Fortunately we don’t have to worry about this

A third of global food production will be at risk by the end of the century if greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise at their current rate, new research suggests.

Many of the world’s most important food-growing areas will see temperatures increase and rainfall patterns alter drastically if temperatures rise by about 3.7C, the forecast increase if emissions stay high.

It’s not going to happen. That projection of 3.7 C. Just not part of our future.

The ‘rising coal’ assumption on which the RCP8.5 climate model is based is implausible in the first place, but has now been shown to be false: the shift from coal to unconventional gas means that the world is on a much lower emissions trajectory than worst case scenarios assume.

However, many climate scientists continue to use – or misuse – the RCP8.5 scenario, claiming that it represents a plausible future under “business as usual” CO2 emissions.

Every year, thousands of scientists adopt it to make scary claims about future climate disasters while environmental journalists report these misleading claims to an unsuspecting public, unaware that the claims are based on a non-credible assumption.

Another, and equally valid, way to make the point is that to beat extreme climate change all that was ever needed was cheaper renewables. Renewables are cheaper – we’ve beaten extreme climate change.

4 thoughts on “Fortunately we don’t have to worry about this”

  1. What do we know.
    CO2 now, 400 ish PPM.
    CO2 in Little Ice Age – around 200 ppm.
    Plant respiration stops at around 150 ppm.
    Biologists confirm plants exhibit distress when levels are below 500 ppm.
    Ripening plants for Avocados or Bananas set a limit of 10,000 ppm above which plant damage occurs.
    Dutch greenhouses routinely kept at 1000 ppm.
    Plants require less moisture as stomata are smaller when CO2 levels are high.
    Therefore to give a decent margin of safety between 500 ppm & 10,000 ppm, wr should hope CO2 returns to around 1000ppm, so we have more chance of food production if it gets colder.
    That is the prudent cautios thing to aim for, to have a reasonable buffer against sudden change.

    Another medieval or Roman climate optimum would be even better.

  2. To point out the blindingly obvious for the umpteenth time, by the end of the century whitey will he on the brink of extinction, so who gives a fuck?

  3. Given how volcanic activity has increased of late, human activity’s contribution of 3% is very puny.

  4. “…global food production will be at risk…”

    Alarmists have been saying this since the 1960s. Either that or the population will outstrip food supplies and then we will all starve. How do I know that the alarmists are wrong? Answer, they are always wrong, they have been reliably and consistently wrong for sixty years, pretty much my entire lifetime.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *