February 10, 2004
WOLF!:
The Cooling World (Newsweek, April 28, 1975)
There are ominous signs that the Earth’s weather patterns have begun to change dramatically and that these changes may portend a drastic decline in food production– with serious political implications for just about every nation on Earth. The drop in food output could begin quite soon, perhaps only 10 years from now. The regions destined to feel its impact are the great wheat-producing lands of Canada and the U.S.S.R. in the North, along with a number of marginally self-sufficient tropical areas – parts of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indochina and Indonesia – where the growing season is dependent upon the rains brought by the monsoon.The evidence in support of these predictions has now begun to accumulate so massively that meteorologists are hard-pressed to keep up with it. In England, farmers have seen their growing season decline by about two weeks since 1950, with a resultant overall loss in grain production estimated at up to 100,000 tons annually. During the same time, the average temperature around the equator has risen by a fraction of a degree – a fraction that in some areas can mean drought and desolation. Last April, in the most devastating outbreak of tornadoes ever recorded, 148 twisters killed more than 300 people and caused half a billion dollars' worth of damage in 13 U.S. states.
To scientists, these seemingly disparate incidents represent the advance signs of fundamental changes in the world's weather. Meteorologists disagree about the cause and extent of the trend, as well as over its specific impact on local weather conditions. But they are almost unanimous in the view that the trend will reduce agricultural productivity for the rest of the century. If the climatic change is as profound as some of the pessimists fear, the resulting famines could be catastrophic. “A major climatic change would force economic and social adjustments on a worldwide scale,” warns a recent report by the National Academy of Sciences, “because the global patterns of food production and population that have evolved are implicitly dependent on the climate of the present century.” [...]
Climatologists are pessimistic that political leaders will take any positive action to compensate for the climatic change, or even to allay its effects. They concede that some of the more spectacular solutions proposed, such as melting the Arctic ice cap by covering it with black soot or diverting arctic rivers, might create problems far greater than those they solve. But the scientists see few signs that government leaders anywhere are even prepared to take the simple measures of stockpiling food or of introducing the variables of climatic uncertainty into economic projections of future food supplies. The longer the planners delay, the more difficult will they find it to cope with climatic change once the results become grim reality.
First comes the desire to have science exercise control over the political system, then comes the cooked evidence to justify the desire. Posted by Orrin Judd at February 10, 2004 12:10 PM
"Player Piano", written by Vonnegut before his creative juices dried up and left him mad as a hatter, is an amusing, if frightening, look at a Society designed by the engineers.
Posted by: ed at February 10, 2004 12:26 PMOn the other hand, like buying a computer or a new car, the longer we wait the better the tools we'll have to deal with the problem. If, for instance, in ten years we'll have an order of magnitude cheaper access to space, then many of these problems go from intractable to solvable. So why not wait?
Posted by: Annoying Old Guy at February 10, 2004 12:42 PMAOG:
I knew a man who used that theory with regard to the automobile and he walked to work every day of his life. He seemed happy, but he probably could have used a ride every once in awhile.
I'm quite sure that, although some specific crop harvests will decline, the total amount of food produced will not.
Posted by: Michael Herdegen at February 10, 2004 4:18 PMI like the way so-called global warming is now going to cause a new ice age, too, instead of benefiting places like the Great White North or Russia.
In that sort of intellectual climate, all bigger/faster computers do is allow a more detailed fantasy to be constructed. The real problem is that the computer models and reality aren't matching up, so we have to do everything possible to change reality instead of seeing why the models are wrong.
I will not begin to take any of this seriously until they can give me an accurate weather forecast for the weekend. (Yes, I know that meteorologists are not the same as climatologists.)
Posted by: Rick T. at February 10, 2004 5:42 PM