Aardvark Daily

Please visit the sponsor!

CO2 watering down our food?

The essential process of photosynthesis is fed by sunlight and CO2 in the air around us.

It's natural therefore, to assume that if CO2 levels increase (as a result of climate change), the growth rate of many species of plants will increase accordingly. Surely this must be a good thing.

Well, as with all things related to "climate disruption", the answer is "no".

Although higher CO2 levels will result in faster plant growth, that faster growth may have dramatic and very negative effects on the nutritional value of our food crops -- at least according to this BBC story

Many poorer nations rely heavily on protein-rich food crops to provide adequate nutrition yet, according to this report, staples such as wheat and rice could effectively have their protein and essential mineral contents reduced by up to 10% as soon as 2050.

Is this important?

Well I guess that this is where we're pretty much at the mercy of those who are telling the story.

While it may be true that the nutrient value of these crops will fall -- surely that will be more than compensated by the increased rate of growth. I would expect that if the rice and wheat grow more vigorously due to higher CO2 levels then there will be more of these foods available for consumption. Just eat 10% more and you'll be back to the same levels as today.

Except perhaps, that this would result in a higher calorific intake for the same levels of protein and essential minerals -- although that's hardly likely to be an issue in those countries where the populations are already malnourished and, by Western standards, "skinny as hell".

The article claims that "if you eat 5-10% more calories every day it would be a matter of months before we were morbidly obese and bumping into issues around metabolic diseases".

Yes, that may be true for those in the West, most of who are already somewhat plumper than might be best for their health -- but surely that's not going to be the case in Ethiopia, Pakistan, rural India and many other places where many are struggling to find enough calories to stay alive.

One would also expect that plants would adapt to the higher CO2 levels by turning down the photosynthesis process, so as to return to sustainable growth levels. Growth that is too rapid can make for physically weaker plants that will not stand up well to the weather extremes associated with "climate disruption". Those variants which, by simple variation of genetics, tend to grow more slowly in a high CO2 environment will therefore thrive more effectively than those which grow fast and get blown to bits by the first spring storm.

While it's important to identify and work hard to mitigate the effects of climate change, we must also be careful not to keep crying wolf and painting an ongoing picture of doom and gloom.

To speak words of caution is one thing, to drive people to despair by predicting never-ending and possibly insurmountable hurdles, dangers and threats is altogether different.

I suspect that if things continue the way they're going, we'll die of terminal depression long before climate change does us in.

Please visit the sponsor!

Have your say in the Aardvark Forums.

PERMALINK to this column

Rank This Aardvark Page

Change Font