Will global warming wipe out our food supply?

Climate change may have  negative impact on our ability to grow food, but it will more likely encourage new innovations in food production.

Chris O'Meara/AP
Icicles cling to oranges in a small grove just after sunrise Wednesday Jan. 4, 2012, in Seffner, Fla. Kahn argues that rather than threatening our food supply, global warming will bring about innovations in food production.

Thanks to forward looking "doom and gloomers" such as the Asteroid Miner (see below) we have been warned about future threats to our food supply.
I quote  this source:

  • Asteroid Miner
  • Illinois

Make it very short: If GW (Global Warming) is not stopped, there will be no food some time in the 2050s. Food production is already being impacted by GW.

  • Dec. 25, 2011 at 9:08 a.m

In a world with 7 billion people, if some folks agree with AM (Asteroid Miner)'s forecast  then they will have strong incentives over the next 38 years to seek out new ways to grow food.  Such individuals would recognize that there is a chance that AM is wrong but that global warming raises the probability that he is right.

The funny thing is that the anticipation that he could be right raises the probability that his prediction will be wrong!  If 1% of 1% of the world's 7 billion people get to work on this food scarcity problem, then we will have 700,000 people working on the problem.  Could they all fail as venture capitalists and others with funding fund this group to come up with new ways to grow food in our hotter future?  We don't need each of these 700,000 to succeed.  A future farming Steve Jobs will emerge from this set and he will become quite rich and we will continue to eat and Asteroid Miner's kids will thank him for playing the role of Paul Revere.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.