Would a warmer global climate offer more food for larger populations?

Question

With CO2 concentrations climbing and with SOME areas on the planet warming slightly, could this not be a boon to mankind? Could it not provide more food for a growing population? Lastly, wouldn't the benefits outweigh the hazards? I am aware that we (and especially I --as a non-scientist) know little of these dynamics and that we are merely making laymen's guesses here.

Answer 1

It's hard to say what the effects of global warming will be, overall a warmer climate might have higher biomass and be better suited to growing food although that's not something we should count on.

The big problem though with global warming are the changes which we are going to have to adapt to, the world at the end of it may end up a better place but the process of climate change will be painful.  The fact that the current man-made global warming is happening faster than any natural global warming is also cause for great concern since we can't use the fact that life adapted to previous global warming events to reassure us it'll survive this one.

Answer 2

No.

There will be some places that will benefit from longer growing seasons and higher rainfall.

There will be even more places adversely affected by decreased rainfall and temperatures that are too hot.

The kicker, however, is that the biggest impact of GW is the significant shift in weather patterns and an increase in variability.

Just because a location has longer growing seasons and more rain doesn't mean that plants, that were perfectly happy with the old season and rainfall, will adapt positively in a reasonable time frame.

The increase in variability has also led to numerous failures as plants get 'tricked' into blooming in February then being hit by a frost or a rice crop that is doing well then gets hit by a storm.

The idea that the balance is more negative than positive is (partly) supported by the rapid rise in food prices this year plus a significant increase in crop failures / decrease in crop yields recently.

Also look at the prolonged droughts, record dry growing periods and increase in wildfires especially in places such as Australia. The rate of desertification continues to increase, turning arable land into arid dust).

(And CrazyCon... these are real, current or past events - not computer models)

Bottom line: GW may have a long term beneficient impact upon plants but:

1 - This is long term, not short term; change takes time to manage and take advantage of

2 - Other factors (increased desertification, salination of soils, weather variability, etc) are just as likely to offset or even outstrip any benefit from CO2

3 - In the short term what it means is more stress on already creaky global social-political structures. What are the consequences of, for example:

Canada becoming much more productive while the US south experiences crop failures?

Israel diverting the area's rivers to sustain their agricultural industries in the face of decreased rainfall, leaving Jordan, Syria, etc dry?

The expansion of the Sahara expanding Darfur-like conflicts and putting even more millions in danger of starvation?

etc

P.S. This business of plants thriving in a high CO2 environment is a myth. The plants around us have evolved/adapted to approx. 200pm CO2.

True, they could adapt/evolve to do even better in, say, 500ppm but this takes a long time.

All you need to do is look at two simple chains of logic:

Atmospheric CO2 has gone from approx. 200ppm in 1750 to approx. 400ppm today.

1 - The underlying idea is that plants thrive on increased CO2, that is, the nmore CO2 there is, the more they consume and the more they grow.

Well, if plants are consuming all this excess CO2, why does it continue to accumulate in the atmosphere?

2 - The idea says that higher CO2 concentrations would mean more plants; We have had higher CO2 concentrations for 250 years (albeit less so in the beginning) yet there has not been a corresponding increase in plant biomass (there has been an increase in the past ten years or so but this is generally believed to be more to do with the first part of your question - warmth and rain).

Answer 3

more likely, no. besides warmth, plants have to be tuned to length of day, length of growth season, etc. for instance, onions time their bulb formation by length of day, if you try to grow a northern-type onion in the south or vice versa, it won't develop a good bulb, warmth or no warmth. a friend of mine did some gardening way up in northern  alberta with a real short growing season and long days, and what happened was he got real nice big good looking vegetables, but they didn't have enough time to properly convert all the sugars they were making into starch, etc. so they were kind of watery and tasteless, and when you tried to cook them they just fell apart or shriveled up.

Answer 4

I'm a global warming skeptic.  (I wish we had our own theme song, or flag, or something.)

Anyhow...slightly warmer climate in cold areas would indeed result in enhanced growing seasons.  The fact that farms have to shut down for the winter season means less food than farms that run year around.  An extra few weeks or a month would make a big difference to our food supply.  Some root and fast growing leaf vegetables would be much more plentiful.  Farmers generally make use of all the warm season that they can.

Answer 5

IF.. the climate warms up the growing areas of the world will move north but the deserts will also move too expanding making the already hot area even more hotter so the growing areas will actually shrink. Remember the farther north you go the less fertile the land is.

yes I have herd of the peace river I live in Edmonton But I am saying the southern states like California and Florida prime Agriculture producers when they are gone the peace area even northern Saskatchewan could not produce enough to feed everyone in Canada and USA

Answer 6

I believe it would be difficult to say that the warmer temperatures of the past 100 years have not contributed to keeping agricultural supply up with demand, along with better farming techniques and genetic modification.

Will even warmer temperatures in the future help with farming? Difficult to say. Several more degrees certainly will not, but a moderate rise in temperatures may be beneficial, with appropriate adaptation strategies.

Answer 7

Absolutely, Co2 is a natural fertilizer and plants do better in warmer climates. Compare the tundra to rain forest.

Others will say how more droughts, more floods, more bad hair days, but NONE of these claims have been supported by actual data. They rely on incomplete computer models and the one with the most outlandish claims wins the next grant.