Guest essay by David Archibald
A correspondent in Oslo writes:
“The official view in Norway is in contrast to what the people experience because of cooling weather: Late spring gives flooding and avalanches when late snow-melting in the mountains. Water pipes freeze because of early and deep frost in the winter. Insect populations down 40% in 5 years because of cool and wet summers. This of cause is bad for pollination of fruit and berries. The grain harvest in Norway this summer is down 18% from average the last 5 years, despite increase in area and better seeds. But officially it is getting warmer.”
Some of those observations are anecdotal but some facts can be checked – Norwegian wheat production for example. The following figure shows Norwegian wheat production from 1960. Wheat production is off 48% from its peak:
Figure 1: Norwegian Wheat Production 1960 – 2013
The problem is sprouting of grain on the stalk prior to harvest due to excessive humidity. That in turn means that Norwegian wheat is no longer good enough to make Norwegian bread as shown by Figure 2:
Figure 2: Percentage of domestic wheat in Norwegian wheat flour (Statistics Norway 2011)
Just a few years ago, Norwegian wheat comprised up to about 75% of Norwegian bread, seemingly hitting a blend wall. Now it is down to 10% due to climate change.
The Norwegian Government used to have a policy of storing two years’ worth of grain consumption. This was a lesson from WW2. It took two generations to forget that lesson and the policy was abandoned in the 1990s. Like a number of other countries, Norway will have to pay for higher food imports while its main source of revenue is falling rapidly. Norwegian oil production peaked in 2001 at 3.4 million barrels per day is now under half that number:
Figure 3: Norwegian Oil Production 1965 – 2013
Norwegian oil production has produced a classic Hubbert-style peak. Norway will cease to be an oil exporter by 2030. The country had attempted to placate the gods of climate with an expensive carbon capture project at the Mongstad refinery on the west coast. That foolish and self-indulgent project was abandoned on 20th September, 2013. With the funds that have been saved by that abandonment perhaps the Norwegian Government should go back to storing two years’s worth of grain.
Related articles
- Norway ditches ‘moon landing’ carbon capture project (businessgreen.com)
- ‘One of the ugliest political crash landings’ – Norway abandons carbon capture project (mining.com)
Gene Selkov:
Are you certain what’s so “clearly” seen is what in fact’s the case?
It’s not that growing space is lean — there’s something in its place
Some crop-choice economics might have given wheat the shove
There’s details, source and background in the comments here above.
===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle
@Keith. DeHavelle: Yes, I take it back. I can’t really judge how suitable the land is for wheat based on total production figures — thank you for pointing it out. But if we’re now in a situation when other crops give wheat the shove, and if the trend continues, won’t it be reasonable to expect that eventually there will be areas where weeds have given the shove to the last profitable crop?
A more generalised version of the point I was trying to make is that each crop is subject to competition by other crops and wild plants. It is possible that the climate can affect the outcome of such competition more than it affects the crop’s yield. Or, in other words the missing bit of information here is how much does it cost to maintain the present yield and how much does that cost vary.
David, sorry, but I’m not believing that climate is impacting Norway’s wheat. The only relevant metric for that is yield—how much wheat are you getting per unit area? Total wheat production is meaningless, they could just be planting more or less. But yield is what counts. Here’s that data, from the FAO
I can’t see any significant effect from anything …
w.
As Willis showed in his graph the wheat yield did not decrease significantly during that same period, but from March of 2008 until June of 2010 the price of wheat dropped from $439.72/metric ton to $157.67/metric ton (http://www.indexmundi.com/commodities/?commodity=wheat&months=120). Farmers don’t grow crops which won’t make them money regardless of what the climate does.
David Archibald,
May I suggest you turn your talent of finding patterns in random correlations and squiggles to humorous subjects such as:
At least your posts could then possess some redeeming quality or social value as opposed to the continued detritus that simply continues to pull down the credibility of this site.
comments closed on this blog thread at Scientific American:
5 Oct: ScientificAmericanBlog: David Wogan: Surplus fossil fuels make it even harder to stay within our carbon budget
Kevin Bullis has written a smart piece at MIT Technology Review about how mankind is likely to blow by the 1-trillion ton carbon budget…
Myles R. Allen, a scientist at the University of Oxford and one of the authors of the IPCC report, thinks we’ll hit that trillionth ton around 2040…
We have now entered a period of energy surplus where we produce energy from “unconventional sources” using technological breakthroughs like horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing…
We’re still in the early stages with unconventional fuels. As Charles C. Mann articulated in his story for The Atlantic: “we will never run out of oil.” Now, “never” isn’t the word I would choose, but in the time scales that we’re concerned with (years, decades, centuries), I’m inclined to side with Mann: there are plenty of fossil fuels in the ground (and under the sea if you consider methane hydrates). Before long, unconventional fuels will be considered conventional. And we haven’t even tapped into what’s recoverable with heating actual shale deposits for fuel.
If the world should be decarbonizing, and rather quickly according to the latest IPCC report (again, 1-trillion ton budget!), a surplus of fossil fuels is not exactly the news you want to hear…
(STRANGE CONCLUSION?) The decision is ours then, not on geology or other natural constraints. It’s up to us to craft policies, develop trade agreements, or implement technologies that keep us within our carbon budget in a period of fossil fuel abundance.
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/plugged-in/2013/10/05/surplus-fossil-fuels-make-it-even-harder-to-stay-within-our-carbon-budget/
5 Oct: UK Telegraph: Emily Gosden: Carbon tax too expensive’, says industry
Ministers are under renewed pressure to scrap their controversial green “carbon tax” after delays in European Union state aid left British heavy industry without promised protection from the costs of the levy.
Tata Steel and BASF have warned that the so-called carbon price floor — levied on fossil fuels used in power generation — is putting them at a competitive disadvantage.
The Government promised that energy-intensive industries would be offered a £100m compensation package to protect them from the unilateral tax, which was introduced last April.
But the compensation has been held up for several months awaiting EU state aid approval, with businesses already facing millions of pounds in costs. ..
If approval were rejected, it could call the whole tax into question. Industry hopes that the Government may be prompted to review the tax, especially after the Conservatives indicated that they were looking to mitigate rising energy costs in the wake of Ed Miliband’s price freeze pledge.
“We shouldn’t put British industry at a disadvantage against Europe and the US: for our manufacturers this would be assisted suicide,” Michael Fallon, the energy minister, said last week…
Andrew Mayer, head of UK public affairs for BASF, the world’s leading chemical company, which employs about 2,000 people in Britain, said: “Without clarity on state aid approval for energy intensive rebates from the CPS [carbon tax] we are facing a 5pc rise in our energy costs today and 20pc from April 2015.
“Even with that clarity, many of our customers and smaller sites are still facing that increase. It is an unsustainable policy that is damaging UK competitiveness. It should be scrapped,” he continued…
The carbon tax was originally intended to encourage new low-carbon power plants such as wind farms and nuclear sites by making it increasingly expensive to run coal and gas works that emit carbon.
But it has failed to secure the low-carbon investment — with ministers now offering developers additional subsidy packages — and critics say it simply serves to push up the price of electricity…
Tony Cocker, chief executive of energy supplier E.On, has described it as a “stealth poll tax” that would hand windfall gains to existing nuclear plants. In a meeting with business leaders in February, before becoming energy minister, Mr Fallon called the carbon tax “a fairly absurd waste of your money”, mistakenly saying that the policy had been inherited from Labour. …
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/energy/10358461/Carbon-tax-too-expensive-says-industry.html
——————————————————————————–
btw humiliating backdown for the EU, no matter how Reuters spins it:
5 Oct: SMH: Reuters: UN aviation body reaches emissions deal
The United Nations body in charge of civil aviation has reached a consensus on a market-based system to curb carbon emissions from airlines by 2020, but rejected a proposal to let Europeapply its own plan to foreign carriers in the meantime…
The resolution sets up steps the ICAO’s 200 or so member states need to take between now and the next assembly in 2016…
Until then, many delegates will look back fondly on their time in Quebec’s largest city. Talks were brightened by an average of three cocktail parties per night hosted by different countries, some of whom were angling to win a coveted seat on ICAO’s 36-member governing council.
Diplomacy and good will were in full force during the first week, when representatives of countries at policy loggerheads clinked glasses of Singapore Slings, or chatted over plates of sushi, samosas and other national dishes…
The committee agreed to “develop a global MBM (market-based mechanism) scheme for international aviation” in 2016, as decided by the ICAO’s governing council in early September.
***But ICAO Assembly president Michel Wachenheim amended the text to reflect requests made by some developing countries, including India, to say the 2016 decision should take into account the “environmental and economic impacts” of different global MBM options, “including feasibility and practicability.”…
IATA plans to work with the ICAO’s governing council over the next three years to design a scheme…
Europe wanted the ICAO to help shore up the continent’s ETS, which is central to its climate policy and requires all airlines using EU airports to pay for emissions.
Analysts say the European Parliament could reject the Montreal package, but would have to act quickly to endorse any extension of the European Commission’s decision to “stop the clock” on its law in time for an April 2014 deadline.
Some environmentalists felt let down by the outcome.
Friday’s agreement lacked the “guts” that the environmental community has been looking for from the aviation industry, said Bill Hemmings, program manager for aviation and shipping for Brussels-based environmental group Transport & Environment.
“After all was said and done, much was said and not much was done,” Hemmings added.
http://www.smh.com.au/business/world-business/un-aviation-body-reaches-emissions-deal-20131005-2v0ep.html
——————————————————————————–
charles the moderator says:
October 5, 2013 at 12:13 pm
Curve-fitting got me to Capitol Hill – twice. The latest effort is here:
http://www.iwp.edu/docLib/20130911_OurCoolingClimateCapitolHill16thSeptember2013.pdf
And the speaker’s notes:
http://www.iwp.edu/docLib/20130918_OurCoolingClimateNotes16thSeptember2013.pdf
If you really want something to start the bile rising, I suggest this:
http://www.iwp.edu/docLib/20130918_TheFourHorsemenIWP17thSeptember2013.pdf
More curve-fitting than you can poke a stick at.
Reply: I don’t know why your comment got held in moderation. Probably the number of links. Ironic that I released it ~ctm
Don’t worry about the “norskis” and their bread – when the harvest gets down too low they just strip the bark of all the trees in their forests, grind it up and mix it in with the bread-dough. Or at least that’s what they did back during “The Little Iceage” (TLI) and long into the 19th century. The other name for that cold time is: “Barkebrøds Dagene”
‘Cut and Paste’ “Barkebrøds Dagene” in your ‘Google Search Engine’ and see what you get. You may need Bing or somebody like that to translate for you, but – – – –
What’s happening with Norwegian wood?
Roger, John lit a fire. Isn’t it good?
Okie dokie, O H Dahlsveen — I found this, thanks to your tip #(:))
(Since the author of this post has essentially been told to go jump in a lake above, time for going OFF the thread into the forest!)
Ingrid’s Bark Bread
100 g or 3.5 oz yeast
1 liter or 1 quart lukewarm water
1 liter or 1 quart rye flour
1.5 liters or 1.5 quarts white flour
2 dl or 1/2 cup bark flour (Ingrid uses bark from her own pine forest)
Blend the ingredients and knead the dough. Allow to rise for one hour. Roll out into smaller rounds. Baking time varies according to the size of the bread. (I suggest for medium rounds which are the size of pita breads 10 minutes at 225 C or 437 F – sprinkle water over before baking)
(Source:http://www.nordicwellbeing.com/Julies_Kitchen/2011/01/09/bark-bread-is-back/)
I typed “bark bread” (in English) into Bing and several sites came up. Interesting. I think you would need a TON of butter and honey to make that stuff taste good. There is NO sugar/sweetener and NO salt in the recipe. I’m not going to be making that …..unless I have to.
Thanks for sharing, though, O. H..
Remember this guy? LOL, “… cattails. Yes, they’re edible.” Who knew? WHO CARES! Yeah, I suppose we (in the U.S.) all will if we don’t rescue our economy from the socialists in D.C. pretty soon!
Hey, it will be a win-win — Dopebamacare will ruin our wonderful dental care industry…. but, waf out woud! We wone naffenny teef!
They once grew some wheat
Had a good run
Hundreds per ton
But wheat became cheap
No one complains
Raised other grains
We got told a tale of the climate woes shown on a graph
We looked at the data (and recipes!) and had to laugh
So, we switched to food
Isn’t it tops?
Norwegian crops.
===|==============/ Keith DeHavelle
Cute, Mr. DeHavelle, lol. Applause.
Patron: Waaaaiii — errrr!
Waiter: Yes?
P: My bweh iff ah my pwafe!
W: Yes?
P: Aaa my teef ah ih my bweh!!!!
W: Ah, well, we did explain to you, did we not? Here (points to tiny print at bottom of menu). “Eat Norwegian bark bread at own risk.” Now, how would you like that steak done?
P: !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I do like that one Janice
Thank you, O. H. #(:))
Do you think you would like Ingrid’s bread?
David,
Your work on energy production and consumption may be interesting. I’m not interested enough to dive in and analyze, but it does look like a useful compilation. I’ll just point out when I see something silly, such as your post here today, or your cancer/pho schtick.
Ah, my Norwegian ancestors, once know as the ‘Berserkers’ once the scourge of Europe, discoverers of America, now give peace prizes to terrorists and blow thru their inheritance in less time than it takes to collect same.
How the mighty are fallen.
O note, they did not have much production to speak of during the weak, flat sunspot cycle of 1965 to 1976.
I appreciate the article. I verified some of my observations over the years with good numbers.
Most Sincerely
Paul Pierett
What is happening to Norwegian wheat production and why, no idea, either from the article or the comments. And does it really matter?
However, the 4 horsemen piece linked by DA is quite interesting. He is suggesting a scenario in which there is a combination of global cooling and a fall in energy production combined with a continued rise in population. The cooling leads to a fall in food production in absolute terms and even greater per capita. The result is forecast to be war and famine.
One interesting aspect of this is that Climatism forecasts something similarly apocalyptic from warming. A fall in food production, famine and wars. The Climatists because of their preoccupation with CO2 and warming do not pay much attention to peaking fossil fuel supply, other than to make usage decline. But the effect will be the same – decreasing energy use from conventional sources both in absolute and per capita terms. Other causes are invoked for disruption, particularly global flooding. But desertification in the Climatist case leads to a similar fall in food production.
The thing you come to looking at both scenarios is that energy use is the key driver. If energy supply falls and prices rise, and if at the same time we have disruptions to food crop production caused either by warming or cooling, then there are going to be very significant global instabilities and suffering.
Energy availability is the key here. Whichever way it turns out, and even if temperatures simply stay more or less static at the levels of recent decades. Energy supply is the elephant in the room here.
Since when has weather not played the major role in farming?
Biggest problem in Norwegian food production, is that we are now giving 3-4-5-6 times the subsidies to “eco” products, in which they do not use artificial fertilizers or herbicides.. The efficiency is a corresponding 1/3-1/6 of that of conventional grown yields. In addition to this, we do not grow the “right” products, that is, products suited for our climate.
( please, do not start criticizing subsidies, that is another discussion).
And in connection with our oil: We are one of the riches countries in the world per capita, and yes, only the vast middle class pensioners will get to enjoy this period in our history fully, this is as good it gets. That said, fossil fuel will be THE income of Norway for the future also, probably hundreds of years. All our other exports are just peas in comparison.
I think the analysis of Archibald is flawed, and a result of finding what one wants to find..
charles the moderator says:
October 5, 2013 at 5:58 pm
David Archibald,
May I suggest you turn your talent of finding patterns in random correlations and squiggles to humorous subjects such as:
[Global temperature vs. number of pirates]
You really have something here – now that global temperatures are cooling, piracy is on the rise again! Or maybe its the Flying Dutchman on vacation?
Clearly there are not many farmers commenting here.
“Due to severe weather conditions very small areas were seeded with autumn wheat and rye in autumn 2011”
Look, I don’t think you can do ‘trends’ on one year. After all, here in the UK, we have just had one of the warmer, drier and sunnier summers in the past 50 years. It came on the back of 5 miserable, wet, cool and damp ones…..
Latitude says:
October 5, 2013 at 11:51 am
… All they need to do is take the varieties of wheat that made it through the “climate change”…
…and breed again from there
Like no one grew any food during the MWP or LIA……sheesh
Well, not much wheat in the LIA, no. The French revolution began with protests about the price of bread, after repeated failed harvests. The King begged farmers and people to switch to potatoes and turnips (as had the English and Dutch), but the French were too chauvinistic and culturally rigid to change. They still are obsessive about bread, in fact.