JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks

The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



Archives

If world warmed — crops could grow another 1,200 km further North

Climate change might bring more food as it expands into the arctic. In a big surprise, scientists found that agriculture works best in places without much snow and ice.

Burn oil and feed the world

Only a third of the giant northern boreal forest is able to be cropped at the moment. With any luck, serious global warming will set in, allowing us to raise the edge of the zone of arable land and feed millions more hungry people.

Obviously , we need to spend billions to stop this.

Though Canadians and Russians may disagree (especially if they thought CO2 actually mattered, but who does?).

Given CO2′s mixed performance in the last hundred years, I predict disappointment…

They found that the upper edge of land suitable for crop growth could shift as far north as 1,200km from the current position with the most dramatic changes occurring in the inner-continental regions of North America and Eurasia.

The study, published in the journal Scientific Reports, estimates that by 2099 roughly 76 per cent of the boreal region could reach the right conditions for agriculture.

There is always a catch:

However, the study also warns that while total rainfall will generally increase on an annual basis, a warmer climate will also lead to more evaporation with potentially dramatic impact on the climatic water balance, both geographically and across seasons.

It will rain more (in general), though not necessarily in the same places. If global climate models were not largely skillless at predicting rainfall, farmers could plan ahead.

They have some very pretty artwork with details of expanding agricultural zones. In the unlikely event that climate models turn out to be right about something, these graphics might be useful.

h/t GWPF

 REFERENCE

King et al (2018) Northward shift of the agricultural climate zone under 21st-century global climate change, Scientific Reports  volume 8, Article number: 7904 (2018)

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.3/10 (60 votes cast)
If world warmed -- crops could grow another 1,200 km further North, 9.3 out of 10 based on 60 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/y8d8kasc

60 comments to If world warmed — crops could grow another 1,200 km further North

  • #
    Peter Miller

    The benefits of increasing CO2 in our atmosphere seem never ending.

    Plants grow faster and stronger, plus the planet is ‘greening’, especially in the Sahel region.

    Now, in the unlikely event significant global warming does occur, we shall have huge new areas in which to plant crops, partly offset by a modest loss of growing areas in current Mediterranean climate zones.

    Lest we forget, our vegetation evolved in times of much higher CO2 levels, so despite recent increases in carbon dioxide our plant life is still on a very strict diet.

    271

    • #
      Geoff

      If the world warmed up 2 degrees this would be amazingly good for our planet’s plants and animals. Unfortunately this is not happening. However, this does not justify a climate scheme to make it happen.

      101

    • #
      Hasbeen

      Surely Peter, the Mediterranean climate zones would simply shift to rice production, making them even more productive than there today. So a win win all the way.

      51

    • #
      Latus Dextro

      Peter, I’d draw the line at the Scots, Scandinavians, Finns and Canadians getting into viticulture. A pinot gris from Oslo, a Highland sauvignon blanc, a Canadian merlot. Ye gods!

      21

      • #

        Actually, Canada already produces some pretty fine wine in British Columbia. We have a pretty pleasant climate over at least part of the country for at least part of the year.

        10

  • #

    No doubt that this claim is an RCP 8.5 result, which anyone with a brain knows to be impossible.

    50

  • #
    Lars P.

    “There is always a catch:
    However, the study also warns that while total rainfall will generally increase on an annual basis, a warmer climate will also lead to more evaporation with potentially dramatic impact on the climatic water balance, both geographically and across seasons.”

    This happens only within deluded models set up to work with an increased ‘backradiation’ from the top of atmosphere, not in reality.
    Physics does not work that way. It is a very poor representation of reality. Models do not even calculate correct lapse rate to have a proper energy transfer in their simulation. Just weather models with added heating. It is clear it overheats…

    Initial calculations, based on radiation physics put the warming estimated to 1°C per doubling. That was also too much as to my knowledge ignored the water circle with related heat transfer, but even if it were right by when will we have doubling of CO2? Probably never as nature will gobble fast more and more.
    I doubt we will even be able to measure the warming caused by CO2.

    On the other side positive effects of CO2 enrichment are visible.

    50

  • #

    Trouble is, the world is behaving to the norm of the last couple of million years. It warmed substantially and quickly, again, and within this current warming phase (which hasn’t got as toasty as the previous one some 120,000 years back) there have been warming and cooling blips, again. The warmest blip so far in this interglacial was some eight thousand years back. The last cooling, just a few hundred years back, was a worry…but it too did pass. (We won’t count the mini-mini-blip of the 1970s which moistened so many mattresses and sold so many TIME magazines.)

    Soon the overall temp will cool and it won’t be blip it will be dip. Again. This may take a few hundred or a few thousand years but it will not take tens of thousands of years. It may start now. The next cooling may be a blip or it may be the start of yet another irregular descent into normal quaternary conditions. That’s ice age, which we never really left.

    You don’t need to be at the bottom of the cycle to find it hard to run a civilisation which has only known the very mild and only slightly ranging temps of the last ten millennia. The problem is not the end of the Holocene…the beginning of the end will be tricky enough.

    Is any of this new or controversial? No? Then how come…

    Never mind.

    200

    • #
      Roger

      NASA global temperatures show a 0.56 C COOLING from Feb 2016 to 2018.

      No interest to MSM and kept very quiet by alarmists.

      230

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘Soon the overall temp will cool and it won’t be blip it will be dip.’

      Fair enough, but how would we recognise it?

      The end of the Eemian in Poland.

      https://gq.pgi.gov.pl/article/view/24856

      31

      • #

        To recognise it you would need actual climate scientists. And they’re like rocking horse droppings.

        There have been these interglacials occurring rhythmically for a couple of million years. There is nothing unusual about this one and there will be nothing unusual about its decline. If it declined now (these episodes don’t just “end”) after some ten thousand years of comfy plateau and if there was no more interglacial for another hundred and twenty thousand years? That would not be unusual.

        In fact, it would be dirt common. That’s really all you get. I might ask why nobody talks about this…but that would be coy of me.

        90

        • #
          el gordo

          ‘….these episodes don’t just “end” ….

          That is correct, thinking of the LIA as a precursor, from that abstract.

          ‘….a re-warming at the very end of this phase, immediately before the transition to the glacial conditions of the last glaciation …’

          It could be our Modern Climate Optimum before the transition.

          30

          • #

            To be fair to the subject-changers, there is no solution to a Holocene decline. It’s the full-time whistle on the game we know.

            What surprises is that such a large and imminent situation is relegated to crank status when it is no more controversial than suggesting quakes in quake zones, floods in flood zones. Interglacials have a long history in stratigraphy, geology etc, we know they are relatively brief above a temp comfortable for the settled and complex communities which started to form during the Optimum some ten thousand years back, give or take: Jericho, Gobekli Tepe, Byblos etc.

            Modern humans have come through maybe three interglacials and all the cold between. The civilisations of modern humans have known only the Holocene plateau. A bit of cooling and drying in the Sahara some 5900 years ago actually resulted in a civilisation along the Nile. But other cooling episodes such as that of 2200 BC rocked that civilisation. We know what a bit of cooling did to the river civilisations, the first Greeks, the Hittites and so on. More technology and resources meant we came through the LIA after much war and misery but nobody would sign up for another LIA.

            So much for a bit of cooling. A lot of cooling puts a stop to everything, it has to come quite soon…but let’s talk about Miley CO2 or Elon Mars Bar. As for the distraction of changing planets, that’s a bit like saying the Melbourne winter is too cold so I’m selling my home to buy a new one in Antarctica at a billion times the price. If you believe in Upholstery in Space, however…

            My preference would be to dwell on this subject of imminent Holocene decline, however gloomy, and shut down the distractions.

            50

            • #
              el gordo

              What if the closure of the Central American Seaway made the Atlantic more salty and that kick started the conveyor belt taking warm waters into the North Atlantic.

              Its probably just a coincidence that the ice age cycle began around the same time and early hominids developed bigger brains.

              ‘The Central American Seaway, also known as the Panamanic Inter-American and Proto-Caribbean Seaway, was a body of water that once separated North America from South America. It formed in the Mesozoic (200–154 Ma) during the separation of the Pangaean supercontinent, and closed when the Isthmus of Panama was formed by volcanic activity in the late Pliocene (2.76–2.54 Ma).’ wiki

              So if full glacial conditions looked imminent I suppose geo engineers would build wider central American canals, after due diligence.

              20

              • #
                Latus Dextro

                Its probably just a coincidence that the ice age cycle began around the same time and early hominids developed bigger brains.

                As you may know, Neanderthals (1500cm^3) had a greater average cranial capacity than Homo sapiens (1250cm^3). Perhaps climatism skeptics have a greater residuum of neanderthal ethnic genetics than HS? Another ice age might be a useful test?

                10

              • #
                el gordo

                Neanderthals did have bigger brains, which may have indirectly caused a genetic bottleneck.

                The real jump in brain size came with the earlier homo erectus and they also migrated out of Africa.

                10

        • #

          Some seem to have been worrying about the speed of recent warming. 0.6 degrees in a century now apparently stalled for a bit. Now that is lightning fast. So fast I never noticed it.

          20

    • #
      sophocles

      mosomoso: you’re nearly there :-)
      Here’s some more
      to whet your appetite.
      Enjoy.

      30

      • #

        It’s very interesting. As a total lay-person, I have no way to gauge the strength of these celestial theories or the counter-arguments, so I base my thoughts on common knowledge on natural and human history. But it’s certainly interesting.

        Something I’ve noticed on the net is the tendency to allow all kinds of skepticism and even ridicule of NASA and consensus science provided the doubters are flat earth advocates. It’s as if YouTube/Google are trying to corral critics of consensus into a sin bin by making sure all have a history of flat earthing, at least by exposure. I believe they call this sort of thing a psy-op and it’s certainly a real thing. Swamping consensus doubters with alien or ET theories is another good “corralling” technique.

        I’ve heard some Ben Davidson interviews and he was certainly worth the listen. Thanks for that link.

        20

        • #
          sophocles

          The ridiculing of NASA is ridiculing the “Gavin Schmidt” branch (GISS) which is the “Global Warming” group. Other NASA science is rock solid especially the astronomical and space science side which is featured in the video.

          Davidson’s Sept 2017 video update on the solar weather effects on this planet’s weather. It’s a pretty good introduction, and if you check the https://www.suspicious0bservers.org website, it has a series of videos of the sun and it’s links to the terrestrial weather as a series of tutorials worth watching for their educational value.

          Another series which is worth following is Adapt 2030 It’s almost all about Northern Hemisphere troubles but notes those interesting aspects of Southern Hemisphere oddities. Take with a salt tablet but listen. It reports what the MSM doesn’t.

          Enjoy.

          10

  • #
    Mark M

    Turns out emitting a trace gas (CO2) is a truly lousy way of …

    making food less nutritious:

    https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/23/climate/rice-global-warming.html?smtyp=cur&smid=tw-nytclimate

    > World faces ‘staggering’ obesity challenge: study -

    https://www.afp.com/en/news/2265/world-faces-staggering-obesity-challenge-study-doc-1590mi1

    … causing cherry picking to become a lost art:

    Record cherry crop expected … Mother nature served our growing regions with ideal weather conditions through bloom into the post-bloom period, which has resulted in a lot of fruit on the trees”

    https://www.thepacker.com/article/record-cherry-crop-expected-bc-tree-fruits

    > Growing tips: cherries need a cold climate and well-drained soil. The best time to plant them is in winter, when they are bare-rooted.

    http://www.burkesbackyard.com.au/fact-sheets/food-and-recipes/food-health-nutrition/cherry-growing-tips-and-recipes/

    causing warblers to become extinct in the northern hemisphere:

    “horror in Quebec: “greatest birding day of my life… greatest avian spectacle I’ve ever witnessed”. 721,000 warblers seen in one day; previous highest-ever tally anywhere in the world was 200,000″

    https://ebird.org/view/checklist/S46116491

    And … causing the world’s oldest tree to stop growing …

    Oldest European Tree Found—And It’s Having a Growth Spurt!

    https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2018/05/oldest-tree-europe-italy-pine-climate-science/#

    “Oldest known tree in Europe update: “wider rings have grown in the past two decades, which indicates better environmental conditions”

    90

    • #
      sophocles

      World faces ‘staggering’ obesity challenge: study -

      That’s not a surprise because the food pyramid we were/are taught for the so-called “balanced diet” is effectively upside down—plain wrong.

      20

      • #
        Latus Dextro

        It’s the rampant generalisation in the face of huge variation in gut morphology that is wrong. As Omnivores adapted to live successfully from the Sahara to the Arctic is testament that there are inevitably a huge range of “healthy” satisfactory diets. The motto is, “know thyself.”

        On the other hand, the list of “sinful” indulgences resulting in calamitous health consequences grows ever longer by the day, little different from catastrophic climatism. The desire by the risk-mongering church of healthism, with its brethren in the church of climatism is to impose their ideological doctrines on the rest of us.

        No way.

        I, like so many, am sick to the bottom of my limbic system of being told what to do, think and believe. If they worked equally as hard at educating the young in critical thinking and information evaluation there is much that might be achieved. But it would require repeating at every generation. So they would of course put themselves out of one job, but they could assume the mantle of another more useful educational pursuit.

        Know your truth and exercise your choices.

        40

        • #
          ROM

          A number of media sources have repeated this claim but here is one version “World facing obesity challenge: study”

          Almost a quarter of the world’s population will be obese by 2045, according to a new study.
          If current trends continue, more than 22 per cent people globally will be classed as obese, up from 14 per cent in 2017, while one-in-eight will have Type-Two diabetes, the projections show.

          The researchers, from the US, Denmark and University College London in the UK, warn efforts to tackle obesity must be significantly intensified to stabilise the growing problem.
          The findings will be presented at the European Congress on Obesity in Vienna, Austria.

          Their projections, based on analysis of population data from a World Health Organisation database, suggest prevalence of diabetes globally will increase from 9.1 per cent to 11.7 per cent by 2045.
          Meanwhile, about 55 per cent of the US population will be obese by 2045 if trends continue, the researchers said.

          “These numbers underline the staggering challenge the world will face in the future in terms of numbers of people who are obese, or have Type Two diabetes, or both,” Dr Alan Moses, of Novo Nordisk Research and Development in Denmark, who will present the study, said.

          ———————
          Note the arrogance here in that these scientists are predicting a situation into a future that is still nearly 30 years away.

          will do this or will do that with only the single barest mention of” if trends continue” which of course they never ever do over more than a few years at best.
          Developments in genetic technology, changes in social conditions, advances in drugs and other health benefiting and health problem alleviating developments are only a couple of items that can and no doubt will alter both the causes of obesity and obesity itself if it is worse per head of population than it has ever been beforehand, another unanswered question needing bucket fulls of tax payer’ s money to be thrown at it.

          The data came from the World Health Organisation.

          So where did the WHO get its figures from?

          Upper Volta or the Central African Republic or Southern Sudan or Afghanistan in the midst of a war and starvationnear rampant or the chaos that is Venezuela under Maduro and etc are hardly likely to be collecting data on obesity.

          Besides what is the definition of “obesity “?.

          Here it is the European/ american definition of “obesity” that is being quoted as the scientifically sacrosant definition of obesity but what is the definition of “obesity ” that encompasses all the definitions of that state of human health amongst all the nations on our earth.

          The Inuits in the northern regions of North America, and the Saami of Finland and northern Russia are all obese by the standards of western society but it is an adaption thatr is needed to survive the bitter cold of those regions.

          My guess would be that the WHO figures are little more than wild arsed projections based on some limited American and European data on obesity dressed up into suitably alarmist figures to keep the public tax payers moola rolling in to the so called researchers.

          After all, what would all those obesity obsessed researchers who made it to that “European Conference on Obesity” to get stuck into all the delicacies served at the conference dinners and group gatherings have to say if instead of having to discuss obesity, they had to discuss the starvation of 22% of the global population by 2045.

          Which would they and you prefer, to discuss a problem of obesity of a fifth of the global population by 2045 or discuss a problem of a world food shortage and the prospects of starvation for a fifth of the world’s peoples by the same date..

          Both are “predictions” of a future that has about a 99% chance of never happening within the time frame presented as cicumstances constantly change and the ever changing tides of history roll ever onwards.

          20

        • #
          ROM

          Sigh!
          In moderation again.

          Another common naughty word I think!

          10

  • #

    ” … most dramatic changes occurring in ” places where there is land rather than ocean. Duh. And places where in general the topography is unsuitable for agriculture anyway?

    50

  • #
    John F. Hultquist

    Related:
    Historical Aspects of the Northern Canadian Treeline HARVEY NICHOLS

    http://pubs.aina.ucalgary.ca/arctic/Arctic29-1-38.pdf

    ABSTRACT From palynological studies it appears that northernmost dwarf spruces of the tundra and parts of the forest-tundra boundary may be relicts from times of prior warmth, and if felled might not regenerate. This disequilibrium may help explain the partial incongruence of modern climatic limits with the present forest edge. Seedlings established as a result of recent warming should therefore be found within the northernmost woodlands rather than in the southern tundra.

    30

  • #
    Another Ian

    “Though Canadians and Russians may disagree (especially if they thought CO2 actually mattered, but who does?)”

    IIRC you can count the current Canadian federal government in, the Russians not so much.

    40

    • #

      Yes, A government which seems to have a serious disconnect from reality, trying desperately to make the same mistakes as Australia, U.K., Germany. Do you think there might be a different outcome?

      10

  • #
    Serge Wright

    “a warmer climate will also lead to more evaporation”

    I often see this line being trotted out by climate alarmists. However, evaporation is not a function of temperature, but of relative humidity. If relative humidity rises, then evaporation falls and vice versa. Ironically, if climate alarmists are suggesting that evaporation will increase, then they must also be claiming that relative humidity will fall, which contradicts their own alarmist theory ;)

    131

    • #

      Uh, as the air warms it,s relative humidity falls unless more water is added by evaporation. Avoid circular reasoning. It makes you sound like a warmist.

      10

  • #
    Another Ian

    This might help.

    “California vs. Big Oil: Judge Orders Plaintiffs To Find Benefits Of Fossil Fuels”

    https://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2018/05/29/california-vs-big-oil-judge-orders-plaintiffs-to-find-benefits-of-fossil-fuels/

    30

  • #
    Ruairi

    Let’s hope that the skeptics are wrong,
    And that warming be global and strong,
    To reduce and assuage,
    Another Little Ice Age,
    That may affect Earth before long.

    150

  • #
    Rosco

    I can’t agree with “However, evaporation is not a function of temperature, but of relative humidity.”

    In extremely cold places regardless of locality one observes very low atmospheric humidity and close to zero evaporation or even sublimation.

    In extremely hot places remote from the oceans one observes very low atmospheric humidity and evaporation resulting in desertification.

    I can’t agree with “However, evaporation is not a function of temperature, but of relative humidity.”

    60

    • #
      David-of-Cooyal-in-Oz

      G’day Rosco,
      An interesting challenge you’ve made. I suspect there’s some rather complex mathematics involved to adequately evaluate evaporation. More variables than I’ve seen here too, eg nature of the surface (land or sea, rough or smooth), surface temperature, wind speed and temperature, and time of day. On land, nature of any vegetation cover. And effects of photosynthesis.
      Here, there’s not much evaporation in a long drought, and the ground dries out pretty quickly after rain given a bit of wind.
      Cheers,
      Dave B

      10

      • #
        sophocles

        there’s not much evaporation in a long drought

        That’s why it’s a drought. Little evaporation => little precipitation. Ping! Drought.

        10

        • #
          David-of-Cooyal-in-Oz

          G’day S,
          I intended the drought statement to be an extreme example of the nature of a (potential) evaporation surface and its effect on evaporation rate regardless of temperature. But you raise another good point when you mention precipitation. Here I’m in a rain shadow area from rain coming from the east (Tasman Sea), sometimes get rain from the north as after effects of tropical storms in the Coral Sea, and yesterday’s 14mms (the first decent rain for two months) seems to have come across from the Indian Ocean.
          I don’t know where moisture evaporated from this area goes…
          Cheers,
          Dave B

          00

  • #
    el gordo

    There has been a slight SST cooling trend off the coast of Japan, which is what we would expect at Holocene’s end.

    http://www.co2science.org/articles/V21/may/a15.php

    20

  • #
    manalive

    Climate change and the northern Russian treeline zone:

    … dendroecological studies indicate enhanced conifer recruitment during the twentieth century. However, conifers have not yet recolonized many areas where trees were present during the Medieval Warm period (ca AD 800–1300) or the Holocene Thermal Maximum (HTM; ca 10 000–3000 years ago) …

    The paper (2007) genuflects to AGW of course but concludes:

    … given the slow rate of northwardforest extension observed thus far, coupled with the climatic, edaphic and ecological factors outlined above, it is difficult to envision that the anticipated northward forest expansion and development of new forest communities as projected by model experiments such as that presented in the Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (2004) would be completed by AD 2100. Developing a clearer understanding of the potential rate of response of the northern boreal forest and treeline zone is a critical area for research …

    Maybe one reason CC™ enthusiasts prefer dendrochronological proxy reconstructions to simple and obvious radiocarbon-dated fossil remains is that the former offer far more scope for statistical shenanigans.

    50

    • #
      Graeme No.3

      manalive:
      “However, conifers have not yet recolonized many areas where trees were present during the Medieval Warm period (ca AD 800–1300) or the Holocene Thermal Maximum (HTM; ca 10 000–3000 years ago)”

      Proof that it was warmer at those times, regardless of the CO2 level.
      The well known (outside gullible circles) of abandonment of higher farm land during the early part of the Little Ice Age also argues that more warmth would cause an increase in arrable land in places like England, south central Norway, Scotland etc.

      50

  • #
    robert rosicka

    Does this mean sea levels will drop and the poor reefs will bleach .

    40

  • #
    Graeme No.3

    O/T
    but to brighten? your day see the photo of well known beauty spot in Scotland.
    https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2018/05/29/can-batteries-solve-the-intermittency-problem/

    I am glad I saw it before it was ‘developed’.

    50

    • #
      William

      Me too Graeme – the castle was free from eco-crucifixes when I was there, and interesting link. I wonder whether alarmists have done the same battery calculations. If they have, they are keeping awfully quiet about it.

      40

  • #
    Jeff

    Surely it would also mean coral reefs further north and south ?
    In general more area suitable for coral, so more reefs.

    40

  • #

    Melbourne Advocate Sat 10 Feb 1912. Quoting something written in 1911 about even earlier supposed observations.

    “In consequence of this, the climate of the Northern
    Hemisphere is getting warmer every year. This
    is confirmed by the records of that great trading
    corporation, the Hudson’s Bay Company, which
    show that the Canadian winter is growing shorter
    and less severe. Birds that formerly never left
    the United States now fly northwards into Canada,
    having discovered the climatic changes for the better
    that are going on. These climatic changes
    have been of great economic value to Canada, for
    they have enormously enlarged the wheat-growing
    area of that Dominion. First-class wheat is now
    grown right up to the Arctic circle, and thousands
    of agricultural settlers are flocking in and taking
    up farms in vast stretches of country that, a few
    years ago, were supposed to be uuinhabitable
    wastes covered with ice and snow. A recent explorer
    tells us that islands in the Arctic Ocean
    which he saw covered with snow and ice at a former
    visit are now filled with “brilliant verdant
    vegetation.”

    https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/170938848

    20

    • #

      Now there is a quote from a journalist who has obviously never been in the north. The Arctic circle is at about 66 degrees north or the equivalent of 66 degrees south to an Australian. Wheat grown here would have to be under glass although it would have one day of 24-hour sunshine and many days of twilight throughout the night.

      10

  • #
    Rupert Ashford

    And if the global cooling sets in over the next 50 years as is expected by more and more scientists? How are we going to feed people then – especially given that no preparations are in place for that.

    90

  • #
    ROM

    Quite a number of years ago I went looking for information on crop growing changes and extensions into the colder and shorter seasons of the northern hemisphere when claims were being made both suggesting the northward movement of the crop line and the possibility of reduced yields due to the extra warmth.

    The US Dept of Ag [ USDA ] had already done all that research for the CONUS [ Continental USA aka the 48 states of continental USA ] which I found in one of the “American Arbor Societies” web pages where the latest versions can still be found.

    For more information on a wider scale on cropping further north as the supposed climate change takes effect just google “Plant hardiness Zones”

    A very good paper on USA Plant Hardiness Zones and how they have changed albeit not in any really substantial ways that would verify the effects of the so called climate change can be found @ Development of a New USDA Plant Hardiness Zone Map for the United States.

    This paper has a number of maps and tables on the changes and trends in where and what plants will grow across all the regions of the USA plus some Plant Hardiness growing maps on other regions of the world that can be expanded when the links are clicked through
    ———————

    30 or more years ago the furthest north for sowing crops was around the Peace River region in Canada’s Alberta province.

    Now viable crops of Canola are being sown in small areas as far north as the Great Slave Lakes area of the NW Territories or a few hundred kilometres further north, not always with full success if the length of the summer warmth plant growing season turns out to be short one .

    Be very wary of a lot of claims of cropping regions moving north because of warming temperatures.

    Most of the ability to plant and grow crops to maturity in these colder regions is because plant geneticists, a tiny group of individuals who have more influence on the future of the global food supplies than anybody else except the plant breeders, have now got the analytical ability to select plants with genes for a very fast, short growing seasonal requirement.
    In short most of the ability to grow in the harsh short season areas of the world is a gentically adapted characteristic using genes from wild specoies of the same plants to acquire the short , fast growing characteristics whilst still achieving very good grain yields, two characteristics that are extremely hard to get together in the same variety, fast growing oft menas lower yields or much lower quality.
    But the plant breeders and plant geneticists have come a very long way in bring good quality, high yields and fast growth andf maturity together in the major food crops today.

    The short fast growing and maturity allied with high yields and god qualities of crop species is also a very valuable crop characteristic and attibute for Australia with our winter cropping aseason characterised by a short winter wetter and cooller mid year seasonal period with a very strong probability of a hot harsh finish and therefore dramatrically reduced yields.

    [ I have been fortunate enough to have known a plant geneticist, a very quiet little guy who would be overlooked in any company but who was regarded as one of the best cropping plant geneticists in the world and who worked for some years here in our Horsham plant breeding facility before moving to the Waite Institute in SA.]

    The short fast groing season genetically selected characteristics of some recently bred cropping plants has enabled crops of some species such as some oil seeds, ie Canola, barley and a couple of other grains to be grown much further north in the ever shorter growing seasons of the further north latitudes than was possible three decades ago.

    So it is not temperature that is the major limit to growing crops ever further north but the length and warmth of the short Summer warm period that crop plants need to first germinate, grow to grain set and and then mature.

    Many current species of crop plants will almost finish grain set and begin to mature in these short warmer summer periods of the most northern regions of cropping areas and then come to a dead halt still a couple of weeks before they are mature and ready for harvest as the colder northern fall and winter descend on the regions.

    In fact in Canada’s prairie provinces if the cold of fall comes early, many mature crops become covered with snow and remain in a frozen state until the thaw of the next season arrives and they can be harvested,.
    The quality of the grain after such an episode is generally very poor but the grain’s use as stock feed is acceptable.

    So, yes, as is usual in Nature , the seasons flex and come and go but the plants and animals have beed adapted to these highly variable weather and climate situations over the milleniums beginning long before mankind ever appeared on this planet and began to worry that he/ she in our arrogant hubristic belief in ultimatem power and influence might be inadvertently or even deliberately changing the global climate if you believe the greens and the alarmist climate scientist and elitist academics.

    61

    • #

      Very good. The average temperature is only one factor in crop success. Hours of sunshine, moisture availability, frost-free periods, heat units, soil conditions are just some of the factors involved. There is very little soil suitable for agriculture in Canada other than for grazing and forage north of the current prairie extent. In fact, much of the north would be desert if it wasn’t so bloody cold.

      20

      • #
        Reasonable Skeptic

        As a denier I should be thrilled that somebody has finally found something good to say about CO2, but I can’t. It is amazing that scientists (or perhaps journalists) can play in their lab and make some wild prognostications while completely ignoring basic facts.

        RockyRedneck is obviously aware that CO2 is not the only factor that might be a problem. Glaciers rip off the soil so the bedrock is close to the surface so even if it was warmer, the rough terrain and poor soil means farming would not change much for most of the boreal forest.

        00

  • #
    Kinky Keith

    Mosomo paints the picture of the real world climate.

    The past, most importantly represented by the last half a million years, is written in the geological record.

    The cause of that series of cycles was variations in the exposure of our Planet Earth to the Sun along with variations in Solar output.

    Thank you Mr. Milankovic.

    According to the holy writ of International Climate Change Catastrophism, IPCCC, we are in danger of overheating because of our nocturnal emissions of CO2.

    As Mary F. pointed out long ago, back in about 2011, human origin CO2, as a proportion of greenhouse gases was 3% of 4% of the total predicted rise of say 1.5 C degrees.

    If the mechanism is real, and I dispute that, the projected rise caused by us would be 0.0018 C degrees.

    Be your own judge as to the dangers of making CO2.

    This is a gigantic scam and the real danger is that we are gonna freeze.

    KK.

    81

  • #
    BoyfromTottenham

    I remember reading somewhere that many plants need less water if CO2 is higher. So future lower rainfall ’caused’ by rising CO2 might then not be a serious problem for food crops.

    40

  • #
    Binny

    Nope,nope and nope. If you wanted to crop that area, you would have to clear the forest. Which is number one on the – Thou shalt nots!!! Everyone will just have to starve, and fight massive wars over the unforested areas.

    40

  • #
    TedM

    But from a globalists point of view. Hungry people are dependent people. It’s still about power.

    10

  • #
    Geoffrey Williams

    Imagine all that extra food – so much they’d have to give it away.
    GeoffW

    20

  • #
    neil

    This is why Russia has stayed away from the AGW debate, they need to burn coal and oil to provide power and heat or their unwashed masses and if Siberia becomes arable then it’s a win-win for them.

    10