首页> 外文期刊>Environmental Research Letters >Climate change, biofuels, and global food security
【24h】

Climate change, biofuels, and global food security

机译:气候变化,生物燃料和全球粮食安全

获取原文
           

摘要

There is a new urgency to improve the accuracy of predicting climate change impact on crop yields because the balance between food supply and demand is shifting abruptly from surplus to deficit. This reversal is being driven by a rapid rise in petroleum prices and, in response, a massive global expansion of biofuel production from maize, oilseed, and sugar crops. Soon the price of these commodities will be determined by their value as feedstock for biofuel rather than their importance as human food or livestock feed [1]. The expectation that petroleum prices will remain high and supportive government policies in several major crop producing countries are providing strong momentum for continued expansion of biofuel production capacity and the associated pressures on global food supply. Farmers in countries that account for a majority of the world's biofuel crop production will enjoy the promise of markedly higher commodity prices and incomesNote1. In contrast, urban and rural poor in food-importing countries will pay much higher prices for basic food staples and there will be less grain available for humanitarian aid. For example, the developing countries of Africa import about 10 MMt of maize each year; another 3–5 MMt of cereal grains are provided as humanitarian aid (figure 1). In a world where more than 800 million are already undernourished and the demand for crop commodities may soon exceed supply, alleviating hunger will no longer be solely a matter of poverty alleviation and more equitable food distribution, which has been the situation for the past thirty years. Instead, food security will also depend on accelerating the rate of gain in crop yields and food production capacity at both local and global scales. Figure 1. Maize imports (yellow bar) and cereal donations as humanitarian aid to the developing countries of Africa, 2001–2003. MMT = million metric tons. Data source: faostat.fao.org/site/395/default.aspx. Given this situation, the question of whether global climate change will have a net positive, negative, or negligible impact on crop yields takes on a larger significance because additional hundreds of millions of people could be at risk of hunger and the window of opportunity for mounting an effective response is closing. To answer this question, Lobell and Field use an innovative empirical/geostatistical approach to estimate the impact of increased temperature since 1980 on crop yields—a period when global mean temperature increased ~0.4 °C [2]. For three major crops—maize, wheat, and barley—there was a significant negative response to increased temperature. For all six crops evaluated (also including rice, soybean, and sorghum), the net impact of climate trends on yield since 1980 was negative. While the approach used by Lobell and Field can be questioned on several pointsNote2, the body of their work represents an ambitious global assessment of recent climate impact on crop yields. Most noteworthy is their conclusion that: the combined effects of increased atmospheric CO2 concentration and climate trends have largely cancelled each other over the past two decades. They contrast their finding with the conclusion of the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that CO2 benefits will exceed temperature-related yield reductions up to a 2 °C increase in mean temperature [3]. It should be noted, however, that the IPCC is coming out with a new assessment to be released in April 2007 (www.ipcc.ch/), and it remains to be seen if this conclusion still holds. The purpose here is not to support or challenge the conclusions of either Lobell and Field or the IPCC, but rather to highlight the fact that there are substantive differences between results obtained from geostatistical assessments based on recent climate trends and actual crop yields versus assessments based on results from controlled experiments in growth chambers, greenhouses, and field enclosures and crop modeling. And while there appears to be good agre
机译:由于粮食供求之间的平衡突然从过剩变为短缺,因此迫切需要提高气候变化对作物产量影响的预测准确性。石油价格的迅速上涨以及作为回应的是,玉米,油料籽和糖料作物在全球范围内大规模扩大了生物燃料生产,从而推动了这种逆转。这些商品的价格很快将取决于其作为生物燃料原料的价值,而不是其作为人类食品或牲畜饲料的重要性[1]。人们对石油价格将保持高位的预期以及几个主要农作物生产国的政府扶持政策为继续扩大生物燃料生产能力以及全球粮食供应的相关压力提供了强大的动力。在占世界生物燃料作物产量大部分的国家中,农民将享有商品价格和收入显着提高的希望。注1。相反,粮食进口国的城市和农村贫困人口将为基本粮食主粮支付更高的价格,而可用于人道主义援助的粮食将减少。例如,非洲的发展中国家每年进口约10 MMt的玉米。另外提供了3-5吨谷物作为人道主义援助(图1)。在世界上已经营养不足,农作物商品的需求可能很快将超过供应的世界上,减轻饥饿不再仅仅是减轻贫困和更加公平的粮食分配问题,这是过去三十年来的情况。 。相反,粮食安全也将取决于在地方和全球范围内加快作物产量和粮食生产能力的增长速度。图1.玉米进口(黄条)和谷物捐赠作为对非洲发展中国家的人道主义援助,2001-2003年。 MMT =百万公吨。数据源:faostat.fao.org/site/395/default.aspx。在这种情况下,全球气候变化将对作物单产产生正面,负面还是可忽略的净影响的问题具有更大的意义,因为另外亿万人民可能面临饥饿的风险,而饥饿的机会也越来越大有效的回应即将结束。为了回答这个问题,Lobell and Field使用一种创新的经验/地统计方法来估算1980年以来温度升高对农作物产量的影响,而全球平均温度升高的时间约为0.4°C [2]。对于三种主要农作物-玉米,小麦和大麦-对温度升高有明显的负面反应。自1980年以来,对于所有六种评估作物(还包括水稻,大豆和高粱),气候趋势对单产的净影响为负。尽管Lobell和Field所采用的方法可能在几个方面受到质疑注2,但它们的工作内容代表着对近期气候对作物单产影响的雄心勃勃的全球评估。最值得注意的结论是:在过去的二十年中,大气中CO2浓度增加和气候趋势的综合影响已相互抵消。他们将其发现与国际气候变化专门委员会(IPCC)得出的结论形成鲜明对比,即二氧化碳的益处将超过与温度相关的产量降低,直至平均温度提高2°C [3]。但是,应该指出的是,IPCC即将发布一项新的评估报告,该评估报告将于2007年4月发布(www.ipcc.ch/),这一结论是否仍然成立还有待观察。这里的目的不是要支持或挑战Lobell and Field或IPCC的结论,而是要强调一个事实,即基于最近气候趋势和实际农作物产量的地统计评估结果与基于在生长室,温室,田间围栏和作物模型中进行的受控实验得出的结果。虽然似乎有很好的协议

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号