Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 20

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 20

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Mon 17 Dec 2018, 20:01:36

On a global scale the chances of humanity doing anything that is effective to prevent climate change are slim to none. So as individuals we are probably better off not contributing to any local effort at prevention as it will be more then counterbalanced by misdeeds elsewhere on the planet. The alternative is to amass money and resources to be used to adapt to the changing conditions you find yourself facing when climate change arrives at your location.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9653
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 20

Unread postby dissident » Mon 17 Dec 2018, 20:34:09

vtsnowedin wrote:On a global scale the chances of humanity doing anything that is effective to prevent climate change are slim to none. So as individuals we are probably better off not contributing to any local effort at prevention as it will be more then counterbalanced by misdeeds elsewhere on the planet. The alternative is to amass money and resources to be used to adapt to the changing conditions you find yourself facing when climate change arrives at your location.


You are a broken record with your inane denial. May as well stick your fingers in your ears and yell neener-neener over and over.

Humanity has added a solid 90 ppmv of CO2 above the recorded natural CO2 maximum of about 320 ppmv which has been the norm for millions of years. This 90 ppmv is not some variation, it is secular accumulation from human activity which currently pumps over 30 billion tons of CO2 into the atmosphere every year.

1) O2 and N2 which account for 99% of the dry atmospheric gases and mass do not absorb IR. So any surface heat literally radiates to space with no back-scatter without another agent to absorb and re-radiate 50% of the outgoing IR back to the surface.

2) Argon makes up the remaining 1% of the atmosphere and does not trap IR either.

3) The IR trapping in the Earth's atmosphere is due to H2O and the dry greenhouse gases that are required to volatilize it. CO2 is the main natural dry greenhouse gas and CH4 is second. Without CO2 the average global temperature would be 18 Celsius colder than today. And the current global mean temperature is about 15 C. Any vapour like H2O would condense out and remove its IR trapping contribution and what is worse would dramatically increase surface albedo which would further reduce the global mean temperature. Zero CO2 in the atmosphere would result in the global oceans freezing solid and the planet would be an ice Hell.

4) Radiative transfer calculations are based on first principles physics and are exact. The above facts are not hand waving or statistical games. They are lab validated physics which we can determine exactly to any roundoff you want. Deniers like you deliberately ignore this and keep bleating denier propaganda in true Goebbels style.
User avatar
dissident
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5420
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 20

Unread postby dissident » Mon 17 Dec 2018, 20:41:13

Another aspect to the public awareness of global warming is the use of the word "theory". For some moronic reason, in the mass media and entertainment realms "theory" means "hunch" or "supposition". This is patent BS. Theory in physics means the best validated understanding of some physical process. Radiative transfer theory is not some hunch. It is actual hard fact. But I guess to some people even gravitational attraction is subjective.

In mathematics, theories are called proofs. This is because in mathematics it is possible to construct pure logical derivations. In physics, empirical observations are central and there is always some degree of measurement error and approximation. But such "looseness" doesn't stop people from working inside sky scrapers and traveling jet aircraft.
User avatar
dissident
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5420
Joined: Sat 08 Apr 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 20

Unread postby KaiserJeep » Mon 17 Dec 2018, 20:59:41

It's not like anything we could do would stop the warming of the planet, gentlefolk. The globe was and is warming still, and there is another 2-4 degrees C before we reach the peak Climatic Optimum temperature. Even if you believe in the AGW theory, the planet is a hugely complex system with hundreds of feedback mechanisms moderating Climate Change.

Warming we can survive. Running out of cheap FF's to burn for energy, not so much.
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5857
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 16:16:32
Location: California's Silly Valley

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 20

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Mon 17 Dec 2018, 22:03:52

Theory in physics means the best validated understanding of some physical process.


Actually that is not true. The definition of a scientific theory is basically:

A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can be repeatedly tested and verified in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results. Where possible, theories are tested under controlled conditions in an experiment.[1][2] In circumstances not amenable to experimental testing, theories are evaluated through principles of abductive reasoning. Established scientific theories have withstood rigorous scrutiny and embody scientific knowledge


in other words a "scientific theory" (no different in physics, chemistry or geosciences) doesn't have to be the "best validated", it simply has to be something that is testable.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 6603
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 02:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 20

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Tue 18 Dec 2018, 05:04:08

rockdoc123 wrote:
Theory in physics means the best validated understanding of some physical process.


Actually that is not true. The definition of a scientific theory is basically:

A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world that can be repeatedly tested and verified in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results. Where possible, theories are tested under controlled conditions in an experiment.[1][2] In circumstances not amenable to experimental testing, theories are evaluated through principles of abductive reasoning. Established scientific theories have withstood rigorous scrutiny and embody scientific knowledge


in other words a "scientific theory" (no different in physics, chemistry or geosciences) doesn't have to be the "best validated", it simply has to be something that is testable.

And pass at least some of the tests.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9653
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 20

Unread postby dohboi » Tue 18 Dec 2018, 10:19:02

KJ is working a variation on the 'four dog defense'

If someone was bitten by his dog, based how he argues idiotically about GW, he would say:

1. I don't have a dog
2. My dog doesn't bite
3. If it bit, it didn't bite you
4. If it bit you, you deserved it, and it's probably good for you...

:-D
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 17962
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 20

Unread postby KaiserJeep » Tue 18 Dec 2018, 12:38:16

...when all I am really saying is first THINK before you do anything. There is lots and lots of energy consumption which I would call frivolous, in comparison to using petroleum fuels and coal sourced electricity to grow, process, and transport food.

We could argue endlessly about THAT topic. For example, as somebody pointed out already, Ibon's beautiful resort generates lots of air travel. People use about 4X the gasoline and diesel they need to live, the "just run to the store" syndrome that results from not planning ahead.

Grid electricity is similar. You NEED lighting only in the room you are in, and for HVAC, cooking, etc. Security lighting, street lights, and other power consumed that nobody is actually using, should be shut off.

I'm all in favor of conservation, even though I seriously doubt the CC part of this is significant.
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5857
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 16:16:32
Location: California's Silly Valley

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 20

Unread postby jedrider » Tue 18 Dec 2018, 14:11:51

If we had any concern for our future, we would be doing something.

Right now, we have some economic models we need to fine tune, global warming be damned!
User avatar
jedrider
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1255
Joined: Thu 28 May 2009, 09:10:44

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 20

Unread postby asg70 » Tue 18 Dec 2018, 14:35:57

dohboi wrote:KJ is working a variation on the 'four dog defense'

If someone was bitten by his dog, based how he argues idiotically about GW, he would say:

1. I don't have a dog
2. My dog doesn't bite
3. If it bit, it didn't bite you
4. If it bit you, you deserved it, and it's probably good for you...

:-D


or the Bart Simpson defense.
"this is peak now. Wanna bet? The Real Pain starts . . . now." (11/21/18)" --pstarr
"$0/barrel soon as per etp." (12/30/18)" --pstarr
ATTN: SHORT LOST A BET AND WON'T EVEN ADMIT HE MADE ONE. HE SHOULD NOT BE WELCOME HERE!
asg70
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2265
Joined: Sun 05 Feb 2017, 13:17:28

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 20

Unread postby EnergyUnlimited » Tue 18 Dec 2018, 14:41:11

KaiserJeep wrote:It's not like anything we could do would stop the warming of the planet, gentlefolk. The globe was and is warming still, and there is another 2-4 degrees C before we reach the peak Climatic Optimum temperature. Even if you believe in the AGW theory, the planet is a hugely complex system with hundreds of feedback mechanisms moderating Climate Change.

Warming we can survive. Running out of cheap FF's to burn for energy, not so much.

I am not convinced with your argument.
We have plenty of evidence to the contrary.
We can surely survive without cheap FF, very much like our ancestors did. Heck, even Easter Islanders have managed somehow.
4 degree warming... Hmm... Humans as species would survive, not necessarily in California but still.
At 8 degree warming humans would not survive except of isolated pockets if anywhere.
User avatar
EnergyUnlimited
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5249
Joined: Mon 15 May 2006, 02:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 20

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Tue 18 Dec 2018, 18:33:38

EnergyUnlimited wrote:We can surely survive without cheap FF, very much like our ancestors did. Heck, even Easter Islanders have managed somehow.

But our ancestors were only one billion people in 1804 and were having a hard time surviving on the available resources at the time. To go back to a pre fossil fuel way of life would require killing off some six billion people and the way such things work we might well kill off almost all of the seven billion that are alive today from "I maybe losing but you are going with me" attitudes.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9653
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 20

Unread postby pstarr » Tue 18 Dec 2018, 19:02:40

KaiserJeep wrote:I have it on good authority that the Illuminati are actually a Zionist banking organization, secretly being influenced by the Gay Whales for Christ. Of course, all of these groups are good Democrats.

who are the Gray Whales for Christ? Not what happened to moby dick and his precious blubber?
SA has peaked. OPEC has peaked. So goes the world.
pstarr
NeoMaster
NeoMaster
 
Posts: 27950
Joined: Mon 27 Sep 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Behind the Redwood Curtain

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 20

Unread postby KaiserJeep » Tue 18 Dec 2018, 19:32:44

I was misquoting a bumper sticker used to tweek California lefties. It reads "Nuke the Gay Whales for Christ". Very popular in some counties.
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5857
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 16:16:32
Location: California's Silly Valley

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 20

Unread postby Tanada » Tue 18 Dec 2018, 22:05:48

vtsnowedin wrote:
EnergyUnlimited wrote:We can surely survive without cheap FF, very much like our ancestors did. Heck, even Easter Islanders have managed somehow.

But our ancestors were only one billion people in 1804 and were having a hard time surviving on the available resources at the time. To go back to a pre fossil fuel way of life would require killing off some six billion people and the way such things work we might well kill off almost all of the seven billion that are alive today from "I maybe losing but you are going with me" attitudes.


What the heck are you talking about? In 1804 North America was very lightly populated and Australia and new Zealand were almost entirely occupied by hunter gatherer cultures that have a population density level that is tiny compared to even primitive agriculture civilization. Europe routinely had food surplus! The only places with dense population and the pressure that comes with it were India and China and even in those places diversified diet was arriving as varied food crops from other regions were being exploited like Maize from the new world and crops like rye and Oats that grew in places where Rice withered like high altitude or far northern locations. Sure Europe had a famine when the volcanic eruptions in Iceland and Indonesia disrupted the climate, but those were by far the exception, not the rule.
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15264
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 20

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Wed 19 Dec 2018, 03:53:56

Tanada wrote:
vtsnowedin wrote:
EnergyUnlimited wrote:We can surely survive without cheap FF, very much like our ancestors did. Heck, even Easter Islanders have managed somehow.

But our ancestors were only one billion people in 1804 and were having a hard time surviving on the available resources at the time. To go back to a pre fossil fuel way of life would require killing off some six billion people and the way such things work we might well kill off almost all of the seven billion that are alive today from "I maybe losing but you are going with me" attitudes.


What the heck are you talking about? In 1804 North America was very lightly populated and Australia and new Zealand were almost entirely occupied by hunter gatherer cultures that have a population density level that is tiny compared to even primitive agriculture civilization. Europe routinely had food surplus! The only places with dense population and the pressure that comes with it were India and China and even in those places diversified diet was arriving as varied food crops from other regions were being exploited like Maize from the new world and crops like rye and Oats that grew in places where Rice withered like high altitude or far northern locations. Sure Europe had a famine when the volcanic eruptions in Iceland and Indonesia disrupted the climate, but those were by far the exception, not the rule.

What the heck are you talking about? In 1804 the North American native population had been decimated by European diseases and our exploding population was rapidly deforesting their new continent as the forests of Europe no longer could supply wood for their sailing ships and navies. Across Polynesia peoples practiced infanticide to keep the population in line with the carrying capacity of their island homes. The cities of Europe were literal cesspools where disease and often starvation kept life expediencies low and retarded population growth.
Now perhaps today we could support a higher population then we could in 1804 due to the knowledge base we have gained but knowing that farm land needs fertilizer isn't much good if you don't have the fossil fuel to make the fertilizer from or the diesel fuel needed to apply it and your land will get depleted and crop yields decline.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9653
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 20

Unread postby Ibon » Wed 19 Dec 2018, 06:52:53

Hey Ho, spann die wagon an
sieht der wind treibt regen ubers land
hol die goldene garben, hol die golden garben


Europe had the least reliable grain of all agricultural areas, wheat yields crashed with wet and cold summers and fall. Rye was the most cold and wet hardy variety of wheat which is why it was grown in northern Europe but still there were frequent shortages.

Getting in that harvest before rains came was the difference between starvation and surviving winters as the above lyrics tell.
Our resiliency resembles an invasive weed. We are the Kudzu Ape
blog: http://blog.mounttotumas.com/
website: http://www.mounttotumas.com
User avatar
Ibon
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 6887
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Volcan, Panama

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 20

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Wed 19 Dec 2018, 10:23:10

Having grown up using nineteenth century horse drawn equipment to farm with I have a deeper understanding of just how hard life was before the advent of ICE engines and electric motors and lights. What we consider a days hard physical labor today wouldn't get the morning chores before breakfast done in a pre fossil fuel world. :)
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9653
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 20

Unread postby Revi » Wed 19 Dec 2018, 11:08:48

vtsnowedin wrote:Having grown up using nineteenth century horse drawn equipment to farm with I have a deeper understanding of just how hard life was before the advent of ICE engines and electric motors and lights. What we consider a days hard physical labor today wouldn't get the morning chores before breakfast done in a pre fossil fuel world. :)


I work out all winter and do some XC skiing, but I always lose weight and get in shape when sugaring starts. The kind of workout you get doing outdoor work is amazing. No need for the gym in March!

I helped a friend with the small oxen he is training, and that was quite a workout! Getting those little guys back on track takes a lot of stamina! They are just learning, but I can tell that even when they are grown they'll take a lot of active management!

I agree. We'll be working harder when we have to do this stuff for real!
Deep in the mud and slime of things, even there, something sings.
User avatar
Revi
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 7039
Joined: Mon 25 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: Maine

Re: Global Warming / Climate Changes Pt. 20

Unread postby Tanada » Wed 19 Dec 2018, 11:16:52

vtsnowedin wrote:
Tanada wrote:
vtsnowedin wrote:
EnergyUnlimited wrote:We can surely survive without cheap FF, very much like our ancestors did. Heck, even Easter Islanders have managed somehow.

But our ancestors were only one billion people in 1804 and were having a hard time surviving on the available resources at the time. To go back to a pre fossil fuel way of life would require killing off some six billion people and the way such things work we might well kill off almost all of the seven billion that are alive today from "I maybe losing but you are going with me" attitudes.


What the heck are you talking about? In 1804 North America was very lightly populated and Australia and new Zealand were almost entirely occupied by hunter gatherer cultures that have a population density level that is tiny compared to even primitive agriculture civilization. Europe routinely had food surplus! The only places with dense population and the pressure that comes with it were India and China and even in those places diversified diet was arriving as varied food crops from other regions were being exploited like Maize from the new world and crops like rye and Oats that grew in places where Rice withered like high altitude or far northern locations. Sure Europe had a famine when the volcanic eruptions in Iceland and Indonesia disrupted the climate, but those were by far the exception, not the rule.

What the heck are you talking about? In 1804 the North American native population had been decimated by European diseases and our exploding population was rapidly deforesting their new continent as the forests of Europe no longer could supply wood for their sailing ships and navies. Across Polynesia peoples practiced infanticide to keep the population in line with the carrying capacity of their island homes. The cities of Europe were literal cesspools where disease and often starvation kept life expediencies low and retarded population growth.
Now perhaps today we could support a higher population then we could in 1804 due to the knowledge base we have gained but knowing that farm land needs fertilizer isn't much good if you don't have the fossil fuel to make the fertilizer from or the diesel fuel needed to apply it and your land will get depleted and crop yields decline.


People have been using manure, including the human variety, to fertilize fields since the dawn of agriculture. Because modern farms use cheap petroleum derivatives does NOT mean that is the only way to go about fertilizing the fields. Farm equipment in toto consumes on the close order of 3% of all the fossil fuels used for our modern way of life, it would be a poor excuse of a country that can't power its farm equipment.

Yes the hunter gatherer peoples practiced infanticide, what is your point? They had a tiny total population not because of infanticide but because their lifestyle did not supply the calories required for a diverse complex agricultural type society.

Yes primitive large cities are cess pools of disease, but that was as true in 450 AD as it was in 1450 AD or 1850 AD. In no case did having a strong disease vector prevent civilization from being complex and population over long time periods from growing. If you look only as short periods sure there were population drops, but over a century even the worst death toll from diseases was recovered from. In the case of North America the DeSoto expedition in the 1500's spread European diseases from Florida to Illinois and then across into Mexico starting a process that lasted nearly 3 centuries as European settlers displaced death First Peoples. Desoto's diseases basically wiped out the Mississippian/Mound Builder complex agricultural culture of the time and reset the middle of the continent back from primitive Agriculture to Hunter Gatherer with seasonal very small scale farming more like gardening than a genuine agricultural base of the food pyramid.

The actual major cause of the deforestation effect had much more to do with making charcoal to refine iron ore into ingots and exporting iron to Europe than it did ship building. Look at a map of Pennsylvania and tick off every place name that ends in 'forge' like Valley Forge. Each of those place names consumed on the order of a square mile of timber a day to stay in operation because it wasn't a single forge, it was dozens located where iron ore and native timber were easily accessed. Much of that 'primeval forest' cleared to manufacture metals was then converted to agricultural use supporting on the close order of 25 times the population base through the use of agriculture on a large scale.

The 18th century agricultural carrying capacity of North America, fully exploited, is around 500,000,000 people. That potential was never reached because fossil fuels broke the cycle starting around 1840 when the first long distance steam boats and locomotives arrived on the scene. However there is zero reason for North America to have a lower population density than Europe within the carrying capacity of the climate which is very similar if you compare the west coast to the west coast as should be done rather than comparing the Atlantic coast of both continents which is a false climactic comparison. The calculated population of Europe in 1750 was 140,000,000 with much of European Russia still being primordial forest. At the same time the calculated population of North America, including tropical Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean was 16,000,000 or slightly over 10% the population density even including well populated locations the Spanish had colonized nearly 150 years earlier.

Heck a good 10% of Great Britain was 'fen' which is another word for swamp land that was not exploited until drainage works were built in the 19th century to make more farmland available. Those drains were built with muscle power and simple machines to take advantage of leverage as were the dikes and wind powered pumps that basically doubled the land area of Holland. Claiming nobody can do anything without fossil fuels is just plain odd given that we had to get far enough along technologically without fossil fuels to make exploiting them effectively profitable. When the forest of Great Britain had been cut back as far as the crown would allow they turned to 'sea coal' that washed ashore from sub-sea exposed seams that broke loose and floated to the top of the water where wave action and tides cast them ashore. When that was no longer enough they turned to mining surface deposits and later to deep mines. That worked fine until Newcommens first effective pumping engine raised the demand for coal and set off the fossil fuel revolution.

But even while that steam revolution was blooming in Great Britain half of Eastern Europe was still major forested areas. The thing was the Poles and Lithuanians and Russians were happy to sell to the UK, but transportation costs were huge. Exploiting the near coastal forest of Maine and Massachusetts was a much cheaper option. So while population density in western Europe soared to new heights the population density of eastern Europe remained on the slow growth track. For example the population of native Polish speakers was around 4.5 million in 1750. If you are unaware Poland has a geographically moderated climate much like Manitoba, Canada. Around 1750 the population of Manitoba was well under 100,000 with nearly everyone engaged in subsistence trapping/hunting/fishing/gathering and almost no crop style agriculture. Even today the population of Manitoba is a little over 1.2 Million. Why? Because today instead of 95% of people being engaged in agriculture 95% are engaged in other work which allows them to live wherever they want and buy food instead of growing their own. But that doesn't mean the agricultural potential of Manitoba is the tiny fraction of the land exploited by modern agriculture. Quite the contrary, in Poland modern agriculture still exploits almost all the land which was placed under cultivation by earlier people and the same is true in Manitoba. The difference is Manitoba never reached its agricultural carrying capacity. Therefore the vast majority of the land was never cleared and provided agricultural infrastructure like large drainage ditches and access roads and removal of field stones and boulders to field boundaries. For a modern Agricultural establishment to exploit that land they would first have to clear it of rocks, install the infrastructure and remove the native vegetation. It is vastly cheaper to simply purchase already existing farmland where farms 100-4000 years ago did all that preparatory labor making the land 'arable' as the Romans called it.

When modern economists talk about how 'useless' Canadian and Alaskan and Siberian lands are for agriculture in the warming world of the 21st century they are mostly talking about the fact that because the land was never under cultivation in the past none of the prepratory work needed for modern agriculture has been done yet. Yet all of that potential is right there, for anyone who looks at the whole picture instead of the 6 months to 12 month modern agricultural industrial cycle. To convert say 10,000 acres of Alaska into a modern agricultural location will require investment of a large sum of labor and the cash to pay for it, plus infrastructure to make it possible to market the resulting production 3-5 years after start of project. However almost nobody with access to the wealth and authority to accomplish that 3 -5 years of preparatory work believes the investment is worthwhile because they all see things in terms of much shorter business cycles. Those modern farms in Poland and Michigan and Alabama have a huge 'sunk cost' of preparatory work that was done before the advent of modern agriculture. However this is almost never acknowledged and leads to many false beliefs.

IMO as the world warms we will get to the point where the need to exploit these undeveloped lands is no longer deniable, at which point money, probably tax payer funds, will be invested to convert those lands to agricultural production. But saying 'nobody exploits those undeveloped lands, therefore nobody will ever exploit those lands' is a total nonstarter. A kind of self reinforcing feedback loop with completely circular reasoning.
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15264
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

PreviousNext

Return to Environment, Weather & Climate

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests