Melvin Landers

Independent researcher and former agricultural missionary in Peru

Perspective

A non-scientific perspective on climate change

The professor who perhaps taught me the most important lesson was the one that angered me the most. She used to scold us anytime there was the slightest hint of an activist's type of attitude on the part of one of her students. "An environmental scientist is no activist. A scientist must be totally dispassionate and detached. To be otherwise would compromise your objectivity. And then any conclusion reached as a result of your research would be held as suspect by the scientific community." She taught me that I could not be a scientist. I care too much about people to be dispassionate and detached. Being a non-scientist I feel no hesitation in commenting on the conclusions reached by scientists working in and around the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

If these scientists are correct there will be an increase in the average surface temperature of the Earth of about three degrees centigrade by the end of the century. The last time the Earth experienced such a drastic increase in temperature was about ten thousand years ago at the end of the last ice age. Prior to that, much of North America's world famous wheat belt was covered with a sheet of ice more than a mile thick. Three degrees doesn't seem like such a small increase when you think of it in these terms. The experts expect the temperature to rise slowly, on average, during each subsequent decade. But, long before the end of the century our children and grandchildren will be suffering the consequences of global warming, unless the world's leaders decide to reverse the depletion of our atmosphere.

The reports about the effects of climate change on agricultural production, written of course by dispassionate scientists, stress the economic impact on farmers. In one way or another these reports refer to farmers as being winners or losers depending on where they live. Those farthest from the equator, in general, are expected to be the biggest losers. The climate which is optimal for wheat production is not much different from what would be considered an arid environment. Remember that in the not too distant past, North Africa was the Roman Empire's wheat belt. Many people alive today remember the dust bowl years in America's Mid West. So, it is evident that the world's most productive agricultural lands are likely to be affected the most. The experts state that farmers in these areas will have to adapt their operations to growing other crops. These are the lands in North America, Europe and elsewhere that produce the food that not only feeds the people in their respective regions, but that also keeps millions of others in warmer climates from starving each year. What crops could these farmers grow which would replace the grain that is lost? The economic impact of such a loss in grain production is miniscule in comparison to the hunger and starvation which will result if temperatures continue to increase and precipitation continues to decrease.

The so called winners are the farmers in tropical areas where the average temperature and precipitation will not change so drastically. The word average is key to the conclusion that these farmers will be winners. But, as anyone who follows the news can attest, these farmers are proving to be the first losers as the climate changes. This is due to severe climate events which are taking an ever increasing toll in land and lives in Asia, Africa and in the Americas. Global warming has spawned stronger typhoons and hurricanes in increasing numbers. And it doesn't take that kind of storm to devastate an entire population. When I first set down to put these thoughts on paper, two severe events were taking place in different parts of Africa. I am afraid that both of these events are continuing today. Thousands of people have drowned in the catastrophic floods in the South while in the North, the people of the Ethiopian highlands are facing their fifth straight year without enough rain to grow crops. Last year many thousands of people lost their farms and their lives in Central America when the rains came too hard for too long. The same thing is happening more frequently in Southern Asia where millions of people are forced to farm low lying land on river deltas.

Farmers are dependent on a relatively stable set of weather conditions in order to successfully produce crops. Fluctuations of temperature and precipitation at any time during the growing season can have a deleterious effect on production. Increased pest populations following warmer than normal winters also take a large toll on production. Besides the severe weather events already mentioned there is also damage caused by high winds and hail. All of these problems increase as the average surface temperature increases.

Decision makers are deluged by reports on the many effects of global warming on varying aspects of human activity. But, the activity that is critical to the survival of all people, both poor and rich, is not taken seriously. If it were, the world's political leaders would insure that available alternative energy technology would be implemented on a global level in order to curtail greenhouse gas production as soon as possible. The technology already exists to drastically reduce the burning of fossil fuels, but, for various economic and political reasons it is unpopular with decision makers. This is, by far, the most important aspect of any plan to reduce the production of greenhouse gasses. However, at the same time that fossil fuel burning is reduced, there also needs to be an end to slash and burn agriculture. To outlaw the practice, would condemn millions of people to starve. Instead, the immediate funding of research and implementation of sustainable farming techniques is necessary. The cropping method I have proposed or one with similar fertility and production results could be used as a starting point. But, more research needs to be done and it needs to be done soon.

Of course, I am no expert and I do not have the sanction of any scientific organization. I have no authority to back up the claims that I have made in the previous paragraphs. For the sake of the people who inhabit this tiny globe, I hope that there are scientists out there who will be willing to be viewed with derision by their collegues in order to call attention to the severity of the situation which is being brought about by the changing climate.

http://members.tripod.com/melvinlanders/index.html