Climate Change Could Lead To Nutrient Deficiency For Hundreds of Millions (smithsonianmag.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Smithsonian: According to new research, rising carbon dioxide levels will sap some of the nutrients from our crops and lead to dietary deficiencies in millions of humans. In 2014, field trials of common food crops including wheat, rice, corn and soybeans showed that as the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere increased, the levels of iron, zinc and protein decreased in the dietary staples by 3 to 17 percent. While the decrease in a few nutrients may not seem important in food secure countries, it could have a big impact in poorer nations.

In the new study published in the journal Nature Climate Change, researchers calculated the impact of declining nutrients on human health. According to a press release, the team looked at the impact of rising CO2 on 225 different types of food. Based on population estimates for 2050 and an expected rise of carbon dioxide from about 400 parts per million today to 550 ppm by mid-century, the team found that the nutrient deficiencies of those already suffering will worsen, and 175 million more people could join the 1.2 billion who are zinc deficient and 122 million people would be added to the 622 million who don't receive enough protein. About 1.4 billion women of childbearing age and children under 5 could see their iron intake drop by about 4 percent.

Comments

Not good

[110010001000]

This isn't good but fortunately I just bought a $60,000 Tesla so I am sure things are going to turn around real soon now for the environment.

Re: So sick of Chicken Little climate change stori

[SirSlud]

Information taken personally by simple man, feels guilty and emotionally inconvenienced. Blames conspiracy as means to emotionally divest. News at 11.

Re:So sick of Chicken Little climate change storie

[butchersong]

This is essentially the same story as on may 25th slashdot

Correlation, not causation

[Archtech]

The root cause of almost all the problems of pollution, resource exhaustion and crowding is simple: too many human beings sharing a planet that could comfortably and sustainably support one, or maybe two billion.

It's very easy to wave arms and make facile comments about how foolish Malthus was - but, in principle, he was completely right. Thanks (perhaps) to human ingenuity, we have staved off the moment of crisis for a few decades. But perhaps the final consequence will just be a far worse collapse.

Think. As population grows, the need for food obviously grows with it. So does the amount of manufactured objects and services demanded by the larger population. Which is mainly responsible for higher CO2 levels? It's hard to say; but one thing can be said with certainty. If the human population were still one billion (or three billion even) we would not have most of these problems.

Why are crops getting poorer in vitamins, minerals and other essential nutrients? Largely because too many harvests are being taken out of a fixed area under cultivation. The Green Revolution produced much greater yields - with generous application of artificial fertilizers, herbicides and insecticides - but the soil can only produce nutrients at a given rate. Quadruple the weight of your annual harvest, and pretty soon you have sucked most of the vitamins and minerals out of the fields. After the food is eaten, anything left over goes down the sewer and is lost. It definitely doesn't go back on the land, as animal and human manure used to.

For a little more information, I suggest reading Philip Lymberry's "Farmageddon" and Richard Manning's "Against the Grain".