer, planting types and practices) are being reached for some (not yet all, e.g. Rice) crops, intensification limits have been reached for most important crops (wheat, rice, alfalfa, potatoes, sorghum, taro…). Corn, soybeans, and vegetables are the notable intensification exceptions to date. And, some recent crop intensification practices are threatened by reversals from Darwinian pest evolution (best and most worrisome example being Ug99 wheat rust)….
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
To some extent you are correct however you are leaving out the most basic principle. If left alone to get on with it mankind is highly innovative and quite capable of coming up with methods for growing food yet undreamed.
When ever someone says something like this I think of the old woman I met in the 1970’s. During her lifetime she saw the USA go from horse drawn wagons and outhouses to space travel and computers. It is only the greedy and the envious and the Luddites they are manipulating that hold mankind back from a decent standard of living. Worse it is done intentionally.
Keitho says: @ur momisugly July 22, 2013 at 12:21 pm
America , like other advanced societies , will take advantage of this situation and why shouldn’t it. Until Haiti, and others , learn that being useless has big consequences they will never get their act together. That is nobody’s fault but their own.
=========
ferd berple says: @ur momisugly July 22, 2013 at 6:38 pm
A large wealthy country can afford to flood a small poor country will cut rate goods, driving local producers out of business. At which point the large country can increase prices and take advantage of its manufactured monopoly to reap enormous profits.
Such a situation is not free trade, it is market manipulation, and it kills people. Either through poverty or through force of arms to try and resist. A rich country does not need to profit in this fashion. As you sow, so shall yea reap.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
To me it is even worse because it was done under the guise of ‘Socialism’ by President Clinton and his Fabian/Socialist buddies Tony Blair, UN Special Envoy and WTO Director Pascal Lamy (The WTO on Agriculture: Food as a Commodity) among others.
“Social Justice’ anyone?
Rud Istvan says:
July 22, 2013 at 6:27 pm
IMO Best this site stick to its expertise, climate, rather than air ill informed biases on fundamentally different topics.
========
Following your own logic, you should therefore not be offering others advice. Rather you should stick to climate.
As to the expertise of readers on this site, I expect more than a few are like myself. I found that Climate Doctrine was at odds with the findings in my own areas of expertise. I tried to make this information public on sites like Real Climate and was shouted down, censored, and not allowed even the basic fundamentals of reasoned argument and debate.
And I asked myself why? Why if the science is settled, if the researchers are so certain of their results, why would they act in this fashion to prevent reasoned debate. That is not how science works. So I researched the question and found the answer. Climate Science is not a science. No true science needs to include the word “science” in its name.
Climate Science is a cult, a belief system, a religion dressed in the trappings of science. It is a high priest, wearing a lab coat, carrying a clip board. Any time something happens to fit the belief, that is proof of the belief. Every time something happens to contradict the belief, that is evidence that change is just around the corner, and with this change will come even more proof of the belief.
Skunkpew says:
July 22, 2013 at 4:10 pm
when obesity is such a growing (no pun intended) problem.
===========
shortage of micro nutrients from food produced on heavily farmed land will induce food cravings in the population, increasing the rate of obesity. perhaps the solution to obesity is a simple as adding some dirt from the ocean bottom to our diet.
ferd berple says:
July 22, 2013 at 7:29 pm
“shortage of micro nutrients from food produced on heavily farmed land will induce food cravings in the population, increasing the rate of obesity. perhaps the solution to obesity is a simple as adding some dirt from the ocean bottom to our diet.”
Perhaps an easier solution would be to close all McDonalds, Wendys, Burger Kings et al.
Fat may be ugly, but, like ugly cars and ugly houses and ugly music, FAT IS FREEDOM.
LOL, even if all the fast-food places were closed, they’d still go buy a box of doughnuts and eat the whole thing topped off with two bottles of sugary pop.
***************************************************
Most American farmland’s nutrient content is, I believe, well-maintained by planting nitrogen (or other nutrient)-replacing cover crops in the off-season, crop rotation, and or fertilizing. It is the “organic” and “sustainable” divisions of the Fantasy Science Club who falsely mischaracterize mainline farming as less healthy (along with their cohorts in the “no gene splicing/Franken food” flummadiddle chapter). Most farmers with farms of any size in this valley have bachelors degrees (or at least one of their kids do) in Agriculture from W.S.U. (Wash State) or O.S.U. (Oregon State) (or have the Envirostalinists taken over O.S.U., Jim S.?). They learn the hard science of farming.
About a year ago, I had an annoying conversation with my friend who is, sadly, a brainwashed member of the “Sustainability” [Translation: requiring no CO2 emissions, since we are just about to run out of fossil fuels AND CO2 is killing the planet, don’t you know!] Division of the Fantasy Science Club (among other divisions, alas; the most tragic membership was, in my view, her joining the Paul Ehrlich Don’t-Have-Kids-to-Save-the-Planet Cult, so, she and her husband didn’t — not that choosing to not have kids is ALWAYS a tragedy, just that for that particular reason it is very sad). Anyway, my friend had the bright idea that she would start a consulting business “helping farmers.”
“Helping farmers? How?” I asked.
“By telling them how to farm with less water and less damage to the environment and, well, sustainable farming methods,” she replied fervently.
“But, there is plenty of water and those farmers are all well-educated in the latest farming science,” I said slowly, “it’s not like it was back in the 1920’s or something.”
Silence. Change of subject. Guess she decided she’d better go attend one of the meetings of the brethren before she tried again to make a convert.
And they do try. Have you noticed this? ANY chance they get, the few libs I have a chat with now and then try to convert me to the AGW cult. I encountered one in the plant section of Fred Meyer last May. “…. and have you noticed how HOT it’s been? I can hardly keep my plants watered.” We had had about 3 days of temperatures in the upper 70’s/lower 80’s F. — after which, it started raining again.
“Even the optimistic FAO explicitly does not see any present way forward to feed its projected 2050 population, save some hoped for not yet in evidence miracle. A more detailed analysis shows feeding projected 2050 popularion is just possible under a specific set of limiting assumtions”
Rud,
Have you even paid attention to recent population trends on a global level? By 2050, no one will be talking about a “population bomb”, anymore. Heck, Japan and Russia are already losing population. Europe’s population will be down a quarter from where it is now. The US will more than likely fall below 300 million by 2050 (that is unless it can find tens of millions of fertile immigrants). Even Mexico and South America have birth rates at or below replacement levels. China is a demographic time bomb, and India’s population growth rate has peaked.
The problem of population and food by 2050 will not due to over farming or over population.
Janice Moore says:
July 22, 2013 at 9:07 pm
Most American farmland’s nutrient content is, I believe, well-maintained by planting nitrogen (or other nutrient)-replacing cover crops in the off-season, crop rotation, and or fertilizing…..
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Actually not. Cover crops cost money (White Dutch Clover and Korean Lespedeza is ~ $200/50lbs) and time and effort so it is often not done especially on rented or commercial farmland.
My farm lost over two foot of top soil and is now down to pure clay (98% per soil analysis), that is why it was sold. Fertilizers do not put back the micro-nutrients. or organic matter. I notice that fire ant mounds on my farm were surrounded by much greener, lusher grass which may indicate nutrients deep in the soil had been brought to the surface by the ants. I also found switching from a livestock salt block (mainly NaCl) to loose mineral salts had a significant effect on my livestock. Less grain was needed to keep condition, coat color became more intense and did not fade as much in the sun and less worming was needed across three different species, horse, sheep and goat. All three species have coat colors of white, black and various shades of brown.
In other words no one has really bothered to really look at micronutrients except in livestock.
That paper led to:
“(Ahem.) Of course, the relevant metric is production PER CAPITA, and it has been dropping for many years now:”
(Ahem.) Not really Sedron L. From you same source:
http://www.springerimages.com/Images/LifeSciences/1-10.1007_s12571-009-0026-y-3
It looks like the per capita production is pretty stable. And it is clear that it is being done on less land, with fewer seeds and less fertilizer.
But I did like the scary projected drop in your cited graph. Too bad it doesn’t seem to have any relationship to their own data or reality.
And their graph clearly shows increased yield per hectare with fewer hectares harvested. So if there really is a problem, just put some of those hectares that are no longer in production back into production. Combined with increased yield per hectare, problem solved.
http://www.springerimages.com/Images/LifeSciences/1-10.1007_s12571-009-0026-y-2
Repeating something again:
Consider dairy in India. Let’s postulate that each Indian averages 8 oz of milk per day, or 62 million gallons of milk for the country. Someone has to grow the crops that feed the cows that produce the milk. Now lets add refrigeration to the country so that milk can be kept for weeks instead of hours between milking and drinking. Are more or fewer gallons poured out for going sour? Do we need more or less grain?
First world countries (with developed infrastructure and cheap reliable energy) are able to consume more calories even when fewer calories are produced. Any decline in produced grain absolutely must take this into account. In which countries do you think it is most likely for a large pile of corn to rot and be tossed? Probably not the one where there is controlled drying and humidity sensors in the storage silo. As these practices are adopted in other countries then we should expect grain production to fall (although an increase in protein consumption could hold the average stable).
An Inquirer says:
Sedron L @ur momisugly July 22, 2013 at 9:12 am talks about per capita.
There must be something amiss with your chart because it does not square with reality. Worldwide, starvation is on the decrease.
Starvation is usully a result of misallocation of resources, not the lack of them.
ddpalmer says:
http://www.springerimages.com/Images/LifeSciences/1-10.1007_s12571-009-0026-y-3
It looks like the per capita production is pretty stable. And it is clear that it is being done on less land, with fewer seeds and less fertilizer.
But I did like the scary projected drop in your cited graph.
I think you misread the graph — it displays no projections.
@Sedron – Actually yes it does. It is the tailing off towards the right. Look again.
ddpalmer says:
And their graph clearly shows increased yield per hectare with fewer hectares harvested. So if there really is a problem, just put some of those hectares that are no longer in production back into production. Combined with increased yield per hectare, problem solved.
Ha. Lack of land is part of the problem, due to sprawl, population growth, water supply and climate change. There is little land going fallow, just waiting to be put back into production.
Joe says:
To date at least, by far the biggest effect of climate change on available food has been the diversion of crops from food to fuel.
Not, according to the expert who wrote the PNAS paper, in North America. And not, according to Lobell and Field (2007):
http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/2/1/014002
How pathetic if your scientific legacy is a litany of predictions of doom – that didn’t happen.
Paul and Anne Ehrlich have been failing at predicting for at least 45 yrs now.Still these people are payed to do “research” and to present their ideas. What could better show that the peer review system doesn’t work in the short term?
A good friend of mine maintains that it is ‘normal’ for bad science to take 40yrs to be corrected.
Let’s see how long Paul and Anne Ehrlich get away with it.
“The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate ….” Paul Ehrlich, “The Population Bomb, 1968. How does an awful purveyor of awfulness, one who has gotten it wrong so many times is still listened to and given any credence?
Of course there is always this!
http://www.bing.com/images/search?q=soylent+green&id=C29BB7095FDCCF7E9A50B189D0B28329C9B93EBA&FORM=IQFRBA#view=detail&id=C29BB7095FDCCF7E9A50B189D0B28329C9B93EBA&selectedIndex=0
Sedron L says:
“I think you misread the graph — it displays no projections.”
I know you need to go back to your original comment. The graph YOUR link goes directly too clearly shows projections past 2021.
Nice try and thanks for playing.
Really? You mean the half billion extra acres of trees in North America since the 18th century are just everyone’s imagination?
You mean that forest that was a farm just down the road from me, never produced?
Or do you mean it destroys your meme, and you have no facts to back up such a ridiculous assertion?
JP may hallucinate a dropping US/world population, but the projections are for the US to go well over 400 million by 2050. I and my children soooo look forward to California doubling again and again as it has done in my lifetime, from under 10 million to 38 million.
Raymond,
The projections do not measure to current population trends. The last 2 years have seen the lowest birthrates in US history. The 2010 Census had the slowest rate of population growth in the US since 1932. The US’s population is growing; but it’s only growing due to long life spans. According to Census Data in 2000 and 2010, only Hispanic immigration allowed our populations to rise. And the Hispanic TFR (Total Fertility Rate) in the US dropped from 3.36 in 2005 to under 2.2 in 2011. The TFR of Mexico has dropped from 6.0 in 1970 to 2.38 in 2012. The Median Age in the US is currently 37.5 years as compared to 24 in 1972. In other words, not only is the US significantly older, but even its immigrant population is failing to reproduce at replacement levels. The US population will only continue to grow because people are dieing off slower than newborns are entering the world. Once the Baby Boomers leave this world. the US population will drop significantly unless it is replenished with foreigners. That is not likely to happen.
As I stated earlier, Russia, Japan, almost all of Europe, and China are even in a worse position. Russia and Japan are already losing population. Germany is about to, as is Italy, Greece, Spain, Ireland and much of Eastern Europe. North Africa’s birthrate as now mostly below replacement levels of 2.1 births (down from an average of 5.5 births/female 40 years ago). Even India is headed for demographic problems. Most of South America has birth rates below replacement levels. Only portions of Africa and East Asia have positive birth rates.
Not sure where all this growth is going to happen. The UN’s own demographic data does not support its positive projections. If current trends continue. The world’s population will peak sometime between 2035-2040 before rapidly declining after 2045-2050.