Climate change threatens world food supply. How bad could it be in the U.S.?
It's especially worrisome in the United States, where top crop production could drop by as much as 50% by 2100.
The planet's food system faces growing risks from climate change, a new study says. It's especially worrisome in the United States, where top crop production could drop by as much as 50% by 2100.
The study, published June 18, assessed six staple crops – maize (corn), soybeans, rice, wheat, cassava and sorghum – and found that only rice might avoid substantial losses from rising temperatures.
'If the climate warms by 3 degrees, that's basically like everyone on the planet giving up breakfast," study co-author Solomon Hsiang of Stanford University said in a statement.
Will there still be a Corn Belt?
The projected losses for U.S. agriculture are especially steep, according to the study. 'Places in the Midwest that are really well suited for present-day corn and soybean production just get hammered under a high warming future,' said lead study author Andrew Hultgren of the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. 'You do start to wonder if the Corn Belt is going to be the Corn Belt in the future.'
Scientists estimated that for every 1.8-degree Fahrenheit increase in temperature above pre-industrial levels, production will decline by 120 calories per person per day, the equivalent of 4.4% of today's daily consumption.
That will push up prices and make it harder for people to access food, Hsiang told CNN.
Wheat, soy and corn most affected
Wheat and corn will be among the crops most at risk, the study found.
The study suggested that under a high-emissions scenario, by the end of the century, maize production could decline by up to 40% in the United States, Eastern China, Central Asia, Southern Africa and the Middle East. Wheat loses could range from 15% to 25% in Europe, Africa and South America and 30% to 40% in China, Russia, the United States and Canada.
'This is basically like sending our agricultural profits overseas," Hsiang said in a statement from Stanford. "We will be sending benefits to producers in Canada, Russia, China. Those are the winners, and we in the U.S. are the losers. The longer we wait to reduce emissions, the more money we lose.'
Data center: Hot, hotter, hottest: How much will climate change warm your county?
Steepest losses at the extremes
The steepest losses occur at the extremes of the agricultural economy, according to a statement from Stanford University. That includes modern breadbaskets that now enjoy some of the world's best growing conditions, such as the United States, and subsistence farming communities that rely on small harvests of cassava.
In terms of food production capacity from staple crops, the analysis found yield losses may average 41% in the wealthiest regions and 28% in the lowest-income regions by 2100.
In the study, scientists concluded further adaptation and the expansion of cropland may be needed to ensure food security and limit the effects of climate change.
A favorable climate, Hsiang said, is a big part of what keeps farmland productive across generations. 'Farmers know how to maintain the soil, invest in infrastructure, repair the barn,' Hsiang said. 'But if you're letting the climate depreciate, the rest of it is a waste. The land you leave to your kids will be good for something, but not for farming.'
The study was published in the peer-reviewed British journal Nature.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
10 hours ago
- Yahoo
Researchers warn of catastrophic consequences from rapidly intensifying threat: 'As a species, we have never confronted anything like this'
Sustained higher-than-average temperatures and warming seas are projected to severely disrupt agriculture, CNN reports, and scientists are concerned about how to "ensure future food security" in a changing climate. Americans born today could "live in a world where the U.S. can only produce half as much of its key food crops," CNN's recent headline read. The ensuing reporting focused on a groundbreaking study recently published in Nature — one of the most widely cited scientific journals globally — and the outlet described its findings as "stark." Study authors examined the impacts of rising temperatures through a universally understood and relevant lens: the global food supply. Put plainly, the researchers' calculations were grim: Every 1°C (1.8°F) increase in average global temperatures will result in a worldwide reduction in food production equivalent to 120 fewer calories per person, per day. Study author Solomon Hsiang of the Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability broke it down further when discussing their findings. "If the climate warms by 3 degrees, that's basically like everyone on the planet giving up breakfast," Hsiang warned. It's well-documented that climate-related matters are routinely and misleadingly cast in doubt, framed as a matter of belief rather than settled science. Not everybody lives in a region routinely walloped by extreme weather — such as wildfires or increased coastal flooding — and the issue can seem abstract, localized elsewhere, or more of a problem for the distant future. However, food is a great equalizer, something all humans require to survive — farmers have long been ringing the alarm about the impacts of unpredictable weather and temperatures on crop yields. Professor and food policy expert Tim Lang told CNN that adaptations to fortify the global food supply are halting and insufficient. "The data pile up. The politicians turn a blind eye … Land use is not altering fast or radically enough," he lamented, addressing the speed at which agriculture is adapting to changes in the climate. Do you worry about how much food you throw away? Definitely Sometimes Not really Never Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. "This is a major problem. It's incredibly expensive. As a species, we have never confronted anything like this." Experts reiterated that "adaptation" and "mitigation" were critical steps to safeguard crops in an increasingly unpredictable climate, one in which the United States could lose half its crop yields. Growing your own food is one approach to guard against food supply instability at a personal level, whereas donating to climate-related causes is a good way to make a broader impact. Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
The Hill
a day ago
- The Hill
Heat dome passes, but climate-fueled waves aren't going anywhere
Climate change is making heat waves like the one that lingered over much of the U.S. this week more frequent and intense. The Eastern U.S. sweltered under a heat dome in recent days, with some cities surpassing 100 degrees Fahrenheit. Roads in Delaware, Wisconsin and Missouri buckled, while a Virginia bridge malfunctioned and dozens of people in places including Washington D.C. and North Carolina were reportedly hospitalized. In New Jersey, some 100 people were treated after attending outdoor graduation ceremonies in the extreme heat. And while summer is always hot, man-made climate change is worsening the problem. Temperatures in parts of the country are set to soar again this coming week. Megan Kirchmeier-Young, a research scientist at Environment and Climate Change Canada, told The Hill that as the planet warms up in a broader sense, extreme heat events become more likely. 'Warming, from human-caused climate change, means more days when we exceed particular temperature thresholds. Across most of the globe, hot extremes are becoming hotter and occurring more often. And we expect these trends to continue with continued global warming,' Kirchmeier-Young said in an email. 'While we do not yet have results for this week's event, Environment and Climate Change Canada's rapid event attribution system analyzed many heat waves from last summer and found that all were more likely to occur because of human-caused climate change,' she added. And not only is the entire planet warming, the Arctic is warming even faster. Because of this, said Jonathan Overpeck, dean of the School for Environment and Sustainability at the University of Michigan, the jet stream slows down and becomes curvier. 'This is where you start to get these high-pressure domes that just sit in one place longer,' he said, adding that 'these very hot events are becoming more frequent because of that; they concentrate the heat in one large region.' Michael Mann, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania's earth and environmental science department, said in an email that the heat domes being experienced by the U.S and Europe 'show that this was part of a very large-scale pattern, associated with a very 'wiggly' jet stream where the 'wiggles' stay in place for days on end.' 'It's really a double whammy, the basic effect of warming the planet, plus how the pattern of warming is changing the jet stream, giving us those stuck, weather extremes, like the heat domes,' Mann said. He's one of the authors of a paper published earlier this year that found that there has been a 'threefold increase' in such events over the last 70 years, which has been 'closely tied to amplified Arctic warming.' 'You're potentially looking at that trend simply continuing on toward quadrupling, etc., as long as we continue to warm the planet with carbon emissions,' Mann told The Hill. Kirchmeier-Young provided a different perspective, saying there's some uncertainty in how weather patterns are changing. 'The main factor for increases in the intensity and frequency of hot extremes is increasing temperatures. While specific weather patterns are important for the occurrence of any particular heat wave event, if/how these weather patterns might be changing is much more uncertain,' she said. But it's not just the heat that causes misery during a heat wave, it can also be the humidity — something that Overpeck also said is being exacerbated by climate change. 'The atmosphere, because it's warmer, it holds more moisture. And it's that combination of the higher humidity, the water in the atmosphere and the heat that really makes it bad,' he said. The world's average global temperature has already risen 1.36 degrees Celsius, or about 2.4 degrees Fahrenheit, when compared to preindustrial times, primarily due to manmade activity such as the burning of fossil fuels. But this is just a global average, and what people experience may be significantly hotter than just a few degrees. 'We still have warmer days and cooler days, but we are shifting the baseline, so the warmer days are even hotter than they used to be,' said Kirchmeier-Young. 'It will not take much warming in the global temperature to see notable changes in extremes at the regional scale.' 'The average temperature of the planet is hard to feel, but for comparison, if we cooled the planet by four to five degrees C, we'd have an ice age, and that would be a totally different planet,' said Overpeck. The heat wave came as the Trump administration is rolling back regulations meant to mitigate climate change — and as Congress prepares to repeal climate-friendly policies and incentives as part of Republicans' 'big, beautiful bill.' 'This heat wave that we're just coming out of is a great example of we're going to see more of getting even hotter and longer if we don't slow down our use and stop our use of fossil fuels and replace fossil fuels with … clean, low-carbon energy,' Overpeck said.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
A scientific breakthrough researchers call ‘magic' could transform treatment for a leading cause of death
For all of the advancement in treating stroke victims over the past couple of decades, some concerns have remained almost constant. In medicine, we like to say that 'time is brain,' meaning that every moment a stroke goes untreated, the potential for long-term brain damage or death escalates. In fact, every minute that the brain goes without blood flow, the average patient loses around 1.9 million neurons and about a week of independent life, experts say. As the vast majority of strokes are ischemic, with a blood clot blocking the flow of oxygen to the brain, clearing that clot swiftly is critical. This is true whether the clot is small or large and regardless of its density—but reliably removing the densest clots via mechanical means has proved an elusive task. Though these concerns, time and density, are not necessarily linked, both matter—one reason, researchers suggest, that a newly developed technology from Stanford University holds the potential to reshape how stroke patients are treated. The device, called a milli-spinner, is a tiny, powerfully rotating hollow tube outfitted with fins and slits. In action, both lab and swine tests demonstrate the ability to dramatically compact and shrink the size of blood clots, making it easier to remove them quickly and effectively—often on the first try. 'This has the potential to be a game changer,' says Greg Albers, director of the Stanford University Stroke Center and a longtime expert in the field. 'The results are likely to translate well to clinical trials.' Mechanical thrombectomy is a minimally invasive procedure by which blood clots are removed. Existing thrombectomy methods, which involve aspirating clots via a catheter or trying to grab and remove them through a stent, are not designed primarily to reduce the size of blood clots. The milli-spinner appears to do so almost routinely—and very quickly, sometimes in a matter of seconds. In a paper published June 4 in the scientific journal Nature, the milli-spinner boasted some audacious early numbers. In flow model tests and swine experiments, the thrombectomy device, inserted via a catheter, demonstrated the capacity to shrink clots by up to 95%. 'For most cases, we were more than doubling the efficacy of current technology' in terms of opening the artery, says Dr. Jeremy Heit, MD, PhD, chief of neuroimaging and neuro-intervention at Stanford and coauthor of the study. Placed close to a clot, the milli-spinner exerts both compression and shear forces to release red blood cells from the sometimes-dense fibrin that has bound it in a clump—a somewhat unexpected development when it was first observed in the lab, says Renee Zhao, the Stanford engineer who designed the milli-spinner and was lead author of the Nature study. 'It was magic to us, because even after we saw the phenomena, it was not very straightforward to directly figure out the working mechanism,' Zhao tells Fortune. A fibrin core remains tightly bound around the milli-spinner, but it is now dramatically smaller than before, and easily removable. (Imagine placing some cotton candy in your hand and then closing your fist tight.) 'What's crazy is, it works in seconds—it literally will spin this thing into a tiny clot and just suck it into the catheter in seconds,' says Heit. 'It's incredibly fast.' Much work remains, the researchers say, including full-scale human trials. But if the results are even close to what's been achieved in the lab and swine work, the device could alter the treatment path for an all-too-common, all-too-serious medical issue. Strokes are the fifth-leading cause of death in the U.S., with about 160,000 deaths a year among the nearly 800,000 cases diagnosed annually. Roughly nine in 10 strokes are ischemic, or clot-related. Patients with ischemic strokes are often treated with clot-busting drugs like tPA or thrombectomy (sometimes both), but the mechanical techniques still encounter failures. In some cases, a clot is simply too large to be extracted by a stent or aspiration device, or it may be too firmly adhered to a vessel wall. In others, because clots are crumbly, small bits may break off during the retrieval attempt. The blood flow can take them further into the brain, potentially making the size of a stroke bigger or causing a new deficit, says Heit. 'Both aspiration and stent retrievers have a high risk of generating fragmentation,' Zhao says. 'The milli-spinner actually prevents it from happening,' at least in the lab. Current thrombectomy devices successfully remove clots less than 50% of the time on the first try, and in about 15% of cases they fail altogether, experts say. It's important because people in whom the blockage is removed on the first attempt with thrombectomy have better clinical outcomes than those who require multiple passes. 'The outcomes are much better than if it takes you two, three, four tries to get everything open,' says Maresh Jayaraman, chair of diagnostic imaging at Brown University. 'Obviously, we need to know that (the milli-spinner) can be safe and effective in humans. If it is, it has the potential to dramatically revolutionize how we think about removing blood clots from the brain.' Zhao says she and her colleagues weren't actually trying to solve this issue, at least not initially. Rather, the engineer had been working on millirobots—tiny, origami-based spinning devices capable of swimming untethered through the bloodstream. Propelled by an external magnetic field, the millirobots, which are still in development, may be able to deliver medicine to targeted regions in the body, perform diagnostic tasks, or perhaps one day even carry instruments or cameras. The spinning millirobots generate 'a highly localized, very strong suction,' says Zhao. 'We were thinking, okay, can we use that suction to suck a clot? It was just extremely simple—I mean, a very straightforward way of thinking.' In the cerebral artery flow model in the lab, Heit says, the milli-spinner was 100% effective at removing clots in more than 500 attempts. In pigs, the device restored at least half of blood flow to blocked blood vessels 90.3% of the time on the first try, nearly twice the average achieved by aspiration. And it was nearly fourfold better at completely opening the artery for the toughest clots. 'I expect (the device) to be a sea-change in technology for the treatment of acute ischemic stroke patients,' Heit says. 'If blood clots are removed at the high success rates in humans as they are in our experiments, which we expect to be the case, the milli-spinner will save tens of thousands of lives or more, and substantially reduce disability in treated patients.' Human clinical trials are the next step. Areas to watch, says Arthur Adam, a neurosurgeon and stroke expert at University of Tennessee Health Sciences Center, include how human brain tissue is affected by the new thrombectomy method, and how the cells and debris behave once they're liberated from the fibrin by the milli-spinner. 'Human trials are essential, and they sometimes show very different results than what we see in early results,' says Adam. Still, the development appears promising. 'It is a very exciting new device, with great potential,' says Colin Derdeyn, chair of radiology and medical imaging at the University of Virginia School of Medicine. 'If it performs in people as well as it does in these models, it will improve recanalization rates—how frequently we are able to open a blocked artery in the brain, heart, or lung. This will lead to better outcomes in patients with stroke, heart attack and pulmonary embolism.' It may also represent only the front end of the technology. Zhao and her colleagues think the untethered, robotic version of the milli-spinner will be able to swim directly inside blood vessels to treat blood clots, brain aneurysms, kidney stones, and other conditions. In the meantime, the team has formed a company in California to proceed with clinical trials on the milli-spinner. 'Considering the growing patient pool and this very promising technology, I think we can potentially save a lot of patients' lives,' Zhao says. 'We want to see this technology in humans—and the sooner, the better.' This story was originally featured on
