Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Climate Change Finally Impacts Important Industry

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the mmmmmmm-beer dept.

Socguy writes "According to a New Zealand scientist, Jim Salinger, the price of beer in and around Australia is going to be under increasing upward pressure as reductions in malting barley yields are experienced as a side effect of our ongoing climate shift. "It will mean either there will be pubs without beer or the cost of beer will go up," Mr. Salinger told the Institute of Brewing and Distilling convention."

11 of 405 comments (clear)

  1. Trying to regulate every little thing is stupid by UbuntuDupe · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm sorry, it seems pretty ridiculous to me to attack climate change by trying to go after *each* and *every* little thing someone deems inefficient given the benefit and environmental cost. You'll never be able to enumerate everything that's inefficient, because a) there are so many activities, and b) it depends on quantity that exists solely in other people's minds.

    We're going after barley today, and tomorrow it will be celery or lack of solar panels on buildings or computer that go to sleep too slowly etc etc etc.

    A much more rational and simple approach would be: Tax all fossil fuels at the current cost of sinking the resulting carbon out of the air. (Actually, you just want to sink the fraction of existing output that needs to be removed in order to stabilize concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere but if I put that in the definition it would be too hard to untangle.)

    Apply the funds to sinking CO2.

    Then, all product use is carbon neutral. For all people, adjusting to climate change is simply a matter of buying whatever you want, so long as its cost is justified by its current price (which has been changed to account for the tax.) Given the new prices, all entrepreneurial activity redirects to account for higher fossil fuel costs and raises resources spent on minimizing this input.

    This method is necessarily the least painful approach because and change in activities necessarily comes from those activities that have least benefit, as people currently judge them, and work up from there.

    Furthermore, as the price of sinking goes down, the tax can go down.

    Furthermore, this is robust against non-compliant countries, as their goods can be tarriffed to pay for whatever sinking they won't pay for. Or, if necessary, other countries can sink CO2 using general tax revenues.

    Oops, I forgot, people would still be able to drive SUVs under this, so scratch it.

    --
    Apology to Ubuntu forum.
  2. Going on two years by BadAnalogyGuy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The barley yields have been underperforming since 2006, so this is cumulatively a big problem for the beer industry and its customers.

    However, there are many other crops from which alcohol can be derived. A sudden price increase in beer will send drinkers to the arms of other libations. This should, in principle, keep the price of beer from fluctuating too wildly. In another couple years when barley yields are back at their maximums, this will all have been a bad memory.

    1. Re:Going on two years by Thundersnatch · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Considering that 20 percent of the U.S. corn crop was converted into 5 billion gallons of ethanol in 2006, (and that amount replaced only 1 percent of U.S. oil consumption).

      Source? Almost all gasoline is actaully 10% ethanol these days. Since gasoline accounts for 60% of oil consumption, wouldn't it stand to reason that ethanol replaces about 6% of our oil consumption at this point?

      Finally, after processing corn for Ethanol, a great deal of high-protien livestock feed remains. The sugars from the corn get converted to ethanol, and the "everything else" is still used as livestock feed.

      It's really a lot more complicated than you make it sound. Corn-based Ethanol will not solve our transportation energy needs, but it isn't all bad.

    2. Re:Going on two years by farmerj · · Score: 4, Interesting
      I don't think it's quite as simple as that. At the moment there are two major markets for barley:
      • Animal Feed
      • Malting
      A minority of the barley grown goes for malting, with the remaining majority going for animal feed.
      Malting barley has stricter requirements that that used for feed, there are max protein levels and germination percentage used along with the normal grain quality indexes (hectolitre weight, screening % etc.)

      The interesting thing as regards to beer (larger, ale and stout) is that the price of the malting barley has very little impact on the price paid for a pint.
      I don't have a quick reference but in Ireland the cost of malting barley works out at around 1-2 cent per pint, out of an average price of around €4.00 or so (pub price).

      The problem is that barley as animal feed is easily subsisted for by other feeds such as wheat, soya, maize etc. This means that the price of barley moves in relation to the prices of these other grains. It is also important to note these these grains along with rice are the base constituents of most alcohol produced.

      As regard to New Zealand, one of its biggest exports are milk products. As NZ sells on the world market the recent increase in milk and milk product prices is pushing up demand for animal feeds such as barley. This is because one of the ways of getting higher output from dairy cows in increasing the levels of concentrates (such as barley wheat etc.) feed.

      So even with higher yields the price of barley may or may not decrease the price of barley depending on the market prices of the other grains.

      --
      Independence? That's middle-class blasphemy. We are all dependent on one another, every soul of us on earth. G.B Shaw
  3. Unlike fuel by WormholeFiend · · Score: 4, Interesting

    People will not pay whatever the beer industry charges.

    I remember reading a Newfoundland drug enforcement police officer's comment once to the effect that beer and spirits stores profits were up whenever the police managed to put a big dent in the illegal drug market.

  4. Uh, not due to climate change though... by JRHelgeson · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The reductions in Malted Barley yields are a direct result of more farmers growing corn in place of barley in order to produce ethanol. The price of corn has gone up because demand has gone up, so therefore more farmers are producing/planting/harvesting corn.

    Just once, why can't one of our poorly considered quick fixes work?

    --
    Good security is based upon reality and common sense. Common sense is a function of having common knowledge.
    1. Re:Uh, not due to climate change though... by garcia · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yup and it's really hurting everyone from large pizza chains right down to the local Asian restaurant my wife and I frequent at least three times a month.

      Flour prices have skyrocketed due to the corn (as you have mentioned) and the fact that farmers are then locked into subsidy land because farmers who grow other crops on corn acreage lose their subsidy for the current year and are fined the market value of the crop they chose to grow instead but are also threatened that they may be permanently ineligible to receive future subsidies (link).

      So while we are getting more "inexpensive" gas and we are lessening our dependencies on foreign oil, we are creating an uncomfortable situation in our food stores and prices. I'd rather we deal with more mass transit and alternative fuel sources that don't fuck with our domestic food supplies.

  5. Re:No peer-review necessary as long as you agree.. by unixcorn · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Exactly! The brewer at the local micro brewery told me that the decreasing harvests were simply due to farmers getting out of the business. It seems the larger breweries had stockpiled so much hopps they drove prices into the dirt..so to speak. He said it was a normal supply and demand thing and that as soon as it once again became profitable to grow hopps the farmers would replant.

  6. Re:home brewers by baldass_newbie · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Grow your own hops. It's not that tough and is easily grown in most places.

    Besides, prices don't seem that high. A little high, sure, but not overwhelming:
    http://www.northernbrewer.com/hop-pellets.html

    --
    The opposite of progress is congress
  7. Re:home brewers by Coryoth · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The "Mini Ice Age" of 1400-1800 destroyed the Wine Industry in Britannia. For 1400 years Romans and their descendents had been growing vineyards and producing wine in the warm England climate. Then suddenly the earth grew cold, and the vines stopped growing. That's a somewhat dubious claim. There were vineyards in southern England around 1000 (based on Domesday records), however the reason for their demise is rather speculative. Certainly a cooling climate may have played a role, but there is also the fact that the English had a significant culutural shift toward beer as the preferred drink, and that may have had at least as much to do with the decline. This can be seen in the recent rise of the English wine industry, which has been driven far more by English drinking taste shifting toward domestic wine as it has been driven by climate.
    --
    Craft Beer Programming T-shirts
  8. Re:Climate change, guess old buzzword wasn't worki by tomdcc · · Score: 3, Interesting
    How does this stuff get Insightful on Slashdot?

    so lets latch on to something generic... even though it occurs all the time we seem to think its only bad now. So by that logic because we used to have hot spells, we shouldn't consider an increased number of hot spells as different in any way. What nonsense.

    I guess with all the stories about the earth having not warmed recently... The stories that do the circles of the right-wing blogs? Because they're credible evidence. Take a look at the current graph of global average temperatures and look at the five year avererage and tell me that the planet is cooling. 1998 was a peak year due to El-Nino, and this year is predicted by those same gosh-darn climate scientists as being cooler due to La-Nina, but the trend is pretty hard to argue. If you're actually interested in what the actual, you know, science says.

    With the current increases in the value of corn and wheat because of the misguided ethanol production in the US would it not make sense that other areas shift to fill the gap? Because a discussion of US politics totally negates a story about actual crop yields down under.

    Putting climate change in the same story as beer either points out the hypocrisy of it all or just shows how silly we are willing to become Except when the story is about reduced crop yields due to increased temperature. As it was.