Why Global Warming does not bother me.

[Warren Dew]

The problem with growing things in the far north is the cold. Soil we can make.

I would think the biggest problem with growing things in the far north is lack of sunlight.

[MiM]

The problem with growing things in the far north is the cold. Soil we can make.

I would think the biggest problem with growing things in the far north is lack of sunlight.

That is certainly not the case. We have longer days than southerners for half of the year. And the intensity is plenty for growing crops.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

MiM, most of the "new" farm land would be in Russia and Canada, right?

[MiM]

MiM, most of the "new" farm land would be in Russia and Canada, right?

I guess so, why?

The latitudes would be similar to where we are already farming, I suppose. We grow wheat up to 64 degree. No problem with lack of sun, only the growth period gets too short, due to cold springs and autumns.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

MiM, most of the "new" farm land would be in Russia and Canada, right?

I guess so, why?

The latitudes would be similar to where we are already farming, I suppose. We grow wheat up to 64 degree. No problem with lack of sun, only the growth period gets too short, due to cold springs and autumns.

Well, Canada and Russia are both filled up with godless socialists and communists, for starters.

And, of course, people in the lower latitudes will have two choices, flee or suffer.

[Seth]

Yep, but not much of the Befores were Afters when the Earth cooled down again. Our heritage is frequent ice ages.

Indeed. And therefore, go global warming.

AGW may be the only thing that saves the human species from mass extinction due to glaciation.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Good thing there no danger of that from anything else then.

But I wonder, if our native state is moderate temps punctuated by glaciation periods, would global warming be a savior or the bullet behind the ear?

[Jason]

MiM, most of the "new" farm land would be in Russia and Canada, right?

I guess so, why?

The latitudes would be similar to where we are already farming, I suppose. We grow wheat up to 64 degree. No problem with lack of sun, only the growth period gets too short, due to cold springs and autumns.

Well, Canada and Russia are both filled up with godless socialists and communists, for starters.

And, of course, people in the lower latitudes will have two choices, flee or suffer.

We have lots of oil too. Don't forget that.

And no you may not 'liberate' us from our 'oppressive' regime.

[Pappa]

The paleological record alone proves that the earth has been much warmer than this year and yet life goes on.

Imagine that.

Yeah, life goes on. Nobody has ever claimed that anthropogenic global warming will cause complete ecological collapse or mass extinctions that would threaten the existence of the human race. Life will go on, but in a way that will be detrimental to the comfortable lives we've got used to in the West. The Stern Review put it quite plainly, it'll cost us more to not deal with global warming than it will to make the necessary changes to lessen the worst of it's impacts on our economic well-being.

[Blind groper]

MiM, most of the "new" farm land would be in Russia and Canada, right?

Couple points.

1. For paranoid Americans who see this as an increase in power by Canada and Russia, do not forget that Alaska is enormous and will be a part of the process.

2. it is not going to happen to any great degree before 2100, and by then who knows what the politics of Canada and Russia might be. No reason not to believe that Russia will be the paragon of capitalism and libertarianism. The USA by then might be 100% socialist. Societies change.

The biggest downside of global warming will be sea level rise. On continental nations, land loss will be about 5% as an absolute maximum, which I think we can live with. We might have to build dykes around coastal cities. Americans will mourn the loss of half of Florida, but most of the USA will be fine.

In places like Bangla Desh, a change in life style will be forced upon them, with a move away from the vulnerable coast, to high density city living. Their economy will need to be based on something other than farming, but that trend already exists, and Bangla Desh has an economy that is growing, with urban growth much faster than rural.

A few island nations will need to be evacuated. Some of those nations are already making preparations. The Maldives, for example, are buying land in Australia. My country will doubtless take many of the island refugees. After all, we are already the biggest Pacific Island nation on Earth in terms of population.

It will be interesting to see if Alaska, Canada and Russia will accept refugees into the lands with newly arable soils.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Excuse me, but who was being paranoid? I was being nationally geographic. The access to the Serbian lands should produce some awesome new fields of resources.

[macdoc]

Yeah, life goes on. Nobody has ever claimed that anthropogenic global warming will cause complete ecological collapse or mass extinctions that would threaten the existence of the human race.

That's not entirely true.
The largest extinction in earth's history was the Permian and that was caused at least in part by massive release of fossil C02 by way of lava intrusion into carboniferous rocks.
http://astrobiology.nasa.gov/articles/t ... xtinction/

We are currently releasing fossil carbon at a rate faster than that which led to the Permian event.
We can't release enough ( there is not enough accessible ) but there is enough stored in taiga, tundra and clathrates to do it if we trigger a positive feedback which there are signs of.
The loss of ocean biome to acidification is well on it's way and that alone would be a serious threat to human civilization.

So yes an ultimate threat risk is low, but not zero.

The self serving denier cadre wants to drill baby drill and unlike a true libertarian, not take responsibility for the consequences of their actions...so the easiest route is denial.
Sounds like Big Tobacco eh.

Eventually we will need to move to a low carbon emission society anyways as Sweden is doing now. Better to manage that process instead of the consequences of not dealing with the root cause.

How's that extreme weather working out in the US this lovely weekend???- 22 dead and 2 million still without power and hell the summer has only begun.

[Warren Dew]

MiM, most of the "new" farm land would be in Russia and Canada, right?

I guess so, why?

The latitudes would be similar to where we are already farming, I suppose. We grow wheat up to 64 degree. No problem with lack of sun, only the growth period gets too short, due to cold springs and autumns.

If you're already farming there, obviously that latitude does not require global warming to make arable land.

[macdoc]

Yeah it requires arable land. Not preCambrian rock with muskeg.
The long days of summer somewhat compensate for the shorter season.
Wheat will be possible in Alaska within a few decades once the viable band moves north out of the United States.
Once more - there won't be a whole lot of new arable land.

The worst area will be the Himalayas as very little arable land north of Indian and Bangladesh and the Gobi is a cold desert.
It's a total pipedream thinking there will be all this new land.

[Blind groper]

macdoc

No pipe dream. It is more a matter of equilibrium, because global warming will reduce arable land in some ways, and increase it in others. What the final equilibrium point will be, I do not know.

Not only will some land currently unusable due to cold, become usable, but there will be some land currently unusable due to aridity, that will gain more water and become usable. After all, much of the Sahara Desert was green 5,000 years ago. Warmer air carries more water, and the predicted overall effect on precipitation is an increase.

Of course, this is not an evenly spread effect globally, and some areas will become drier. Some land will be lost to encroaching seas, also. The final tally - more or less land available - I do not know. I suspect more, but I could be wrong.

I should also add that it will require some adaptation by farmers. Any newly available arable land will not be the same as older arable areas, and adjustments will be made to how the land is farmed. Farmlands from the cold north may, as previously stated, have thin soils. This will require farmers to act a little differently to build soils, and/or to use crops that can grow on poorer soils. Reclaimed desert will also require its own special farming methods. However, humans are adaptable, and can adjust farming techniques to cope.