Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Earth

Record-Breaking Heat Wave In India Threatens Residents, Crucial Wheat Harvest (nbcnews.com) 90

A record-breaking heat wave in India exposing hundreds of millions to dangerous temperatures is damaging the country's wheat harvest, which experts say could hit countries seeking to make up imports of the food staple from conflict-riven Ukraine. NBC News reports: With some states in India's breadbasket northern and central regions seeing forecasts with highs of 120 Fahrenheit this week, observers fear a range of lasting impacts, both local and international, from the hot spell. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi told U.S. President Joe Biden earlier this month that India could step in to ease the shortfall created by Russia's invasion of Ukraine. The two countries account for nearly a third of all global wheat exports, and the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization has warned that the conflict could leave an additional 8 million to 13 million people undernourished by next year.

India's wheat exports hit 8.7 million tons in the fiscal year ending in March, with the government predicting record production levels -- some 122 million tons -- in 2022. But the country has just endured its hottest March since records began, according to the India Meteorological Department, and the heat wave is dragging well into harvest time. The heat wave is hitting India's main wheat-growing regions particularly hard, with temperatures this week set to hit 112 F in Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh; 120 F in Chandigarh, Punjab; and 109 F in Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh. Devendra Singh Chauhan, a farmer from Uttar Pradesh's Etawah district, told NBC News that his wheat crop was down 60 percent compared to normal harvests.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Record-Breaking Heat Wave In India Threatens Residents, Crucial Wheat Harvest

Comments Filter:
  • It can't be 120 F there! Global warming doesn't exist! Fake news! /obvious sarcasm

    • Maybe its time for them to cover all the fields with solar to protect the wheat from extreme heat stroke and get double the money for each field
  • by Anonymous Coward

    a farmer from Uttar Pradesh's Etawah district, told NBC News that his wheat crop was down 60 percent compared to normal harvests.

    And yet no one will make the obvious, common sense decision to stop exporting wheat.

    • by ShanghaiBill ( 739463 ) on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @12:25AM (#62483024)

      And yet no one will make the obvious, common sense decision to stop exporting wheat.

      Export bans on agricultural commodities are a way to force poor rural people to subsidize wealthier urban people.

      Farmers should receive a fair market price for their products. If that means exporting wheat, then so be it. The money earned from wheat exports can buy food unaffected by the war and in plentiful supply, such as rice.

      • Farmers should receive a fair market price for their products. If that means exporting wheat, then so be it. The money earned from wheat exports can buy food unaffected by the war and in plentiful supply, such as rice.

        Yes, let them eat sticky rice cakes. Seriously, farmers don't necessarily benefit from exports, if there are intermediaries that buy low and sell high. I think this is common knowledge, this being one of the reason why we have these so-called "ethical" or "fair" food product lines, the implication being that other brands come from sources where the farmers don't receive their fair share.

        • Yes, let them eat sticky rice cakes.

          Indians grow and eat long grain rice, which isn't sticky.

          farmers don't necessarily benefit from exports

          Not always, but if you produce X, you will usually benefit from more people buying X.

          • Yes, let them eat sticky rice cakes.

            Indians grow and eat long grain rice, which isn't sticky.

            Right. I blendered my South and East Asian cuisine.

            farmers don't necessarily benefit from exports

            Not always, but if you produce X, you will usually benefit from more people buying X.

            But there's also that gold rush tendency for especially profitable cash crops to transform a region's agriculture into a monoculture, banana republics being a notorious example. This is true of any enterprise, but agriculture is more susceptible to circumstances beyond current human control, more so than say, a hard drive factory that needs to be sanitized and restarted after a flood.

    • And yet no one will make the obvious, common sense decision to stop exporting wheat.

      India doesn't seem to take the obvious, common sense decision to stop burning coal and invest maximally in renewable energy, especially solar, where they have a real chance to become a world leader. Why should you expect any sensible policy anywhere else? Modi is a Putinbot.

      • by ghoul ( 157158 )
        There is an obvious market solution. US could buy all the coal from India so India cant burn coal. Will cost less than burning thousands of Javelins in Ukraine. But no US wants India to take bad economic decisions to support US adventurism in Russia's backyard.
        • "US adventurism", "in Russia's back yard"

          I see, so Ukranians don't get to have back yards and you're fine with that. Russians are allowed to "adventure" [wikipedia.org] in other people's countries but that's fine.

          However, the US gives some weapons to another country to allow them to defend themselves and suddenly that's "US adventurism in Russia's backyard.". Do you have any form of morality?

          • by ghoul ( 157158 )
            When a thief is caught red handed his first response is a lecture on morality
            • Your username is literal, isn't it? The Americans are paying for your freedom and then you want to blackmail them out of even more money. You are so entitled that you think that their money belongs to you and someone suggesting that they shouldn't be blackmailed out of it is a "thief". I have no idea who you are, which troll farm you come from, but however you justify your continued life to yourself, you could see through it with just a few moments of thought.

  • 120 F ~= 48.89 C (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward

    For those outside of the small section of the world known as the United States (e.g. India):
    120 F is approximately 48.89 C
    112 F is approximately 44.44 C
    109 F is approximately 42.78 C

    • Thanks. I was going to have to look that up, because I live in the 21st century.
    • No.

      120 F is approximately 49 C

      112 F is approximately 44.5 C

      109 F is approximately 43 C

      Don't add significant digits when they aren't there to start with.

      • All three of measurements in F have three significant digits. Without context, the 120 F measurement could be interpreted as 120, however, given the context of the 2 other measurements, coupled with the fact how most thermometers are marked, 3 s.d. is the correct interpretation.
      • by gweihir ( 88907 )

        Indeed. Also, these are environmental measurements, they are not that precise to begin with. Seems too many people do not have a Science-education worth anything these days. Or lack the common sense to use it.

    • 40 C = 104 F 45 C = 113 F 50 C = 122 F its expected to hit 50 this year
  • Bad year for wheat. (Score:5, Informative)

    by hey! ( 33014 ) on Tuesday April 26, 2022 @09:46PM (#62482760) Homepage Journal

    Drought means a bad winter wheat harvest in the US. Ukraine is one of the largest wheat exporters in the world, and both planting and shipping has been disrupted by war, although Russian exports will benefit by high prices.

    Ukrainian wheat is an important food supply in the Middle East and North Africa. With multiple countries facing a bad or disrupted wheat harvest, many countries dependent upon wheat imports may get politically destabilized by food price increases. Countries particularly dependent upon wheat imports: Egypt, Turkey, Indonesia, China, Algeria and Bengladesh.

    • Global Warming is a big problem for the entire world!!!
      • by hey! ( 33014 ) on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @12:14AM (#62483010) Homepage Journal

        Climate a politically destabilizing factor. Initially it's not going to be *just* climate events. It's going to be an unlucky confluence of climate events with other crises, like the crop failure in Syria coinciding with high international wheat prices, displacing millions of young rural men to the cities where they were ripe for Islamist radicalization.

        Right now it's China has me worried. It's the world's leading importer of food at a time of record high food prices. It's the world's largest importer of wheat AND the world's largest grower of wheat, and it just had a failed harvest at a time when world wheat supplies are disrupted. Normally this food thing wouldn't be too hard for China to handle, but with multiple economic, budgetary, and COVID crises going on, adding yet another is making me wonder -- and with a party congress coming up too. I wouldn't mind seeing regime change, but under the circumstances who knows which way change might go?

        • Right now it's China has me worried. It's the world's leading importer of food at a time of record high food prices.

          We can all worry about China later. The PRC still has enough balance of trade surplus to buy its way out of any food or raw materials crisis. It's when the global supply runs low that we should start worrying because then the PRC and other countries could go from market competition to trade warfare and even physical confrontation.

    • by gtall ( 79522 )

      Yep, and the drought West oft the Mississippi is going to nail the U.S. farmers there hard:

              https://droughtmonitor.unl.edu... [unl.edu]

  • Surprise. The nation where 1/2 of all the people who die of hunger related causes is a major exporter of food.
    Call me shocked.
    Capitalism at its finest.
  • by BeaverCleaver ( 673164 ) on Tuesday April 26, 2022 @11:07PM (#62482942)

    There was an interesting article in New Scientist recently, suggesting that reducing the mandates for biofuels in the USA and EU could completely offset the lost grain production: https://www.newscientist.com/a... [newscientist.com]

    New Scientist generally has a very "green" editorial stance, so it seems unlikely that this is just a shill article funded by Exxon Mobil :-)

    • New Scientist has a clickbait editorial stance, so it is funded equally by all their advertisers, not sponsored by individual ones.

      They're not publishing that because it is news, or because there was some new science or study. They're publishing it because biofuel production has increased to partially offset sanctions on Russian oil, and so by publishing that now they can encourage controversy.

      • For the poor, I would think food is far more important than fuel.

        Prices of commodities are international.

        • For the poor, I would think food is far more important than fuel.

          In poor countries the price of food and the price of fuel are more closely related than you might think. Agriculture uses fuel to run machinery, it also takes fuel to produce fertilizer, it takes fuel to make pesticides, and it takes fuel to transport the food to market. The other two major costs, land and people are relatively stable, so fuel is responsible for a lot of the fluctuations in food price.

          The poor also need fuel of some kind to cook their food, but that is often locally produced biomass which i

        • So your point is what? Did you think that countries with large food exports have a goal of lowering the price of those exports through public policy?

          If not, then the story might be obtuse clickbait that merely pretends to offer information on a public policy.

      • They're not publishing that because it is news, or because there was some new science or study. They're publishing it because biofuel production has increased to partially offset sanctions on Russian oil, and so by publishing that now they can encourage controversy.

        In fact there is a new study, and the New Scientist article links to it. It's open-access too, not hidden behind any paywall. I'll put the link here too: https://www.pnas.org/doi/full/... [pnas.org]

        in line with the New Scientist article, the study suggests that the Renewable Fuel Standard in the USA has led to an increase in greenhouse gas emissions.

    • Since agriculture is so fossil fuel intensive these days, especially corn/maize, biofuels aren't an effective way to reduce CO2 emissions.
      • What would be a more effective means to reduce CO2 emissions would be nuclear powered cargo ships, nuclear powered military ships, especially icebreakers were they operate in ecosystems that are highly sensitive to diesel fumes and oil spills. Icebreakers burn a lot of fuel because it takes a lot of power to break ice, and with the power and longevity of nuclear powered ships we could see more efficient shipping from more shipping lanes opened.

        Russia has a huge fleet of conventional and nuclear powered ice

    • I don't like the idea of biomass fuels because it is burning food. If taken too far it forces people to choose between freezing to death or starving to death. I don't mind corn ethanol fuel so much because I know it gives us a measure of energy independence and food security. The food security comes from knowing that we can stop burning our food at any time in order to get more food on the market overnight.

      What we got from the Biden administration though was an increase in the use of corn ethanol fuel in

    • by burtosis ( 1124179 ) on Wednesday April 27, 2022 @07:10AM (#62483490)
      It takes about 31k calories in corn to make one gallon of ethanol. Thus that gallon of biofuel could feed a family of 4 for about 4 days. If you include all the external factors, the CO2 footprint isn’t zero or negative either, its closer to just using regular gas than many would like to admit. Really it is more about farm subsidies and finding a use for excess production than anything else, and in times of famine, propels a typical vehicle less than 3 miles for each person who goes without food for a day.
  • by bb_matt ( 5705262 ) on Tuesday April 26, 2022 @11:55PM (#62482994)

    So, this type of news is what so many people just don't get about a rapidly changing climate - food production.

    So much of the FUD flying about, is related to *weather*, not climate.
    "Oh, but gee, it was super cold here last winter! - global warming, what a crock of shit!"

    A failure to see the joined up nature of world food trade is the problem, not understanding where so much of the food in the supermarkets actually comes from.

    It comes down to one statement:

    "The inability to produce grain at scale = end of civilisation"

    It really is that simple.

    So, we have a war in Ukraine, cutting a big chunk of food production and this heat wave in India, cutting another.
    One of them isn't climate related, one is.

    What happens when we have 3 events, or 4 events at this scale?
    What happens when we have multiple events a year, over 3 or 4 years?
    What happens when global harvests are down ... 70 percent?

    Mass starvation, mass migration, war.

    *This* is what rapid climate change means, in terms of collapse.

    You can't just up and move billions and billions of hectares of crops - they grow where they do for a reason - and where would you move them?

    It also isn't just going to be heat that ruins harvests, it will be floods, droughts, extreme storms and potentially even extreme cold at the wrong time.

    What scientists still aren't sure of, is exactly how fast this will happen and whether we do actually have time to halt further catastrophe.
    Some more extremist outliers, give us less than a decade, before crop production fails at significant volumes to cause civilisation collapse.

    • Its not one, two or three crises that are a problem, its the fifth to seventh that really get you.

      I really like Rober H. Cline's tak on this, in the book 1177BC. Tying all the civilizations around the mediterranean sea together, connecting the dots.

      > Some more extremist outliers, give us less than a decade, before crop production fails at significant volumes to cause civilisation collapse.

      Any names, links come to mind? My definition of "extremist" in this case is about 20-30 years...

    • Fertilizer costs increases led to cutbacks in planting crop due to concerns could not recoup if over supplies. Free market guiding hand doing its thingy.
    • US wheat farmers benefit from the shortage. Probably why the farm lobby has supported US training for Ukrainian soldiers for the last 8 years. Without US training Ukraine would probably have made peace in the Donbas long time back but US backing gave them the confidence to poke the bear.
  • fahrenheit? (Score:1, Troll)

    by etash ( 1907284 )
    stop using fucking stupid metrics. Come to the 21st century. use celsius.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by burtosis ( 1124179 )
      Celsius is stupid and not grounded in reality, screwing up formulas with negative numbers. Real people use Kelvin.
    • by skam240 ( 789197 )

      How about you stop complaining about American news sites using American metrics instead?

      I don't complain about the BBC using Stones in the context of human weight. Why not? Because I respect that different countries do things differently unlike you.

    • by ghoul ( 157158 )
      You mean the 20th century? Fahreinheit is definitely 19th century not 20th century
  • https://www.indexmundi.com/com... [indexmundi.com] Three metric tons of wheat for one cellphone. When the sh*t hits the fan it will be one cellphone for a slice of bread.
  • What's 120 Fahrenheits? I've no effing clue. OK, it's roughly 49C which is insane. Thanks, Google.
  • There is a good recent sci-fi near-future dystopian book that starts with exactly this kind of event.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ministry_for_the_Future

    If extreme weather events caused by climate change disproportionately affect one country over another, that country may be forced to act.

    • Yep. I was thinking the same thing. I just recently read The_Ministry_for_the_Future . I would recommend the book, though I found not only the climate disasters to be dystopian, but also the end state (in the book) of the world order to be dystopian. Feel like a true scifi author could make a sequel where the inevitable results of that new world order also lead to bad consequences, not related to the natural environment ..parsing words to as not to be a spoiler

  • KSR called heat waves in India in Ministry For The Future, where he actually takes a pretty realistic look at the likeliest near term future on a warming planet. Of course, his is more extreme, where a heat wave is accompanied by extreme humidity, lasts for weeks, leading to grid collapse, and with wet bulb temps above human body temperature, millions of people slowly cook alive over the course of days.

    I certainly hope that's not what happens, but it starts to look like an inevitability if this keeps up.

Real Programmers don't eat quiche. They eat Twinkies and Szechwan food.

Working...