Crop Declines Expected from Warming; Panel Urges Use of Biotechnology

An international panel of scientists writing in the Feb. 12 edition of the journal Science is urging world leaders to dramatically alter their notions about sustainable agriculture to prevent a major starvation catastrophe by the end of this century among the more than 3 billion people who live relatively close to the equator.

Specifically they urge world leaders to "get beyond popular biases against the use of agricultural biotechnology," particularly crops genetically modified to produce greater yields in harsher conditions and to base the regulations of such crops on the best available science.

"You're looking at a 20 percent to 30 percent decline in production yields in the next 50 years for major crops between the latitudes of southern California or southern Europe to South Africa," said David Battisti, a University of Washington atmospheric sciences professor.

He is a coauthor of a Perspectives article that urges food production experts, scientists and world leaders to begin thinking in dramatically different ways to meet food needs in a significantly warmer world. Lead author is Nina Federoff, science and technology adviser to Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton.

"I grow increasingly concerned that we have not yet understood what it will take to feed a growing population on a warming planet," said Federoff, who also is a biology professor at Pennsylvania State University.

The challenge is becoming more difficult, the scientists said, because the world's population is likely to have increased more than 30 percent, to 9 billion people, by 2050. Even without climate change, feeding all of these people will require doubling the grain production in the tropics, Battisti said, but a warmer climate will reduce yields because the temperature will be too high to achieve the most efficient photosynthesis. That factor, combined with less rainfall in major food-producing regions and increasing pressure from pests and pathogens, is likely to cut major food crop yields a minimum of 20 percent to 30 percent.

The authors advocate developing systems that have the potential to decrease the land, energy and fresh water needed for agriculture and at the same time reducing the pollution associated with agricultural chemicals and animal waste.

Battisti noted that the so-called green revolution in agriculture produced a 2 percent increase in yields per year for 20 years, primarily through development of new grain varieties and use of fertilizer and irrigation. But there is little, if any, new land available for farming, and such yield increases cannot be sustained without further innovation. In addition, there already are 1 billion people, mostly in the tropics, who do not have enough food for a healthy life.

"We're really asking for yield gains comparable to those at the peak of the green revolution, but sustained for an unprecedented length of time, 40 years, and at a time when climate change is acting against us," he said.

A major obstacle is that many of the institutions involved do not work together closely enough to succeed and, despite years of safe production and consumption, there is continued resistance to crops such as corn and soybeans that have been genetically modified to be insect resistant and tolerant of herbicides.

"There has to be a lot of creative thinking, a greater blending of biotechnology and agriculture and better coordination between private and public research efforts throughout the world for us to keep pace with the increasing demand for food," Battisti said. "We need to be thinking about the long-term demands for food and the environmental and social ramifications of how we will produce it."

Comments

Fri, Mar 5, 2010 norm missouri

Global warming causing decrease crop yields? We need more biotechnology? I'm starting to ge confused. Global warming is supposed to be caused by increased CO2 but increased CO2 increases plant growth. Global warming will decrease rainfall. Except increased temperatures produces more evaporation therby more rainfall. Increased temperatures will decrease crop yields. Maybe in some locations but increased temperatures will length growing seasons in the temperate climates and open up vast new areas to crop production in Canada and Russia. It sounds more like scientists looking for more government grants. Or maybe this man made warming is just a hoax Why else would the data need to be 'lost' , mis-interpreted or withheld from the public?

Thu, Feb 18, 2010 Bill Alaska

The only way to stop Global warming, pollution, poverty, famine, etc... is to limit population of humans on this planet. -We all talk about controlling emissions - saving water. recycling, etc.... but without population control for every pound of emissions or acre of land we plant - a new human will burn 2 pounds of emissions, and consume more food and water than has been produced.
We are eroding everyone's quality of life - because our resources will not sustain 7,8,9, Billion people for very long on this planet

This is a necessity - all parents/single mothers with 1 child must be rendered infertile or receive no government aid/ health care/ tax breaks, welfare, food stamps, etc..

All men who have *** without condoms and impregnate a woman who already has a child receive vasectomies or are imprisoned.

I realize this sounds harsh and all religiously brainwashed individuals will object (which includes something like 70% of the people in the U.S.A.) But the fact is - unless we make some hard decisions - we will not be able to sustain our population with fresh water and food in the future.

Wed, Feb 17, 2010 Larry Arizona

Since there is no global warming occurring, it appears there is more risk in the use of genetically mutated crops than from "so called" global warming. There is plenty of land to grow food and to spare if that used for drugs, alcohol and tobacco were put into food production.

Add your Comment

Your Name:(optional)
Your Email:(optional)
Your Location:(optional)
Comment:
Please type the letters/numbers you see above