Posted on 02/27/2013 11:49:03 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Guest Post by David Middleton
First it was wheat and now it’s coffee. What’s next? Bacon & eggs?
This is nothing but alarmist nonsense…
Researchers at the Royal Botanic Gardens in Kew and the Environment and Coffee Forest Forum in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia looked at how climate change might make some land unsuitable for Arabica plants, which are highly vulnerable to temperature change and other dangers including pests and disease.
They came up with a best-case scenario that predicts a 38 per cent reduction in land capable of yielding Arabica by 2080. The worst-case scenario puts the loss at between 90 per cent and 100 per cent.
If global climate warming change disruption is likely to wipe out such a prevalent coffee bean in a few decades, the previous few hundred years of warming should have “left a mark” on global coffee production… Right?
I downloaded the latest HadCRUT4 temperature and Mauna Loa CO2 data from Wood for Trees and global coffee bean production from FAOSTAT and it appears that coffee bean trees like warmer temperatures…
And they really like a carbon dioxide-rich diet…
The “how climate change might make some land unsuitable” model was built from the IPCC’s totally bogus emissions scenarios. The modeled scenarios A1B, A2A and B2A.
The models say that “business as usual” will lead to A1-type scenarios (turn Earth into Venus and wipe out coffee). The models say that drastic cuts in carbon emissions are required to stay in the B2-type scenario range.
The actual data indicate that the B2-type scenario is the worst case possibility if we keep “business as usual”.
Furthermore, HadCRUT4 shows absolutely no global warming since late 2000…
Now, if I take HadCRUT4 back to the beginning of 1997, I get this…
(Note: I built this graph back in November.)
Let’s look at the equation of the trend line:
y = 0.0048x – 9.2567
The key part of the equation is the number right before “x.” That’s what’s called the “slope” of the function. The slope is 0.0048 °C per year. This works out to about half-a-degree (0.5 °C) Celsius per century. For reference purposes, the IPCC “forecasted” 1.8 to 4.0 °C per century over the next 100 years, depending on their various socioeconomic scenarios. Here’s the real kicker… The IPCC “forecasted” 0.6 °C of warming over the next century in a scenario in which CO2 remains at the same level as it was in 2000. This is reminiscent of Hanson’s failed 1988 model. The IPCC forecast more warming in a steady-state CO2 world than has actually occurred since 1997.
Now let’s look at the “R²” value…
R² = 0.0334
R² is the “coefficient of determination.” It tells us how well the trend line fits the data. An R² of 1.0 would be a perfect fit. An R² of 0.0 would be no fit. 0.0334 is a lot closer to 0.0 than it is to 1.0. R² is related to explained variance. The linear trend line “explains” about 3.3% of the variation in the temperature data since 1997. 96.7% of the variation was due to natural climatic oscillations (quasi-periodic fluctuations, if you prefer) and stochastic variability.
The scenarios in which coffee beans *might* be threatened, “forecasted” 1.8 to 4.0 °C of warming in the 21st century based on “business as usual” carbon emissions. The actual warming since 1998 has been less than the scenario in which atmospheric CO2 levels stopped rising at the beginning of this century.
Data Sources:
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, FAO Statistics Division. Coffee bean data downloaded on Feb. 27, 2013.
Hadley Centre. HadCRUT4 tropical temperature data downloaded on February 27, 2013 from Wood for Trees.
NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory. Mauna Loa CO2 data downloaded on February 27, 2013 from Wood for Trees.
fyi
lol
Global warming stopped 16 years ago, reveals Met Office report quietly released... and here is the chart to prove it
ROTFLOLOLOLOL.
Like almost all plants I will assume that the coffee plant is many hundreds of millions of years old and has lived through many epochs of far warmer global temps than the in present.
The “analysis” also completely disregards the likelihood that coffee growing will become economical in areas where it is not currently. Rather than becoming “extinct” (roughtly 0.0% probability) coffee would likely entend its range further north.
I can’t wait to get an nice cup of Green Mountain Coffee, that’s actually grown in the Green Mountains. About the only thing they grow there now is smelly hippies.
no bootleg poultry product for me , I want my eggs laid the same week or two at least.. Thank you. I eat more eggs when I cruise than at home, go figure. I don’t have to cook them. lol We sail late May for Alaska. yummmy. and bacon is sacrosanct. do not disrupt the pork flow or there will be complaints. :-)
Where doomed. Coffee gone.
Maybe I could do that in the Mojave....
and Coffee to...we have some high altitude areas....up near the Sierras would be nice.
I am concerned,...when coffee goes it will be my time to depart...I depend on ir.
If I make it to 2080, lack of coffee will be the least of my worries!
Trampling on People, Environment and Ethics
Global Warming on Free Republic
Trampling on People, Environment and Ethics
Global Warming on Free Republic
Exactly. Juan Valdez would just have to go a little higher in the mountains to harvest the coffee beans.
Kinda like when yet another bond measure is on the ballot and if it doesn't pass, somehow the stuff on the chopping block is always the stuff the people don't want to see cut. Charlatans. Oxygen thieves.
Yeah, except Juan is a Democrat so he doesn't want to do anything that reveals globull worming to be a hoax, plus he's union, and work rules prohibit him from climbing any higher because he wouldn't have time to make it back to the bottom before end of shift.
Damn! Now, we 70 year olds have something else to worry about!
Might need to invest in a much larger freezer.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.