Like clockwork, every year climate activists and their media enablers publish bold headlines claiming that global warming aka “climate change” will result in crop yield reductions, crop failures, and food shortages. Of course this sort of claim has been going on for decades, yet has never actually happened. Cue failed doomsayer Paul Ehrlich and The Population Bomb.
The most recent absurd claim is from CNN Business who says: Climate-driven crop failures are driving up food prices.
“Climate change is coming right into our dining room tables,” said Cynthia Rosenzweig, an agronomist and climatologist.
Of course, the data for actual crop yields doesn’t support that, their claims are all based on model projections rather than real-world data. Real-world data shows ever increasing global crop yields.

But, real science without any social engineering agenda has just made all of these claims moot, especially in poorer countries where rice is the main staple of the diet.
The University of Chicago (UC) recently announced breakthrough research published in Nature Biotechnology that will yield increased crop production. By doing a simple manipulation of the RNA in plant cells, this new modification allows plants to yield dramatically more crops, as well as increased drought tolerance
According to UC, in initial tests, adding a gene encoding for a protein called FTO to both rice and potato plants increased their yield by 50% in field tests. The plants grew significantly larger, produced longer root systems and were better able to tolerate drought stress. Further analysis also showed that the plants had increased their rate of photosynthesis.

“The change really is dramatic,” said University of Chicago Prof. Chuan He, who together with Prof. Guifang Jia at Peking University led the research.
“What’s more, it worked with almost every type of plant we tried it with so far, and it’s a very simple modification to make.”
The method has created some exciting results.
UC reports the rice plants grew three times more rice under laboratory conditions. When they tried it out in real field tests, the plants grew 50% more mass and yielded 50% more rice. They grew longer roots, photosynthesized more efficiently, and could better withstand stress from drought.
The scientists repeated the experiments with potato plants, which are part of a completely different plant family. The results were the same.

The fact that the same RNA modification worked on both potatoes and rice suggests a degree of universality for the new discovery that is extremely exciting. As the researchers try other staple crops such as corn and soybeans, the results, especially for American farmers could be dramatic.
While environmentalists and food safety critic will probably try to label this improvement yet another variation of “frankenfood”, it turns out the researchers are not doing any genetic modifications (GMO) at all, but merely tapping into something already in the plant.
According to Guifang Jia, one of the UC researchers, “This is a brand new type of approach, one that could be different from GMO and CRISPR gene editing; this technique allows us to “flip a switch” in the plants at an early point in development, which continues to affect the plant’s food production even after we remove the switch.”
“It seems that plants already have this layer of regulation, and all we did is tap into it. So the next step would be to discover how to do it using the plant’s existing genetics,” he said.
According to Michael Kremer, another UC researcher, “This is a very exciting technology and could potentially help address problems of poverty and food insecurity at a global scale.”
Indeed, once it is applied on a global scale, it would essentially negate any argument made by climate change advocates that climate change will affect food production in a negative way, but that won’t stop them from trying.
The paper: RNA demethylation increases the yield and biomass of rice and potato plants in field trials
Abstract
RNA N6-methyladenosine (m6A) modifications are essential in plants. Here, we show that transgenic expression of the human RNA demethylase FTO in rice caused a more than threefold increase in grain yield under greenhouse conditions. In field trials, transgenic expression of FTO in rice and potato caused ~50% increases in yield and biomass. We demonstrate that the presence of FTO stimulates root meristem cell proliferation and tiller bud formation and promotes photosynthetic efficiency and drought tolerance but has no effect on mature cell size, shoot meristem cell proliferation, root diameter, plant height or ploidy. FTO mediates substantial m6A demethylation (around 7% of demethylation in poly(A) RNA and around 35% decrease of m6A in non-ribosomal nuclear RNA) in plant RNA, inducing chromatin openness and transcriptional activation. Therefore, modulation of plant RNA m6A methylation is a promising strategy to dramatically improve plant growth and crop yield.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
All this extra grain can be used for ethanol-to-electric production needed for the society of the future.
Americans don’t need more food. Search-up images of ‘ obese americans ‘
Liquid hydrocarbon-based fuels only make sense for transportation uses. And we don’t get that extra corn to make more ethanol without copious use of natural gas (fertilizers, pesticides) and propane and diesel (mechanical vehicles and heated dryers). It has only been because natural gas and propane prices have stayed historically low that subsidized ethanol production (for mandated gasoline addition) can even make a profit for the producers of that product. Skyrocketing natural gas prices will make fertilizer prices skyrocket, which would then force ethanol producers into non-viable economic situations.
I see a Rube Goldberg solution. If DRAX can burn wood pellets shipped across an ocean, then grains can be burned to produce electricity. Nothing else follows “then a miracle happens” to make all the EVs plausable.
Or to make more vodka.
Color me skeptical. These increases, 3x in lab, 50% in field, are not credible.
That isn’t skepticism. That’s doubt. Doubt is a feeling. Skepticism is a rational evaluation of available facts.
“These increases … are not credible”
Why do you think they are not credible?
I don’t want to hear any more whining about GMO food from those who exalt the CoViD mRNA injections.
I certainly don’t want to see the pushback similar to what Golden Rice and AquaBounty suffered from the activists and corrupt politicians (BIRM).
Its bad enough that politicians, Malthusians, neo-Luddites and ZPG types terrorize the ignorant public into living lives of deprivation and worry, yet they also work tirelessly to knee cap human flourishing through their alarmist propaganda, lawsuits and regulatory abuse.
OTOH, I’m amazed at how technology and ingenuity keep appearing to save us from the dark times prophesized by models. A huge advancement was the discovery of how mixing certain microbes with seeds results in plants that can extract necessary nitrogen from the atmosphere as opposed to dependency on massive soil fertilization efforts.
Alarmism-driven Covid nonsense is what’s driving up food prices.
There have been very real world-wide logistics disruptions to supply chains around the world due to COVID related shutdowns across many countries. Including dock workers, stevadors, and factory workers ordered to stay home, which have ships left anchored in ports unable to unload. This supply chain disruptions has idled factories that make manufactured goods that then cause further supply chain problems on down the line.
These Ripple effects and knock-on ripple effects will be felt for at least several more years assuming there a no more shocks to the international trade systems that we all depend on.
The shutdowns were of course political orders, not as a result of some cold virus. And the NWO adherents have realized themselves now tools with try to impose their desired Great Resets, and “Build Back Better” schemes to impose socialism.
If was OK to make everyone stay home, why was it not ok to let them go to work, eventually get covid, stay home a few days and then back to work with the free natural inoculation? Instead of 4 waves of poverty and isolation?
Granted the seniors homes, etc., would have needed a strict regimen.
Lockdowns and isolation only delayed the inevitable. Stupid.
^THIS^
I am a vaccine fan in general. But our reaction to a virus that when the data is evaluated critically, is not generally more fatal than a bad flu year has been completely irrational.
Well, the Phillipines approved Golden Rice in July. I mean, it was only after extensive effort and approvals are slow in coming, but still.
Beware of Grotesque Mutant Organisms, they will get you if Climate Doom doesn’t….
That is a harsh description of climate activists 🙂
Interesting. There’s been a project to engineer C4 rice since 2006, with some funding from the Gates Foundation among others. Their stated goal is to increase yields by 50%.
Project home is here.
Looks like this group found a simpler way to get the same results — “obese” rice instead of “C4 rice”.
It was found that obesity in adults causes fat cells to grow in size, but not in number. However, in young children, obesity does cause an increase in number too.
Rice Crispies vs Corn Pops.
We have C4 rice. It’s called corn (and sorghum). And the kernals are much bigger and starchier (is that a word?). Makes for nice popcorn and corn pops cereal.
“corn pops”
Uh oh! you just triggered sniffin’ Joe!
Old Joe is probably out looking for a 8 yr old to sniff even as we speak.
All of this benefit, so easily?
Besides smacking of too good to be true, one wonders why no plants in nature have not already flipped this switch?
One suspects that at double the starch production, water and nutrient uptakes must double at a minimum. Raising concerns about the claims for increased drought stress.
It is only easy in retrospect — and if you have the technological tools to do it.
“water and nutrient uptakes must double at a minimum”
Did you read the article where it says “ could better withstand stress from drought.”
The one thing I haven’e seen anyone comment upon is the possible effect on the soil. Plant growth is a part of a cycle in which the plants mine minerals and organic nutrients from the soil. Their continued growth relies on the supply of necessary minerals and nutrients being maintained. Genetic modifications of plants which lead to larger and more efficient root systems must inevitably require that the other parts of the plant life cycle be similarly strengthed. My question is what effect does this activated FTO have on the demands that are placed on the soil? I’m not arguing against the use of thes plants, but I am wondering what problems are we creating for ourselves further down the line.
Sounds like simply increase rates of fertilization
I have some nice potash stocks I’ve been holding onto…..
Assuming the fertiliser is available and money to pay for it. Likely for the developed world but perhaps less so for poorer countries.
And for the seed too.
Every silver lining has a cloud as they say.
Wholly admire the ingenuity nonetheless.
Can I get Scotts to add this gene to my Kentucky Bluegrass?
I’m reminded of Woody Allen’s movie “Sleeper,” the scene in which he came across a farm (sort of) that featured 10-foot bananas, celery, and other things. That was set 200 years in the future. Given the rate of technological advancement, perhaps Woody was onto something.
Wonderful points Anthony!
Death by Greening!
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/69258/
Another secret about fossil fuels: Haber Bosch process-fertilizers feeding the planet using natural gas-doubling food production/crop yields.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/39215/
All the inputs with world food production:
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/73349/#73351
climate change absolutely WILL result in more crop failures etc.
so while this is good news, is it enough to offset climate effects?
what, we should ignore climate impacts entirely because this may deliver (some) more food?
You keep spewing these lies, lie spewing liar.
What climate change?
According to the catastrophists, something bad is always just over the horizon.
If don’t believe me, just ask my model.
Griff
Please point to the “crop failures” that happened in earth’s history at atmospheric CO2 of 500, 1000, 3000, 10,000 ppm CO2.
There are none.
CO2 will only continue to benefit the phytosphere, as it is doing now with record harvests paralleling the record temperatures.
“climate change absolutely WILL result in more crop failures etc.
so while this is good news, is it enough to offset climate effects?
what, we should ignore climate impacts entirely because this may deliver (some) more food?”
griff,
You are just repeating that because it’s what you read/were told.
I predict crop yields/production based on weather/climate/CO2 for a living.
Empty your head of the anti agronomy manufactured realities for a minute and just look at the direction we’ve taken the last 40 years……..straight up, right.
Is this from technological advances?
Then why is the entire planet greening up at the same time? Why do the models show that the planet will get even greener thru this century?
Have humans replaced all the plants and trees around the world with genetically superior plants and trees?
No!
Are humans fertilizing all the forests and plants?
Yes they are…………..with CO2 fertilizer.
Increasing CO2 also means plants/crops don’t need to open their stomata as wide to get essential CO2 and they lose less moisture from transpiration. This makes them more drought tolerant. Increasing CO2 also makes them more heat tolerant.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/66878/#66881
The optimal level of CO2 for plants is indisputably more than double the current level. Why wouldn’t they/crops continue to be more productive as CO2 increases?
Oh, yeah, that pesky climate change problem.
1-2 deg. C of additional warming is going to offset all the massive benefits of CO2(when so far, the warming has been PART OF the benefits)???
That doesn’t even make sense dude.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/69258/#69259
Climate change, that is always taking place (and always has), will result in some crops in some places doing more poorly and some crops in some places doing better.
IF the primary driver of climate change is the actions of man (a highly doubtful assertion) then we need to balance the benefits of energy use and technology to deal with the problems vs. the widespread starvation and poverty that would come with forgoing those benefits.
My personal evaluation indicates that envirowackos can be processed into biodiesel and fertilizer providing a clean source of energy and increasing the average world IQ level quite handily.
Please don’t try to insert human proteins to cabbages…. Body Snatchers???
Wanna bet that the majority of the people that stress over Genetically modified crops are proponents for taking the jabs which modify their mRNA?
Proponents? They are the ones who want everyone else injected with that sh*t.
So much for Malthus and Ehrlich.
More and healthier food? That has got to be pissing the leftards off no end, they have worked so hard to spread famine and disease to the Third World and beyond!
manipulation of the RNA in plant cells,
adding a gene encoding for a protein called FTO to both rice and potato plants
hmm seems a LOT like “modification” to me!
and of course patentable so seed or whatever will be costly
wish they stop screwing round with our food
Good news for the human race.
Bad news for the Khmer Vert.