African food-stress and climate change

A short article yesterday in Mail & Guardian Africa states that the current food-stress in a few districts in Africa are not caused by the global warming effect

“There is a myth in circulation which says that hunger in Africa is a climate phenomenon. It is really a myth, nothing else. Hunger, especially on the Horn of Africa, is man-made.”

I’m reminded of another report I read a while back. Its author stated that they frequently encountered African children being educated by westerners to “see” dangerous global warming everywhere around them, but that what the children were actually doing was attributing all sorts of perfectly normal natural rural phenomena to “climate change”.

Ice creamed

We’ve all seen headlines along the lines of: “Methane Hydrate Breakdown in the Arctic permafrost = Massive Global Super-warming!” Erm, nope. The panic is over about every eco-worrier’s favourite ice-gas, according to the USGS. It seems that Matt Ridley has another failed eco-scare to add to his growing list…

“Our review is the culmination of nearly a decade of original research by the USGS, my co-author Professor John Kessler at the University of Rochester, and many other groups in the community,” said USGS geophysicist Carolyn Ruppel, who is the paper’s lead author and oversees the USGS Gas Hydrates Project. “After so many years spent determining where gas hydrates are breaking down and measuring methane flux at the sea-air interface, we suggest that conclusive evidence for release of hydrate-related methane to the atmosphere is lacking.”

Virginia Burkett, USGS Associate Director for Climate and Land Use Change, noted, ” […] The authors’ sober, data-driven analyses and conclusions challenge the popular perception that warming climate will lead to a catastrophic release of methane to the atmosphere as a result of gas hydrate breakdown.”


Gallup-ing toward books

A new Gallup survey finds “Rumors of the Demise of Books Greatly Exaggerated”

“book reading is a classic tradition that has remained a constant in a faster-paced world, especially in comparison to the slump of other printed media such as newspapers and magazines.”

Just bear in mind that it’s a public poll, albeit by the industry-leading Gallup, and is thus inherently untrustworthy — given what we now know about the lack of reach and various unavoidable flaws that such traditional polling methods have.

Evidently there’s been no wholesale switch to audio books, interestingly…

“only 6% mostly experienced books in audio form”

It would have been interesting to see a breakdown of actual book titles that were polled, set against each demographic.

Incidentally there’s no RSS news feed(s) displayed by the Gallup website. Instead one is expected to sign up to one of those infernal email mailing-lists. But I’ve been able to dig out their main feeds, and they function fine:

Is Africa about to see mass starvation again? Not on present trends.

According to a new end-of-year FAO report “Crop Prospects and Food Situation”

“Global cereal production in 2016 received a further boost, owing to generally favourable growing conditions for the crops harvested later in the season.”

That’s great, and adds to boosts from a host of other factors. Obviously the FAO can’t commit climate heresy by saying so, but you have to suspect this may be a result of the positive effects of global warming and the global greening that arises from it.

There are some interesting insights into Africa in the report, and unlike most international reports the figures are sound. Since the agricultural inputs and outputs are hard for corrupt regional statistics-fiddlers to manipulate, unlike many educational and development aid outcomes, or things like wildlife counts.

There’s one especially positive set of statistics. In the west many people will casually assume that Western Africa and the Sahel nations are mostly desert. But now these nations are…

“about to achieve record production of cereals” in 2017 and rice is also doing well… “growing conditions have also proven conducive across Northern Hemisphere Africa, where the rice output is seen at a fresh peak of 19.8 million tonnes”

While back in the European Union, curiously…

“Significant production declines are estimated in the European Union, with the wheat output falling by 16.5 million tonnes on a yearly basis”.

The trade journal AgriMoney attributes this trend to urbanisation and afforestation of the countryside, and it affects many other crops such as potatoes. According to this trade journal…

“the downward trend in EU crop area [increases] as towns and forests expand, a decline which stretches back to the 1990s.”

The decline may also be something to do with the ageing and declining demographics of the continent, I’d guess? Old people tend to eat less, in aggregate. This rather startling comparison between the EU and the Sahel evokes the surreal image of a future starving elderly Italian pensioner opening their Christmas food aid parcel, to find it stamped: “From the people of Mali”.

But seriously, the FOA report of course reveals hotspots of food stress in the southern hemisphere part of Africa. These are almost all due to the expected local areas of El Nino‑induced drought, but sometimes to socialist politics or some vicious (usually religious) insurgency. Though it can’t be long now before some journalists start lazily eliding the droughts with global warming.

The FAO’s report suggests that the main serious problem areas for 2017 are:

* Malawi where the corn crops failed repeatedly, and where 6.5 million people sound like they could use some regular subsidised corn supplies as food aid in 2017;

* The basket-case nation of Zimbabwe will likely see even more hardship in 2017, with the FOA saying the nation’s dire politics and the 2016 drought will place a biggest-ever 4.07 million people at risk due to severe food shortages. The FAO talks ominously of “large declines” in its cereal production.

* Localised droughts in the far south of the island of Madagascar “have resulted” [in] “up to 850,000 people requiring emergency assistance”, though the rice production there actually increased. It seems unclear if food aid is still needed, or if the local government can keep handling it.

* There is even western media talk of possible problems in a couple of war-torn and inaccessible towns of relatively prosperous Nigeria, following some recently NGO press releases. But the government there rejects the tin-rattling rhetoric being used: “Nigeria accuses aid groups of exaggerating hunger crisis”, stating that…

“aid agencies had been attempting “to whip up a non-existent fear of mass starvation.”

…in order to bring in funds at Christmas. Food prices are high at present in Nigeria due to some exporting, but the Nigerian government’s complaint is clearly supported by the above FOA report which states that…

“above‑average cereal harvests are expected [for 2017] in most coastal countries including Nigeria where the aggregate cereal output is forecast to remain close to last year’s above‑average level.”

* The Horn of Africa is generally stressed, and major food aid may be needed in the spring in some war-torn parts of it such as parts of Sudan and Somalia, but The World Bank is saying of places such as Ethiopia that…

“Economic growth remained at a respectable 8% in 2015/16, which is impressive especially compared to previous drought situations … said Carolyn Turk, World Bank Country Director for Ethiopia, Sudan and South Sudan.” … “growth momentum will still remain and since 2016 rains arrived as expected, the recent drought will not likely affect Ethiopia’s medium-term economic growth.” (my emphasis)

Overall, the central and southern parts of Africa appear to have coped relatively well with the El Nino‑induced droughts, the worst in several decades, which have in places provided a bitter ‘stress test’ of Africa’s continuing development and growth. From my reading of the FOA report it seems that, with some relatively modest and targeted food aid in early 2017, the dozen or so very real hardship spots in Africa should pull through without mass starvation. None of these hotspots have arisen due to global warming.

The largest ongoing real risk in 2017 appears to me to be a Venezuela-style systemic collapse in Zimbabwe, and a few conflict zones.

There are reasons for optimism, beyond the next few months. Africa’s weather and rains in the south should be back to normal in 2017, and there are now plans and money on the table to try to make future African droughts even more survivable. Such as:

* grain marketing boards made to work in such a way that everyone can see exactly where any corruption or price-fixing is.

* better management of water access, better access to Africa’s huge river systems for generally increased water supply.

* better long-term weather forecasting of drought, and seed distribution systems that enable small farmers to switch crops quickly in response.

* better access to market prices and trends, via a farmer’s mobile phone, encouraging the sort of businesses literacy that will make swopping to drought-resistant crops easier.

* free or very cheap school meals.

* large national grain reserves (such as those held by Morocco and Zambia).

* reserve government funds, held in corruption-free escrow in dollars — for quickly buying and shipping emergency grain to short-term food not-spots and refugee camps. Such as that currently being deployed by Kenya to help people hit by drought.

* better roads for quick transportation of aid, which will also offer more efficient transport of crops to market.

* drought-resistant and GMO crops.

* simply bringing more land under the plough, as Africa’s population grows and young workers are available, thus boosting overall local production.

* increased open access to global markets, such as the UK after Brexit, opening up the possibility of having rows of high-value crop types growing alongside staple crops.

* cutting bio-fuels production, through which the West diverts a significant part of its field crops to make motor fuel. A reduction in bio-fuels would generally decrease global food prices.

Talking sense on “fake news”

It appears that the political left has decided that “fake news” is a big fat scapegoat that they can saddle up, then spur the hairy beast into a final götterdämmerung battle-ride against the Trump-Hitler. Thankfully there are a few highly informed people talking sense on the matter of “fake news”, albeit while being drowned out by the ongoing hysteria. Here are three such…

Backchannel: According to Snopes, Fake News Is Not the Problem

“Take it from the Internet’s chief myth busters: The problem is the failing media.”

The American Interest: “Fake News” Is the New “Bregret”.

The Register: The Facebook ‘Fake News’ Moral Panic. Just a second…

National Review: Buzzfeed’s ‘Fake News’ Study – Methodology Questioned

M&G: The surprising origins of ‘post-truth’ – and how it was spawned by the liberal left

I would add that the ‘fake news’ panic is a typical leftist tactical manoeuvre, in which they spot a real emerging concern — then latch onto it in order to project their own failings onto their political enemies. In this case, such a manoeuvre serves to deflect scrutiny of the outright lies and shifting half-truths that the far-left have been experts at purveying since the 1930s.

Incidentally, I see that one of the several “block ‘fake news’ posts from Facebook” add-ons, for Web browsers, uses an obviously biased URL list. The blocklist gives a free pass to sites like Russia Today (RT) and the Huffington Post, while blocking politically mainstream-right news aggregators like Independent Journal Review, Breitbart and Drudge. One may not like the megaphone tendencies of such news sites, but so far as I can tell they are no more likely to link to satire stories than Google News is. Once the partisanship of this sort of block list gets exposed in the media, expect the left to turn around and psychologically ‘project’ — probably by trying to claim that it’s ‘actually right-wing sites that are shills for Putin’.

I’ve been thinking a bit about the need for personal news filters recently, in terms of toning down the mainstream media’s relentless focus on disaster, crime, trivial/celebrity, staged and ‘feigned taking-offence’ news. Such filters are needed, if only to hack through the jungle and get to the important news and analysis. I’m still formulating ideas on such, and am not yet really for a post on the matter. But I think that one of the key things we can all do is to ask news sites to offer RSS feeds, which at least keeps the whole news ecosystem loose and flowing easily. This whole “sign up to our private mailing-list” thing, while not offering a public RSS news-feed, is vile. Thankfully there are services run for free by various beneficent WebGods. Such as Five Filters which lets you get an RSS feed from any site. And Feed2JS which lets you easily plug that feed into your blog sidebar or homepage.