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.
> increasing temperatures could make it impossible to grow coffee in about half of Ethiopia's coffee-growing regions
It could also not. I can only assume the latest victim is my senses, not anything to do with Ethiopia.
Who cares?
That's what I see in front of me.
This site is now a pile of largely irrelevant "news" complied by "editors" who couldn't pass a reasonably stringent freshman English course.
MEANWHILE, the judge's decision in the Michelle Carter trial, which could have very far-reaching legal implications, has been utterly ignored. The ACLU isn't ignoring it, thank goodness.
Stop blowing the trumpet on this shit. Its not working.
Carbon reduction isnt working. Even if we ceased all output tomorrow is probably already too late.
Put some reflective dust into the upper atmosphere and cool us back down, then those drunk on hydrocarbons get what they want until it runs out and is replaced with the next thing. win/win.
Chile has better coffee than Ethiopia. No big loss.
A large orange fellow told me climate change isn't real.
He also offered to shout me dinner at this pizza parlour he knows about.
Denier trolls will spam this article with fallacious arguments against climate change. There are definitely a lot of paid shills on this site. Climate change is an undeniable fact and we are in serious trouble if carbon emissions don't go to zero right now. Right wing trolls like Brett Buck and SuperKendall will spew crap, which is pretty much all the Republicans can do. Their positions are never supported by the facts, which is why the right wingers are almost exclusively uneducated. It's a shame that we can't discuss climate change on this site without the articles being polluted with spam and astroturfing from Republican climate change denier trolls. Shame on you, rightists. You should be ashamed of yourselves.
it's an Ethiopian hiding behind a tree lol
T-ing it up huh? Oh fuck it, just show us more malnourished pot-bellied black children while you're at it. Dear God, we are Soooo snapping back to the 1980's. Un-fucking believable! Hah!
Life is not for the lazy.
"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."
#ThanksClimateChange
hurts the local economy.
Coffee production in Vietnam https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Vietnam invested in a lot of different farming crops, so did a lot of other nations. A global flood of cheap and quality coffee now exists from many different nations.
Other nations have learned how to do all the different coffee crops and are selling on the open market.
Lots of nations saw coffee prices and helped their farmers into a cash crop. Some made quality, some went for a lot of low cost production.
Consumers want a low cost product too, so costs are been pushed down. A low price still keeps farmers in work so different nations flood the coffee market with well planned plantations.
Other nations did the planning, used their best experts over the years and can now produce at a lower cost.
Its not the weather, its just classic competition and having much better experts.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
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
Where will we get coffee? I guess we could grow it ... somewhere it's too cold to grow coffee right now, but won't be when it warms up.
Still though, not growing coffee in the precise location it is currently being grown is a monumental tragedy.
And the dinosaurs are dead and the glaciers retreated... if only the planets temperature had remained constant... we would not be having these arguments on the internet...
5 out of 6 people enjoy Russian Roulette & 6 out of 7 Dwarfs are not Happy
A warmer climate means LESS extremes in weather, because as the temperature grows more water vapor enters the system and it acts on a damper (ha!) for really extreme weather.
So far we have witnessed that first hand, being in an epic lull in terms of major hurricanes hitting the U.S..
It is so sad to see so many be taken in by such obvious fear-mongering, devoid even of what little real science we do know describes how the Earth works in reality... dry portions of the earth are not caused by heat, they care caused by local weather patterns that scrub moisture from the air before it reaches an area. The Antarctic even has a desert after all...
And as mentioned - why even fear anything when it means Ethiopia could simply shift where it grows the crops?? This is what I really don't get about fear mongering, the inability to realize just how good humans are at dealing with change, never mind change that takes place slowly over decades or centuries... why are you so scared of warming? The only thing there ever was to fear was runaway warming and we can see plainly that's not happening (requiring 10 times more CO2 than is currently in the atmosphere, even as countries are gradually ramping down emissions as the increase use of solar power...).
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
"Scientists project climate change could increase coffee production in Ethiopia fourfold."
But that probably wouldn't get as many clicks.
I'm a Socialist but even I realize that "careful planning" always loses to the invisible hand of the market. Greed is very effective in adapting to climate change.
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?)
People will want to dismiss this "Oh noes, Ethiopia will be poor." But the truth is this is how things go from bad or barely manageable to absolute hell. Civilized societies turn to civil war and in our time feeding grounds for terrorism. The Yucatan peninsula went from 1.2 million people, with scientists, politicians, and surprisingly advanced civilization at the time, to just over 100k in less than 100 years. Drought was a big part of that.
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.
(Emphasis mine)
Sorry, I read that and just laughed out loud! Cats and dogs living together! Bwa ha ha ha.... !
Seriously.
Do you have any hard evidence to cite? Something without, for example, emotional content?
1- Seems like fake news designed to excite Leftards with random fearmongering.
2- My coffee doesn't come from Ethiopia.
3- Maybe the US can develop coffee independence. Colorado coffee would be great.
So, suck it bitches. No UBI-paid fancy coffee for you!
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.
ass of them all, progress. ANy tossers, went out violated. In the
i'm old enough to remember when all this climate bs started
al gore and fellow nwo puppets said that there would be no snow on the Himalayas by the year 2000,
the arctic ocean and great lakes would be ice free,
and the pacific islands would all be under water.
what a load of toss,
wake up sheeple before it's too late,
it's all a lie,
don't believe the libtard msm sjw hypocrites and their massive carbon footprint,
who've make a lot of money from this,
sipping their lattes on their private jets
Are there any other non-coffee drinkers who welcome this? I'm hoping beyond all hope that the hipster poseurs w@nking about their addictive beans might stop yapping about it for a few minutes ? If you enjoy coffee, wonderful, but pretending one cup of seemingly burnt toast scrapings differs much from another cup of seemingly burnt toast scrapings warrants the same sniffy pontification as wine tasting is even more tedious than it is comical (I live in the city with the highest ratio of coffee outlets to citizens, and whose citizens are uberserious about their coffee, but it still tastes vile to me).
We gotta Trump, the wisest ape of them all. And he grabs pussies... mmm.
What's the population density in Ethiopia?
Depends on the wind direction.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
That coffee definitely maybe for sure 100% of the time might causes in an increase in cancer by 27% as proven by a million dollar NSF funded double blind placebo controlled study. Now that we have 98% of the climate scientist saying that with100% certainty that no coffee will be able to grow in Ethiopia. Combined, this is good news. Thanks to science we know that in the future there will be no cancer. If you dont agree with everything i just said, you are a science denier who believes the world is 6000 years old.
Remember science is always right.
In some alternate universe where warmer, more humid are doesn't == more tornadoes, hurricanes in the summer, and more blizzards in the winter.
Dampener forr what?
Temperature? Yes.
Amount if rain? No.
If I never had a flood on my fields or in my streets, and now have that every rain season, I would call that: extreme.
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
100 years ago probably almost nobody at all in continental Nth America was growing corn, because it's a modern cash crop.
FTFY
Fossil water consumption, deforestation etc etc. The impact a doubling of population every 25 years can have on an environment is so far in excess to what the relative steady global warming can do it's almost laughable.
But you are allowed to talk about global warming, you have to pretend population growth is irrelevant.
The title says the industry is the latest victim. The content says there 'could' be impact. The objective evidence is that over the past decade Ethiopia has increased their coffee production from around 240k mt to 360k mt, meanwhile the 'projections' from the end of the 90s were that the climate would have been drastically warmer than it actually is, so you can take your bullshit alarmists and 'could' go fuck yerselves ;)
Oh the humanity! I won't be able to drink some overpriced "boutique" swill at my local gay transgender coffee house!
you insensitive clod...
"ideally between 59 to 75 degree Fahrenheit,"
If the "The National Coffee Association" are idiots, we do not have to mirror them...
No, because NYC has been flooded.
Moreover your tired old denier zombie argument is false.
Lets say that the prices drop 20% every year. At what point will the 99.99 price point become negative, moron?
"may be the vanishing snows of Kilimanjaro, which were predicted to disappear as early as 2015 in a widely-publicized report a decade ago. "
So widely publicised that the article you linked to did not provide it. Nor even what it meant by widely publicised. Published and available to anyone who had a journal subscription?
That's an extrapolation. You will die in something less than maybe 80 years. Laughable? No. It's a solidly evidenced inductive conclusion.
The only alarmism is the bullshitters like you screaming about how doing anything about AGW will result in the End Of The World. Based on fuck all but paranoid delusion.
Clueless morons who have no idea of science will calculate that falling at 9.8m/s/s over 3km will end up with you falling at a speed of 170m/s. But actual scientists know that air resistance exists and include that in their dynamical equation and get a figure for a human body around 60m/s after a 3km drop to ground level.
YOUR extrapolations are ridiculous, the ones scientists do are not.
t matter.
I know "tastes like shit" is horribly overused, but Ethiopian coffee gives a very strong smell of human fecal matter, with a taste to match. YMMV, obviously.
These are largest polluters in the world per acre and have almost environmental guide lines. At least none that readily enforced. They are largest reason for this tragedy.
You say things that offend me and I can deal with it. Can you?
"increasing temperatures could make it" ... could means not hasn't happened, so not a victim.
Damn alarmists. "Our models says we're all going to die unless you sacrifice to our green gods!"
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
Yes it is. And unlike some cults, it can even prove it.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Check out the acknowledgements:
Sound like the study's sponsor begins with the assumption that the Coffee economy is not climate-Resilient And that climate change that is expected will damage it
".. to realize just how good humans are at dealing with change ..."
You've clearly never met a Millennial.
Seriously. I come from a farming community in Canada. There was no 'careful planning', there was 'we have a bunch of land & people anyone in the world want to come, break their ass & farm stuff here?'
Farmers go where the crops will grow. So not only is the report alarmist in trying to first claim Ethiopian coffee growing is doomed THAN it admits 'O no, actually other places in Ethiopia will be able to grow MORE coffee', than concludes that apparently only government can ensure that...e.g. 'careful planning' = 'billions of government subsidies to screw with the market'...also what else will be grown in Ethiopia where coffee grows today?
I have no problem with scientists going 'hey it's getting warmer', making doomsday predictions every time they say that though is getting really grating.
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.
More processing power, models refined over the decades for more accurate forecasting.
...And they *STILL* can't get the computer climate models to even somewhat-accurately track *PAST* climate changes!
WTF makes anyone think that their predictions about *future* climate changes are any more reliable?
Strat
For anyone wanting something more than the parent's word on this, the IPCC backs him up on it in their 5th assessment report you can read about here:
For instance, maintaining the global mean top of the atmosphere (TOA) energy balance in a simulation of pre-industrial climate is essential to prevent the climate system from drifting to an unrealistic state. The models used in this report almost universally contain adjustments to parameters in their treatment of clouds to fulfil this important constraint of the climate system (Watanabe et al., 2010; Donner et al., 2011; Gent et al., 2011; Golaz et al., 2011; Martin et al., 2011; Hazeleger et al., 2012; Mauritsen et al., 2012; Hourdin et al., 2013).
One of the referenced papers comments on the reason tuning is desirable:
The choices we make naturally depend on our preconceptions, preferences and objectives. We choose to tune our model because the alternatives - to either drift away from the known climate state, or to introduce flux-corrections - are less attractive. Within the foreseeable future climate model tuning will continue to be necessary as the prospects of constraining the relevant unresolved processes with sufficient precision are not good.
So, our inherent understanding of some processes is still not accurate enough for the job and tuning is a necessary evil. Regrettably, the corrections we tune for are bad enough that they are "essential to prevent the climate system from drifting to an unrealistic state".
The challenges still faced from tuning are outlined in another of the referenced papers:
CM3w predicts the most realistic 20th century warming. However, this is achieved with a small and less desirable threshold radius of 6.0 m for the onset of precipitation. Conversely, CM3c uses a more desirable value of 10.6 m but produces a very unrealistic 20th century temperature evolution.
So the tuning process means using less realistic values for parameters just to make sure the TOA energy balances.
That same paper ends with the following note:
Furthermore, in order to predict a realistic evolution of the 20th century, models must balance radiative forcing and climate sensitivity, resulting in a well-documented inverse correlation between forcing and sensitivity [Schwartz etal. 2007; Kiehl, 2007; Andrews etal. 2012]. This inverse correlation is consistent with an intercomparison-driven model selection process in which “climate models’ ability to simulate the 20th century temperature increase with fidelity has become something of a show-stopper as a model unable to reproduce the 20th century would probably not see publication
So, as even the IPCC and many jumping on after me here will be liable to observe, the published climate models out there all more or less are able to recreate the historical temperature record. Of course, as noted this isn't necessarily a comment on inherent merit to the models as the authors note their own model tuning meant the choice between picking a parameter value that better fit the known data, or the parameter that would yield a better hindcast and unless you choose the hindcast you don't get published. If the only models that can get published are tuned for hindcasts, it's less surprising that a sampling of published models manages to do that. The question of HOW they manage to hindcast is key, and the inability to properly control TOA energy without hand balling things is huge.
Ethiopia's coffee exports are hitting new volume records:
http://www.ena.gov.et/en/index...
alarmist trash, there is no problem at present. this is the same nonsense as the "third of world's population exposed to heat wave danger " article today, as if that weren't always true, and as if we didn't have more massive amounts of deaths from heat waves decades and more ago.
I'm against carbon pollution; we have smarter ways to make energy now than burning organic fossil matter. but this kind of tabloid trash hype isn't helping any cause
The claim is that there has been a few degrees of warming, and that the worst case is that there will be a few more. Few being on the order of 5 in each case.
Since there is much more variation in daily, seasonal, and yearly averages, I don't get how this will cause a mass kill off of trees.
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba