Slashdot Mirror
Ethiopia's Coffee Is the Latest Victim of Climate Change (theverge.com)
According to a study published today in Nature Plants, by the end of this century, increasing temperatures could make it impossible to grow coffee in about half of Ethiopia's coffee-growing regions. "That's because Arabica coffee trees (which are grown in Ethiopia) require pretty mild temperatures to survive, ideally between 59 to 75 degree Fahrenheit," reports The Verge. "Climate projections show that Ethiopia will generally become warmer and drier, and that means that 40 to 60 percent of areas where coffee is currently grown won't be suitable to grow the beans, the study says." From the report: In fact, climate change is already hurting Ethiopia's coffee growers: days and nights are already warmer, and the weather is more unpredictable and extreme. Hot days are hotter and rainy days are rainier. That leads to more unpredictable harvests and it hurts the local economy. Ethiopia is Africa's biggest coffee producer and the world's fifth largest coffee exporter, with 15 million Ethiopians living off coffee farming. Climate change risks disrupting the country's future. But there is a way Ethiopia can brace for its brewing troubles. The study found that rising temperatures will turn swaths of land at higher elevation into just the right places to grow coffee in the future. In fact, coffee farming could increase four fold if plantations are moved uphill, the study says. But to do that, the country needs to prepare: millions of farmers can't just take their crops and move to land they don't own. You need careful planning.
Imagine what kind of havoc had to have happened for 9/10 of your friends and family to not have descendants. That's serious war and hell, and we see our own human history showing that we're not good at these long term planning challenges. The funny thing is that there were politicians in the Yucatan, in the beginning, that tried to get people to change farming practices to cope with the changing climate, but they were always immediately voted out of office because it would have affected profits.
So laugh and dismiss all you want, but vote for leaders that take this seriously and plan properly.
The study itself says "In fact, coffee farming could increase four fold if plantations are moved uphill, "
FOUR FOLD.
Yet, the headline is about how some coffee fields will be too hot.
Perhaps a more fair headline would be "Climate change displacing Ethiopian Coffee farmers, but will increase their productivity fourfold."?
-Styopa
If they're already observing an impact from climate change, that's not extrapolation.
It's not extrapolation if there is a mechanistic explanation.
In 1900 there was a mechanistic explanation why NYC would have horse manure six feet deep on all the streets.
If they're already observing an impact from climate change, that's not extrapolation.
We are also seeing the impact of wider adoption of solar panels because of lower prices. If you project the price drop forward, within a decade they will actually go negative, and solar companies will PAY YOU to have panels installed on your roof.
If we are already observing the price declining, that's not extrapolation.
"Scientists project climate change could increase coffee production in Ethiopia fourfold."
But that probably wouldn't get as many clicks.
This alarmism is based on an extrapolation of current conditions. Extrapolations 80 years into the future have a long history of looking laughably silly in hindsight.
The snow on Kilimanjaro was predicted to disappear by 2015 or thereabouts.
Of course, it actually didn't.
Science is all about forming hypotheses, then making falsifiable predictions.
What testable predictions do we have for Ethiopian coffee? What year will coffee be untenable as a crop?
Wait a couple of years and see if these predictions are correct - sounds like a valid test of climate change.
What's the problem with doing that?
(If you don't like waiting years, then let's look at previous testable predictions and see how well they held up. Anyone have a list of testable predictions?)
Perfect. Then, let's mark the projected date of this coffee calamity on a calendar and see how it plays out.
sig: sauer
we'll be doing something differently by then
Unless we'll be actively removing CO2 from the atmosphere, it will still be there in 80 years.
Unfortunately, in most scientific fields the fastest way to brand yourself a traitor is to question any part of the gospel of climate change. This isn't science anymore, it's like a religion with holy teachings and clergy. Science is a method of inquiry, it's not a damned belief system. Yet people go around saying stuff like "I believe in science" or "so and so doesn't believe in science." Fuck 'em. They have no idea what they're talking about. You don't "believe" in science, you test it, question it, criticize it, refine it, and the process never ends. Nothing is set in stone, no matter what these idiots everywhere claim.
You make an excellent point:
un-desertify the Sahara and planted trees throughout the whole thing
There would be people screeching about the damage to the Sahara desert's indigenous flora and fauna.
Are you sick of this relentless propaganda, every single day, from this website?
There is no such thing as 'catastrophic man-made global warming', no matter how many paid shills (i.e. 'experts' whose jobs and funding depend on maintaining alarm among their victims) bleat on about it every single day.
www.climatedepot.com
www.wattsupwiththat.com
Once again, a "scientific" article carefully avoids making a scientific statement... Because such statements need to be falsifiable (among other requirements).
And I don't blame the authors — in the 4 decades of the "global warming" hysteria, plenty of predictions have been made. Those among them, that were falsifiable, ended up getting falsified indeed (any attempt to rebut this post must cite counter-examples or be returned unopened) — hence the switch from the firm "will" to the evasive "could". It still mongers the fears just as well, but without quite as much embarrassment, when the prediction fails...
The fear of commitment is like that of the insurance lizard: "15 minutes call could save you 15% or more".
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.