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)
Norway’s sovereign wealth fund is now $750 billion ($150,000 per person) and it is growing by $1 billion per month. Why grow wheat (in a rocky cold place) when working in the oil industry or living off the government is more lucrative.
Also, Norway had a very cold winter and a very late spring this year, much like most of the northern hemisphere. With a short growing season, many farmers would have opted to grow something else.
http://www.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/global_monitoring/temperature/tn01384_1yr.gif
michel says: October 6, 2013 at 12:57 am
A good post, thank you Michel. You say “Energy availability is the key” and I agree. Imminent natural global cooling also appears probable.
Some of my concerns about energy supply and imminent global cooling are included below.
It concerns me that our leaders are still obsessed with fictional humanmade global warming in a (probably) naturally cooling world.
I (we) predicted global cooling starting circa 2020-2030 in an article published in 2002. If anything, we may have been a bit late in our prediction. At the time, SC24 was predicted to be robust (Hathaway et al) and it is a dud. SC24 now looks similar to a Dalton Minimum.
Regrettably, European leaders have damaged their energy systems through their ill-advised reliance on grid-connected wind and solar power.
Regards to all, Allan
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/09/28/models-fail-land-versus-sea-surface-warming-rates/#comment-1429997
My concern is global cooling and harsh winters, particularly in the UK and continental Europe, where Tony Blair and his Euro-cohorts have severely damaged their energy systems through the foolish adoption of “green energy” schemes, which have caused electricity prices to soar. I refer specifically to the politically-enforced, highly-subsidized implementation of impractical grid-connected wind and solar power schemes.
I understand the “excess winter mortality” in the UK is about 35,000 people per year. This is reportedly due (in part) to fuel poverty, also called “heat or eat”, where people, particularly seniors, cannot afford to heat their dwellings and many huddle in their beds through the winter to keep warm.
Fuel poverty is also commonplace across Western Europe, again thanks to green energy nonsense.
Falling sea surface temperatures in the North Atlantic suggest that Europe is starting to cool, and there is an increased probability of more severe winters.
http://bobtisdale.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/figure-2-31.png
I strongly suggest that it is past time for British and European governments to face climate and energy reality. Europe is probably cooling, not warming, and these governments needs to discard their foolish notions of global warming alarmism and address the real problems that are facing their citizens right now – fuel poverty in a cooling winter climate.
Current government global warming alarmist policies are apparently exacerbating the rate of excess winter mortality in the UK and continental Europe.
European leaders need to be told unequivocally: “Your foolish global warming alarmist policies are, in all probability, killing your own people.”
Yours sincerely, Allan MacRae
Excess Winter Mortality in England and Wales, 2010/11 (Provisional) and 2009/10 (Final)
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/subnational-health2/excess-winter-mortality-in-england-and-wales/2010-11–provisional–and-2009-10–final-/stb-ewm-2010-11.html
Key findings: “There were an estimated 25,700 excess winter deaths in England and Wales in 2010/11, virtually unchanged from the previous winter.”
“Told You So” Ten Years Ago
http://www.apegga.org/Members/Publications/peggs/WEB11_02/kyoto_pt.htm
“Climate science does not support the theory of catastrophic human-made global warming – the alleged warming crisis does not exist.”
“The ultimate agenda of pro-Kyoto advocates is to eliminate fossil fuels, but this would result in a catastrophic shortfall in global energy supply – the wasteful, inefficient energy solutions proposed by Kyoto advocates simply cannot replace fossil fuels.”
– Dr. Sallie Baliunas, Dr. Tim Patterson, Allan M.R. MacRae, P.Eng. (PEGG, November 2002)
The original article does not go into enough detail, but perhaps those focusing on yields are missing the point.
It does not matter how many tonnes per hectare you get if it is too wet and cold during the maturation and harvesting stage. Then the wheat still gets harvested, but much of it is downgraded to animal feed. Which makes all the intensive livestock farmers very happy for that year, but does not do the wheat farmers any favors.
Been living in Norway for the last 30 years. This year, after a late spring we’ve had a fantastic summer now turning into a very colourful autumn. First frost here in Asker was 10 days back so it could be a long cold winter again, at least the skiing will be good.
One interesting observation related to this article, for many years there has been a relationship between Norwegian wheat production and bread prices. More home grown wheat gives higher bread prices as, as has been pointed out above, Norway is not a country that is ideal for wheat production.
After about 15 years managed to start appreciating Lutefisk (dried cod, soaked in caustic soda, then washed out and baked in the oven, accompanied by bacon, potatoes, mashed peas, brown cheese, mustard and washed down with beer and aquavit). Even better to eat, but it can smell worse, is Rakfisk (fillets of fish that have been allowed to go rotten but in a controlled anaerobic environment), again the beer and aquavit helps.
There are lots of Climate Realists in Norway with our own organisation (www.klimarealistene.no) but virtually no public discussion or political climate realism. After the recent election the newly elected right wing parties appear to be even keener on showing how green they are than the ousted socialist cooalition. Luckily there is much more oil and gas out in the seas round Norway, with a significant increase in discoveries in the last 3 to 4 years. There will be work in the offshore industry to see me into retirement and probably my children too! Onshore hydroelectric production continues to supply all of our internal energy needs so the hydrocarbons can be exported to customers in Europe or further afield and keep the Norwegian investment fund growing.
Losses due to grains sprouting before harvest are due to rainfall on mature grains – not necessarily particularly prolonged or unusual rainfall, but sufficient to keep the grain moist and the straw wet enough to keep the combine away. A week or so can be sufficient. It’s not at all unusual for crops to be impacted this way in the UK – we measure the impact of the alpha-amylase enzyme produced by sprouting and characterise with a Hagberg falling number – essentially a measurement of porridge thickness. Any wheat acceptable for bread has to have an adequate falling number.
More to the point, Norway is a bizarre place to grow wheat – its yields are a tiny fraction of nearby countries – in the UK we typically harvest 2 or 3 times their feeble 4 tonnes per hectare – we can grow it better, more cheaply and don’t have much of a problem loading it into ships in Scotland and floating it over the North Sea – why do they bother? If the MUST grow grains in Norway, rye or even food barley are much more resilient – wheat is just a daft choice of crop.
Meanwhile in Canada : Record crop production, yields projected :
http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Record+crop+production+yields+projected/8998676/story.html
lgl says:
October 6, 2013 at 2:35 am
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″
—————————–
Clearly, much acreage of wheat must have been taken out of production for the total produced to have fallen so far, while yield didn’t drop as deeply. At least some part of the acreage reduction was because of weather, not just converting to other crops or fallowing for some market or political reason.
Since the better-suited, higher-yielding land would have preferentially been kept in wheat, yield per hectare held up better than total production.
Most of Norway is marginal for wheat & rye cultivation in many decades, with barley & oats often being more suitable, or non-grain crops.
IMO a case can be made for a weather component in the Norwegian wheat data, if not indeed a warming climate (30 years’ average WX), followed by a cooling one.
In 1980 rains caused some Pacific NW soft white wheat to sprout. Normally farmers would have sold it to Iran, where sprouted grain bread is favored, but couldn’t because of the embargo over the hostages. Nevertheless, many supported Carter’s actions, feeble & ineffective though they were.
We have just experienced another record wheat yield per acre and production in Canada (fondly known as the frozen north) this year – the fourth new record yield in the past decade. Whatever has been happening with the climate has been conducive with improved agronomic management for better yields, so we hope it will continue…
“Like a number of other countries, Norway will have to pay for higher food imports while its main source of revenue is falling rapidly.”
This bit is technically incorrect. Norway instituted a sovereign wealth fund for the proceeds of oil extraction, so as to stop it wrecking the rest of their economy. They have never taken direct income from their oil.
Where did you get the data for these graphics…?
USDA