Today's Quote:
"LAW III To every action there is always opposed an equal reaction." - Sir Isaac Newton
The U.S. is the world's grain bank. For now (read this from the USDA regarding wheat. Wheat is a very different product from corn in that corn is primarily an animal feed and wheat is primarily grown to feed people). The U.S. went from exporting nearly 60% of its wheat several decades ago to 20 to 30%, and really closer to 20% with a couple year coming in the top of the band (notice the quote "over the past decade, U.S. wheat exports have exceeded 30 million metric tons only twice"). Net exports must be adjusted 2.5% (as the U.S. imports some wheat) making the accurate U.S. wheat export percentage of the crop 17.5% - 27.5%.
Given U.S. population growth how much longer will the U.S. be a wheat exporter? If everything goes perfectly, with no droughts or heat waves or crop disease, somewhere between 10 and 15 years.
Corn
While the U.S. has greater flexibility in corn, that is only true if the U.S. gives up flexibility in ethanol. U.S. can increase corn exports or for use in human consumption at anytime it wishes to - the trade off is less transportation fuel. How much less? Up to nearly 1 million barrels per day. So the U.S. won't be going hungry any time soon based on food supply (not making any calculation for the fact that 40+ Billion need government assistance to buy food now) though prices could rise significantly... unless there is something else that throws a monkey wrench into the system... like a sever fuel shortage that severely impacted the trucking food distribution model.
(Corn has some other issues. As a "heavy feeders" of soil nutrients, corn cannot be grown on the same ground year after year irrespective of how much fertilizer is applied. After 3 successive years of corn on the same ground (farmers call 2 years "corn after corn" and 3 years "corn after corn after corn") the yield per acre in the 3rd year is often down by 1/3 from year 1.)
I see the problem as more of an economic threat/risk than physical threat/risk here in the U.S. Real economic growth will absolutely/positively cease at peak world population (or shortly thereafter) in my opinion. Population either grows or contracts - nothing remains constant - ergo if it isn't growing it will be contracting (and that is dynamic, with ebbs and flows like waves) and if you think economic policy has been fraught with problems and risks of late just imagine what it will be like with a sustained decline in population.
More soon.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Why should we breed what we can't feed. Do you know why we both inport and export wheat? That doesn't make sense to me although it's a pretty sure bet that economics figure in somehow.
You probably won't even notice a decline in population growth, or even a decline in world population. People just die younger, or more babies die, or people get ill because they aren't strong enough to fight diseases, or old people don't last so long....
For us in the Western countires, we have a lot to lose before people starve. Even mobile home dwellers seem to have a car and satellite! The fact is, those 40 million DO get food stamps.
American life expectancy is falling anyway, due to obesity. Makes you wonder is a food shortage will INCREASE U.S. life expectancy?!
Makes you wonder is a food shortage will INCREASE U.S. life expectancy?!
Funny that you should mention that Donal as I've wondered that myself a few times. Certainly the obesity will melt away. It's just a matter of whether the life gains from lost weight out do the other things like dirtier water, less medical care, truly inadequate food, etc.
"...Do you know why we both import
and export wheat?..."
The protein levels and test weights of the grain vary, all wheat isn't necessarily the same.
Depending on how and where it is being milled, the wheat is being blended to get the desired end product. So, the wheat is being either exported or imported based on the milling characteristics desired by the importing or exporting countries.
I would imagine the average well feed Third Worlder is healthier than the average American because our diet is corn, corn and more corn topped with sweetened condensed corn syrup with a side of growth hormone laden pork for good measure; and that’s just breakfast. However the average American is probably much healthier than the average Third Worlder because the average Third Worlder is severely malnourished.
Currently; the big danger to the developed world from malnutrition is that we get some nasty bug amongst the already weekend starving masses that are currently revolting all across the middle-east. Then a reporter, envoy, etc, hops on a plane and brings it home. Cairo to NYC takes twelve hours; Jakarta to LA takes twenty-two.
We would probably fare much better than the starving masses, as I alluded to yesterday. However, not necessarily; when The Spanish flu reduced world population by 5% it mainly took out young healthy adults. It killed by a cytokine storm where one basically drowns in their own white blood cells and a healthier body was more of a hindrance than a benefit.
Best,
Dan
From my observations, which are decades old now, I would say third world citizens suffer more from lack of long term medical care than they do from lack of food. Broken bones, dental, non-lethal but chronic fungus and other illness etc. take their toll. Malnutrition also figures in but more from a lack of an essential than a general lack of food. Of course I never saw much of Africa so perhaps things are different there abouts.
A true lack of food will work itself out in a population fast usually exploding into physical action before much time has past. They may not have much by way of variety but most areas have some abundant food source, only large cities or refugees are usually starving.
Transportation is going to be the real killer in the US. If that shuts down people will starve and most of them will be East of the Mississippi. We just do not have the local food production needed for urban areas without transportation. Regardless of how much grain we produce if you don't have more than a few days on hand and no way to transport it to where it is needed, people will starve.
Pioneer,
I reckon I should have specified that I was mainly talking about urban areas. Just look at this list of urban areas with populations >2M, some of these places are real crapholes to put it mildly. Consider that in 2007 there were 468 cities with populations >1M, how many are there today? It boggles the mind.
Moreover, Some of these metros are converging into enormous slums. “The entire stretch of coast from Abidjan eastward to Lagos—is one burgeoning megalopolis that by any rational economic and geographical standard should constitute a single sovereignty, rather than the five (the Ivory Coast, Ghana, Togo, Benin, and Nigeria) into which it is currently divided.” link
Best,
Dan
Actually all of The Coming Anarchy: How scarcity, crime, overpopulation, tribalism, and disease are rapidly destroying the social fabric of our planet is worth reading.
Best,
Dan
Dan
I wasn't disagreeing with your observation or comment in anyway. As I said my experiences are very dated and since I am a country boy born and bred I escape cities every chance I get and never really think of them as part of the land. Yes a general bias on my part I admit.
I would only comment that the slums and terrible sewage and water would be more dangerous for a bug as you mentioned than mal-nutrition in my opinion anyway. Especially within the urban areas you mention. Not that I am an expert but I do know that several European cities like 1740's London had miraculous disease free times after the slums caught fire and burned.
Actually I think our two theories are pretty much in agreement.
Pioneer,
When I saw your comment it hit me that I probably should have been more specific. Unfortunately I can write something, leave important parts out, and then it will still make perfect sense when I glance over it; because I know what I mean to say.
That is interesting about 1740’s London. Makes perfect sense too.
Best,
Dan
Dan
In reading your link of West Africa the parts about "Chicago" caught my eye talking about the creek water and unsanitary conditions there.
It reminded me of Ben Franklin's excerpts from his time in London and drinking water. apparently he commonly boiled all his water and refused to drink the local beer. He also mentioned the slums burning during that time. As it turns out he contributed those actions to his remaining sickness free.
Post a Comment