Module 9: Food and Climate Change
Module 9: Food and Climate Change sxr133Introduction
We've seen in previous modules how crucial climate is in food production. Temperature and precipitation are critical factors in the growth of crops, choice of crops, and food production capacity of a given region. In this module, we'll first review the mechanism and projected effects of human-induced climate change. We'll also explore the role that agriculture plays in contributing to human-induced climate change. In the second half of this module, you'll explore the varied impacts that climate change may have on agricultural production. The summative assessment for this module will be an important contribution to your capstone project, as you'll be exploring the potential future climate changes in your assigned regions, and begin proposing strategies to improve the resilience of your assigned region.
Goals and Learning Objectives
Goals and Learning Objectives azs2Goals
- Outline the basic science behind human-induced climate change and the contribution from agriculture.
- Compare various potential impacts of climate change on our global and local food systems.
- Select strategies that enhance the resilience of food systems in the face of a changing climate.
Learning Objectives
After completing this module, students will be able to:
- Identify climate variables that affect agriculture.
- Explain possible climate change impacts on crops.
- Summarize the mechanisms of human-induced climate change.
- Explain the role of food systems in contributing to climate change.
- Discuss how climate change impacts food production and yield.
- Evaluate how farmers adapt to climate change.
- Differentiate impacts of climate change on climate variables in different regions.
Module 9.1: Understanding Global Climate Change and Food Systems
Module 9.1: Understanding Global Climate Change and Food Systems jls164We hear a lot about global climate change and global warming in the news, especially about the controversy surrounding proposed strategies to reduce carbon emissions, but how well do you understand the science behind why our climate is changing and our planet is warming? In this unit, we'll review the basic science that underpins our understanding of global warming. Agriculture is one of the human activities that contributes carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, so we'll consider those contributions and how they can be reduced. Finally, we'll start to look to the future. What are some of the projections for future temperatures? We need to know what the future projections are so that we can plan to make our food systems more resilient to expected changes.
Introduction
Introduction azs2Understanding the Science of Climate Change: The Basics
Module 9 focuses on how agriculture contributes to global climate and how climate change will affect global agriculture. In addition, we'll explore agricultural strategies for adapting to a changing climate. But, before we explore the connections between global climate change and food production, we want to make sure that everyone understands some of the basic science underpinning global climate change.
Have you ever thought about the difference between weather and climate? If you don't like the weather right now, what do you do? In many places, you just need to "wait five minutes"! If you don't like the climate where you live, what do you do? Move! Weather is the day-to-day fluctuation in meteorological variables including temperature, precipitation, wind, and relative humidity, whereas climate is the long-term average of those variables. If someone asked you what the climate of your hometown is like, your response might be "hot and dry" or "cold and damp". Often we describe climate by the consistent expected temperature and precipitation pattern for the geographic region. So, when we talk about climate change, we're not talking about the day-to-day weather, which can at times be quite extreme. Instead, we're talking about changes in those long-term temperature and precipitation patterns that are quite predictable. A warming climate means that the average temperature over the long term is increasing, but there can still be cold snowy days, and blizzards even!
The two videos below are excellent introductions to the science of climate change. We'll use these videos as your introduction to the basic science behind our understanding of climate change that we'll build on as we explore the connections between climate change and food production in the rest of this module. Follow instructions from your instructor for this introductory section of Module 9.
Optional Video Climate Change: Lines of Evidence
The National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine have prepared an excellent 20-minute sequence of videos, Climate Change: Lines of Evidence, that explains how scientists have arrived at the state of knowledge about current climate change and its causes. Use the worksheet linked below to summarize the story that the video tells about anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions and the resulting changes in Earth's climate. The narrator speaks pretty quickly, so you'll want to pause the video and rewind when you need to make sure you understand what he's explaining. It's important to take the time to understand and answer the questions in the worksheet because you'll use this information in a future assignment.
If instructed by your instructor, download detailed questions about the Climate Change: Lines of Evidence videos:
- MSWord docx -Climate Change: Lines of Evidence video questions
- pdf -Climate Change: Lines of Evidence video questions
Video: What is Climate? Climate Change, Lines of Evidence: Chapter 1 (25:59)
Another resource you can use to help answer the questions is the booklet that goes with this video: Climate Change: Evidence, Impacts, Choices. It is 40 pages, so you might not want to print it. Use it as an online reference.
Penn State geology professor, Richard Alley's, 45-minute video uses earth science to tell the story of Earth's climate history and our relationship with fossil fuels. There is no worksheet associated with this video.
Optional Video: Earth: The Operators' Manual (53:42)
RICHARD ALLEY: All across the planet, nations and cities are working to reduce their dependence on fossil fuels and promote sustainable energy options.
ANNISE PARKER: Because it's the smart thing, because it makes business sense, and it's the right thing. NARRATOR: In China, Europe, and Brazil, energy innovations are changing how we live. And in the US, every branch of the military is mobilizing to cut its carbon bootprint.
DAVID TITLEY: We really believe that the climate is changing.
RICHARD ALLEY: In this program, we'll share how we know Earth is warming and why and discover what Earth science tells us about clean, green energy opportunities. I'm Richard Alley. I'm a geologist at Penn State University. But my research has taken me around the planet, from Greenland to Antarctica. I'm fascinated by how our climate has changed dramatically and often, from times with ice everywhere to no ice anywhere on the planet. Records of past climate help us learn how our Earth operates. What has happened can happen again. And I know that sometimes, things change really fast. I'm a registered Republican, play soccer on Saturdays, and go to church on Sundays. I'm a parent and a professor. I worry about jobs for my students and my daughter's future. I've been a proud member of the UN Panel on Climate Change. And I know the risks. And I've worked for an oil company and know how much we all need energy. And the best science shows we'll be better off if we address the twin stories of climate change and energy, and that the sooner we move forward, the better. Our use of fossil fuels for energy is pushing us towards a climate unlike any seen in the history of civilization. But a growing population needs more and more clean energy. But I believe science offers us an operator's manual with answers to both of these huge challenges.
[MUSIC PLAYING] NARRATOR: "Earth-- The Operator's Manual" is made possible by NSF, the National Science Foundation, where discoveries begin.
RICHARD ALLEY: Humans need energy. We always have and always will. But how we use energy is now critical for our survival. It all began with fire. Today, it's mostly fossil fuels. Now we're closing in on 7 billion of us, and the planet's population is headed toward 10 billion. Our cities and our civilization depend on vast amounts of energy. Fossil fuels-- coal, oil, and natural gas-- provide almost 80% of the energy used worldwide. Nuclear is a little less than 5%, hydropower a little under 6%, and the other renewables-- solar, wind, and geothermal-- about 1%, but growing fast. Wood and dung make up the rest. Using energy is helping many of us live better than ever before. Yet well over 1.5 billion are lagging behind, without access to electricity or clean fuels. In recent years, Brazil has brought electricity to 10 million. But in rural Ceara, some still live off the grid-- no electricity, no running water, and no refrigerators to keep food safe. Life's essentials come from their own hard labor. Education is compulsory, but studying is a challenge when evening arrives. The only light is from kerosene lamps. They're smoky, dim, and dangerous. Someday, this mother prays, the electric grid will reach her home.
TRANSLATOR: The first thing I'll do when the electricity arrives in my house will be to say a rosary and give praise to God.
RICHARD ALLEY: More than half of China's 1.3 billion citizens live in the countryside. Many rural residents still use wood or coal for cooking and heating, although most of China is already on the grid. China has used energy to fuel the development that has brought more than 500 million out of poverty. In village homes, there are flat-screen TVs and air conditioners. By 2030, it's projected that 350 million Chinese-- more than the population of the entire United States-- will move from the countryside to cities, a trend that's echoed worldwide. Development in Asia, Africa, and South America will mean 3 billion people will start using more and more energy as they escape from poverty. Suppose we make the familiar, if old-fashioned, 100-watt light bulb our unit for comparing energy use. If you're off the grid, your share of your nation's energy will be just a few hundred watts, a few light bulbs. South Americans average about 13 bulbs. For fast-developing China, it's more like 22 bulbs. Europe and Russia, 5,000 watts, 50 bulbs, and North Americans, over 10,000 watts, more than 100 bulbs. Now let's replace those light bulbs with the actual numbers. Population is shown across the bottom and energy use displayed vertically-- off the grid to the left, North America to the right. If everyone everywhere started using energy at the rate North Americans do, the world's energy consumption would more than quadruple. And using fossil fuels, that's clearly unsustainable. No doubt about it-- coal, gas, and oil have brought huge benefits. But we're burning through them approximately a million times faster than nature saved them for us, and they will run out. What's even worse-- the carbon dioxide from our energy system threatens to change the planet in ways that will make our lives much harder. So why are fossil fuels such a powerful, but ultimately problematic, source of energy? Conditions on the waterways of today's Louisiana help us understand how fossil fuels are made and why they're ultimately unsustainable. Oil, coal, and natural gas are made from things-- mostly plants-- that lived and died long ago. It's taken hundreds and millions of years for nature to create enough of the special conditions that saved the carbon and energy and plants to form the fossil fuels that we use. Here's how it works. Plants, like these tiny diatoms encased in silica shells, grow in the upper layers of lakes and oceans, using the sun's energy to turn carbon dioxide and water into more plants. When they die, if they're buried where there's little oxygen to break them down, their chemical bonds retain the energy that began as sunlight. If enough carbon-rich matter is buried deeply enough for long enough, the Earth's heat and pressure turn it into fossil fuel, concentrating the energy that once fed the growing plants. Vary what goes into Earth's pressure cooker and the temperature, and you end up with the different kinds of fossil fuel. Woody plants make coal. Slimy plants, algae, will give you oil, and both of them give rise to natural gas. The fossil fuels formed over a few hundred million years, and we're burning them over a few hundred years. And if we keep doing that, sooner or later, they must run out. But there's a bigger problem with fossil fuels. As we've seen, they're made of carbon, primarily. And when you burn them, you add oxygen, and that makes CO2 that goes in the air. We're reversing the process by which they formed. And if we keep doing this, it must change the composition of Earth's atmosphere. What CO2 does was confirmed by basic research that had absolutely nothing to do with climate change.
REPORTER: A continuance of the Upper Air Program will provide scientific data concerning the physics of the upper atmosphere.
RICHARD ALLEY: World War II was over, but the Cold War had begun. The US Air Force needed to understand the atmosphere for communications and to design heat-seeking missiles. At certain wavelengths, carbon dioxide and water vapor block radiation, so the new missiles couldn't see very far if they used a wavelength that CO2 absorbs. Research at the Air Force Geophysics Laboratory in Hanscom, Massachusetts produced an immense database with careful measurements of atmospheric gases. Further research by others applied and extended those discoveries, clearly showing the heat-trapping influence of CO2. The Air Force hadn't set out to study global warming. They just wanted their missiles to work. But physics is physics. The atmosphere doesn't care if you're studying it for warring or warming. Adding CO2 turns up the planet's thermostat. It works the other way as well. Remove CO2, and things cool down. These are the Southern Alps of New Zealand, and their climate history shows that the physicists really got it right. These deep, thick piles of frozen water are glaciers-- slow-moving rivers of ice sitting on land. But once, when temperatures were warmer, they were liquid water stored in the sea. We're going to follow this one, the Franz Josef, from summit to ocean to see the real world impact of changing levels of CO2. It's beautiful up here on the highest snow field, but dangers lurk beneath the surface. I've spent a lot of time on the ice. It's standard practice up here to travel in pairs, roped up for safety. The glacier is fed by something like six meters of water a year-- maybe 20 meters, 60 feet of snowfall, so really seriously high snowfall. The snow and ice spread under their own weight, and it's headed downhill at something like a kilometer a year. When ice is speeding up a lot as it flows towards the coast, it can crack and open great crevasses that give you a view into the guts of the glacier. Man, this is a big one. 10, 20, 30, meters more, 100 feet or more heading down in here. And we can see a whole lot of the structure of the glacier right here.
MAN: So what we're going to do is just sit on the edge and then walk backwards, and then I'll lower you.
RICHARD ALLEY: Tell me when. OK. Roll her around, and down we go. Snowfall arrives in layers, each storm putting one down. Summer sun heats the snow and makes it look a little bit different than the winter snow. And so you build up a history. In these layers, there's indications of climate-- how much it snowed, what the temperature was. And all of this is being buried by more snow. And the weight of that snow squeezes what's beneath it and turns it to ice. And in doing that, it can trap bubbles. And in those bubbles are samples of old air-- a record of the composition of the Earth's atmosphere, including how much CO2 was in it, a record of the temperature on the ice sheets and how much it snowed. As we'll see, we can open those icy bottles of ancient air and study the history of Earth's atmosphere. This landscape also tells the story of the Ice Ages and the forces that have shaped Earth's climate. Over the last millions of years, the brightness of the sun doesn't seem to have changed much. But the Earth's orbit, and the tilt of its axis, have shifted in regular patterns over tens and hundreds of thousands of years. The orbit changes shape, varying how close and far the Earth gets as it orbits the sun each year. Over 41,000 years, the tilt of Earth's axis gets larger and smaller, shifting some of the sunshine from the Equator to the poles and back. And our planet has a slight wobble, like a child's top, altering which hemisphere is most directly pointed towards the sun when Earth is closest to it. Over tens of thousands of years, these natural variations shift sunlight around on the planet, and that influences climate. More than 20,000 years ago, decreasing amounts of sunshine in the Arctic allowed great ice sheets to grow across North America and Eurasia, reaching the modern sites of New York and Chicago. Sea level fell as water was locked up on land. Changing currents let the oceans absorb CO2 from the air. That cooled the Southern Hemisphere and unleashed the immense power of glaciers, such as the Franz Josef, which advanced down this wide valley, filling it with deep, thick ice. Now we're flying over today's coastline, where giant boulders are leftovers from that last ice age. A glacier is a great earth-moving machine. It's a dump truck that carries rocks that fall on top of it. It's a bulldozer that pushes rocks in front of it, and it outlines itself with those rocks, making a deposit that we call a moraine that tells us where the glacier has been. We're 20 kilometers, 12 miles, from the front of the Franz Josef glacier today. But about 20,000 years ago, the ice was depositing these rocks as it flowed past us and out to sea. The rocks we can still see today confirm where the glacier once was. Now, in a computer-generated time lapse condensing thousands of years of Earth's history, we're seeing what happened. Lower CO2, colder temperatures, more snow and ice, and the Franz Josef advanced. 20,000 years ago, 30% of today's land area was covered by great ice sheets which locked up so much water that the global sea level was almost 400 feet lower than today. And then, as Earth's orbit changed, temperatures and CO2 rose, and the glacier melted back. The orbits set the stage. But by themselves, there weren't enough. We need the warming and cooling effects of rising and falling CO2 to explain the changes we know happened. Today, atmospheric CO2 is increasing still more, temperatures are rising, and glaciers and ice sheets are melting. You can see this clearly on the lake formed by the shrinking Tasman Glacier across the range from the Franz Josef. This is what the end of an ice age looks like-- glaciers falling apart, new lakes, new land, icebergs coming off the front of the ice. In the early 1980s, we would have been inside New Zealand's Tasman Glacier right here. Now we're passing icebergs in a new lake from a glacier that has mostly fallen apart and ends over six kilometers, four miles away. One glacier doesn't tell us what the world is doing. But while the Tasman has been retreating, the great majority of glaciers on the planet have gotten smaller. This is the Columbia Glacier in Alaska. It's a type of glacier that makes the effects of warming easy to see. It's been retreating so fast that the Extreme Ice Survey had to reposition their time-lapse cameras to follow its motion. In Iceland, warming air temperatures have made this glacier simply melt away, leaving streams and small lakes behind. Thermometers in the air show warming. Thermometers in the air far from cities show warming. Put your thermometer in the ground, in the ocean, look down from satellites-- they show warming. The evidence is clear. The Earth's climate is warming. This frozen library, the National Ice Core Lab in Denver, Colorado, has ice from all over, kept at minus 35 degrees. The oldest core here goes back some 400,000 years. Here, really ancient ice from Greenland in the north and Antarctica in the south reveals Earth's climate history. Let's see what cores like this can tell us. First are those layers I mentioned in the New Zealand snow. They've turned to ice, and we can count them-- summer, winter, summer, winter. Like tree rings, we can date the core. Other cores tell other stories. Look at this. It's the ash of an Icelandic volcano that blew up to Greenland 50,000 years ago. Cores hold other, and even more important, secrets. Look at these bubbles. They formed as the snow turned to ice and trapped old air that's still in there. Scientists now are working with cores from Antarctica that go back even further. They tell us, with a very high degree of accuracy, how much carbon dioxide was in the air that far back. Researchers break chunks of ice in vacuum chambers and carefully analyze the gases that come off. They're able to measure, very precisely, levels of carbon dioxide in that ancient air. Looking at the cores, we see a pattern that repeats-- 280 parts per million of CO2, then 180, 280, 180, 280. By analyzing the chemistry of the oxygen atoms in the ice, you can also see the pattern of rising and falling temperature over time-- colder during the ice ages, warmer during the interglacial periods. Now put the two lines together, and you can see how closely temperature and carbon dioxide track each other. They're not exactly alike. At times, the orbits caused a little temperature change before the feedback effects of CO2 joined in. But just as we saw in New Zealand, we can't explain the large size of the changes in temperature without the effects of CO2. This is the signature of natural variation, the cycle of the ice ages driven by changes in Earth's orbit with no human involvement. But here's where we are today. In just 250 years since the Industrial Revolution, we've blown past 380 with no sign of slowing down. It's a level not seen in more than 400,000 years, 40 times longer than the oldest human civilization. So physics and chemistry tell us that adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere warms things up, and Earth's climate history shows us there will be impacts, from melting ice sheets to rising sea level. But how do we know, with equal certainty, that it's not just more natural variation, that humans are the source of the increasing CO2? When we look at a landscape like this one, we know immediately that volcanoes put out all sorts of interesting things, and that includes CO2. So how do we know that the rise of CO2 in the atmosphere that we see comes from our burning of fossil fuels and not from something that the volcanoes have done? Well, the first step in the problem is just bookkeeping. We measure how much CO2 comes out of the volcanoes. We measure how much CO2 comes out of our smokestacks and tailpipes. The natural source is small. Humans are putting out 50 to 100 times more CO2 than the natural volcanic source. We can then ask the air whether our bookkeeping is right, and the air says that it is. Volcanoes make CO2 by melting rocks to release the CO2. They don't burn, and they don't use oxygen. But burning fossil fuels does use oxygen when it makes CO2. We see that the rise in CO2 goes with the fall of oxygen, which says that the rising CO2 comes from burning something. We can then ask the carbon in the rising CO2 where it came from. Carbon comes in three flavors-- the lightweight, carbon-12, which is especially common in plants, the medium weight, carbon-13, which is a little more common in the gases coming out of volcanoes, and the heavyweight, carbon-14. It's radioactive and decays almost entirely after about 50,000 years, which is why you won't find it in very old things, like dinosaur bones or fossil fuels. We see a rise in carbon-12 which comes from plants. We don't see a rise of carbon-13, so the CO2 isn't coming from the volcanoes. And we don't see a rise in carbon-14, so the CO2 can't be coming from recently living plants. And so the atmosphere says that the rising CO2 comes from burning of plants that have been dead a long time. That is fossil fuels. The CO2 is coming from our fossil fuels. It's us. So physics and chemistry show us carbon dioxide is at levels never seen in human history. And the evidence says it's all of us burning fossil fuels that's driving the increase. But what about climate change and global warming? Are they for real? Here's what those who have looked at all the data say about the future.
MAN: Climate change, energy security, and economic stability are inextricably linked. Climate change will contribute to food and water scarcity, will increase the spread of disease, and may spur or exacerbate mass migration.
RICHARD ALLEY: Who do you suppose said that? Not a pundit, not a politician. The Pentagon. These war games at Fort Irwin, California provide realistic training to keep our soldiers safe. The purpose of the Pentagon's Quadrennial Defense Review, the QDR, is to keep the nation safe. The review covers military strategies for an uncertain world. The Pentagon has to think long-term and be ready for all contingencies. The 2010 QDR was the first time that those contingencies included climate change. Rear Admiral David Titley is oceanographer of the Navy and contributed to the Defense Review.
DAVID TITLEY: Well, I think the QDR really talks about climate change in terms that really isn't for debate. And you take a look at the global temperatures. You take a look at sea level rise. You take a look at what the glaciers are doing-- not just one or two glaciers, but really glaciers worldwide. And you add all of those up together, and that's one of the reasons we really believe that the climate is changing. So the observations tell us that. Physics tells us this as well.
RICHARD ALLEY: What climate change means for key global hotspots is less clear.
DAVID TITLEY: We understand the Earth is getting warmer. We understand the oceans are getting warmer. What we do not understand is exactly how that will affect things like strong storms, rainfall rates, rainfall distribution. So yes, climate change is a certainty, but what is it going to be like in specific regions of the world, and when?
RICHARD ALLEY: One area of particular concern to the Navy is sea level rise.
DAVID TITLEY: Sea level rise is going to be a long-term and very, very significant issue for the 21st century.
RICHARD ALLEY: The QDR included an infrastructure vulnerability assessment that found that 153 Naval installations are at significant risk from climatic stresses. From Pearl Harbor, Hawaii to Norfolk, Virginia, the bases and their nearby communities will have to adapt.
DAVID TITLEY: Even with one to two meters of sea level rise, which is very, very substantial, we have time. This is not a crisis, but it is certainly going to be a strategic challenge.
RICHARD ALLEY: Globally, climate change is expected to mean more fires, floods, and famine. Nations may be destabilized. For the Pentagon, climate change is a threat multiplier. But with sound climate science, Titley believes forewarned is forearmed.
DAVID TITLEY: The good thing is the science is advanced enough in oceanography, glaciology, meteorology that we have some skill at some frames of predicting this. And if we choose to use those projections, we can, in fact, by our behavior, alter the future in our favor. RICHARD ALLEY: Titley and the Pentagon think the facts are in.
DAVID TITLEY: Climate change is happening, and there is very, very strong evidence that a large part of this is, in fact, man-made.
RICHARD ALLEY: The military is America's single largest user of energy, and it recognizes that its use of fossil fuels has to change. The Pentagon uses 300,000 barrels of oil each day. That's more than 12 million gallons. An armored Humvee gets four miles to the gallon. At full speed, an Abrams battle tank uses four gallons to the mile. And it can cost as much as $400 a gallon to get gas to some remote bases in Afghanistan. Fort Irwin is a test bed to see if the Army can operate just as effectively while using less fossil fuel and more renewables. And it's not just Fort Irwin in the Army. At Camp Pendleton, Marines were trained on an energy-saving experimental forward operating base that deployed with them to Afghanistan.
ROBERT HEDELUND: Before any equipment goes into theater, we want Marines to get trained on it. So what are some of the things that we can take hold of right away and make sure that we can make a difference for the warfighter down range? RICHARD ALLEY: They test out different kinds of portable solar power units. They also practice how to purify stagnant water and make it drinkable. The Army and Marines both want to minimize the number of convoys trucking in fuel and water. A report for the Army found that in five years, more than 3,000 service members had been killed or wounded in supply convoys.
ROBERT HEDELUND: And if you've got Marines guarding that convoy, and God forbid, it get hit by an IED, then what are the wounded, what are the deaths involved in that? And are we really utilizing those Marines and that capability the way we should?
RICHARD ALLEY: Generators used to keep accommodations livable and computers running are also major gas guzzlers.
ADORJAN FERENCZY: Right now, what we're doing is putting up a power shade. It has flexible solar panels on the top and gives us enough power to run small electronics, such as lighting systems and laptop computers. It also provides shade over the tent structure. Experimenting with this equipment in Africa proved that it could reduce the internal temperature of the tent seven to 10 degrees.
RICHARD ALLEY: All the LED lights in the entire tent use just 91 watts, less than one single old-fashioned incandescent bulb.
ADORJAN FERENCZY: It's a no-brainer when it comes to efficiency.
RICHARD ALLEY: Light-emitting diodes don't weigh much, but they're still rugged enough to survive a typical Marine's gentle touch.
ZACH LYMAN: When we put something into a military application and they beat it up, it's ruggedized. It's ready for the worst that the world can take. And so one thing that people say is if the military has used this thing and they trust it, then maybe it's OK for my backyard.
RICHARD ALLEY: Renewable energy will also play an important role at sea and in the air. The Navy's Makin Island is an amphibious assault ship with jump jets, helicopters, and landing craft. It's the first vessel to have both gas turbines and a hybrid electric drive, which it can use for 75% of its time at sea. This Prius of the ocean cut fuel costs by $2 million on its maiden voyage. By 2016, the Navy plans to have what it calls a Great Green Fleet, a complete carrier group running on renewable fuels with nuclear ships, hybrid electric surface vessels, and aircraft flying only biofuels. By 2020, the goal is to cut usage of fossil fuels by 50%. Once deployed in Afghanistan, the XFOB cut down on gas used in generators by over 80%. In the past, the Pentagon's innovations in computers, GPS, and radar have spun off into civilian life. In the future, the military's use of renewable energy can reduce dependence on foreign oil, increase operational security, and save lives and money.
JIM CHEVALLIER: A lot of the times, it is a culture change more than anything else. And the Department of Defense, over the years, has proved, time and time again, that they can lead the way in that culture change.
RICHARD ALLEY: If the US military is the largest user of energy in America, China is now the largest consumer on the planet. At 1.3 billion, China has a population about four times larger than the US, so average per-person use in CO2 emissions remain about 1/4 those of Americans. But like the US Military, China is moving ahead at full speed on multiple different sustainable energy options. And it pretty much has to. Cities are congested. The air is polluted. Continued rapid growth using old technologies seems unsustainable. This meeting in Beijing brought together mayors from all over China, executives from state-owned enterprises, and international representatives. The organizer was a US-Chinese NGO headed by Peggy Liu.
PEGGY LIU: Over 20 years, we're going to have 350 million people moving into cities in China. And we're going to be building 50,000 new skyscrapers, the equivalent of 10 Manhattans, 170 new mass transit systems. It's just incredible, incredible scale.
RICHARD ALLEY: This massive, rapid growth comes with a high environmental cost.
MARTIN SCHOENBAUER: They recognize that they're spending as much as 6% of their gross domestic product on environmental issues.
RICHARD ALLEY: In 2009, China committed $35 billion, almost twice as much as the US, TO energy research and incentives for wind, solar, and other clean energy technologies. It's attracted an American company to set up the world's most advanced solar power research plant. China now makes more solar panels than any other nation. But it's also promoting low-tech, low-cost solutions. Solar water heaters are seen on modest village homes. Some cities have them on almost every roof.
PEGGY LIU: China is throwing spaghetti on the wall right now in terms of over 27 different cities doing LED street lighting, or over 20, 30 different cities doing electric vehicles.
RICHARD ALLEY: But visit any city, and you can see that the coal used to generate more than 70% of China's electricity has serious consequences with visible pollution and adverse health effects. China uses more coal than any other nation on Earth, but it's also trying to find ways to burn coal more cleanly.
PEGGY LIU: In three years, 2006 to 2009, while China was building one new coal-fired power plant a week, it also shut down inefficient coal plants. So it's out with the old and in with the new. And they're really trying hard to invent new models.
RICHARD ALLEY: This pilot plant, designed for carbon capture and sequestration, was rushed to completion in time for Shanghai's 2010 World Expo. It absorbs and sells carbon dioxide and will soon scale up to capture 3 million tons a year that could be pumped back into the ground, keeping it out of the air.
MARTIN SCHOENBAUER: Here in China, they are bringing many plants online in a much shorter time span it takes us in the US. PEGGY LIU: China is right now the factory of the world. What we'd like to do is turn it into the clean tech laboratory of the world. RICHARD ALLEY: If nations choose to pay the price, burning coal with carbon capture can offer the world a temporary bridge until renewables come to scale. PEGGY LIU: China is going to come up with the clean energy solutions that are cost-effective and can be deployed at large scale-- in other words, solutions that everybody around the world wants.
RICHARD ALLEY: Can low-carbon solutions really give us enough energy to power the planet and a growing population? Let's put some numbers on how much energy we can get from non-fossil fuel renewables. Today, all humans everywhere on Earth use about 15.7 terawatts of energy. That's a big number. In watts, that's 157 followed by 11 0's, or 157 billion of those 100-watt light bulbs we used as a reference. To show what's possible, let's see if we can get to 15.7 terawatts using only renewable energy. I'm here in the Algodones Dunes near Yuma, Arizona. The Guinness Book of Records says it's the sunniest place in the world. There's barely a cloud in the daytime sky for roughly 90% of the year. 0.01%, 1/100 of 1%-- if we could collect that much of the sun's energy reaching the Earth, it would be more than all human use today. Today's technologies have made a start. This was the world's first commercial power station to use a tower to harvest concentrated solar energy. Near Seville, Spain, 624 mirrors stretch over an area of more than 135 acres, beaming back sunlight to a tower nearly 400 feet high. Intense heat produces steam that drives the turbine, which generates electricity. When completed, this one facility will be able to power 200,000 homes, enough to supply the entire nearby city of Seville. Remember our target of 15.7 terawatts? Well, the sun delivers 173,000 terawatts to the top of Earth's atmosphere, 11,000 times current human use. No way we can capture all of that potential energy at Earth's surface. But the deserts of America's Southwest, with today's technology, have enough suitable land to supply 80% of the entire planet's current use. Of course, there's one big problem with solar power-- night. But with more efficient transmission lines, and as part of a balanced renewable energy portfolio that includes storage, the sun's potential is vast. In tropical nations like Brazil, the sun heats water, makes clouds, and unleashes rainfall that feeds some of the planet's largest rivers. Iguazu Falls is a tourist attraction, one of the most spectacular waterfalls on Earth, where you can feel the immense power of falling water. The nearby Itaipu Dam on the border of Brazil in Paraguay produces the most hydroelectric power of any generating station in the world. This one dam supplies most of the electricity used in Sao Paulo, a city of more than 11 million. Sao Paulo is 600 miles away, but Brazil made the decision to build innovative, high-voltage direct current transmission lines to minimize energy loss. The Itaipu to Sao Paulo electrical grid has been in operation since 1984 and shows that renewable energy can go the distance. Dams can't be the answer for every nation. They flood landscapes, disrupt ecosystems, and displace people. But hydropower gives Brazil, a nation larger than the continental United States, 80% of its electricity. And worldwide, hydropower could contribute 12% of human energy use, ready at a moment's notice in case the sun goes behind a cloud. Brazil is also using its unique natural environment in another way. Its tropical climate provides ideal conditions for sugarcane, one of the Earth's most efficient plants in its ability to collect the energy of sunlight. Plantations like this one harvest the cane for the production of sugar and the biofuel called ethanol. The US is actually the number one producer of ethanol in the world, mostly using corn instead of cane. But ethanol made from sugar cane is several times more efficient at replacing fossil fuel than corn-based ethanol. Modern facilities like this one pipe back wet waste to fertilize the fields and burn the dry waste, called the gas, to generate electricity to run the factory. For Brazil, at least, ethanol works. Today, almost all cars sold in Brazil can use flex fuels. Drivers choose gasoline blended with 25% ethanol or pure ethanol, depending on price and how far they plan to drive. Local researchers say that if all the gasoline in the world suddenly disappeared, Brazil is the only nation that could go it alone and keep its cars running. Using food for fuel raises big questions in a hungry world. As of now, sugarcane ethanol hasn't affected food prices much. But there are concerns with corn. So here in the US, government labs like NREL, the National Renewable Energy Lab, have launched programs to see if biofuels can be made from agricultural waste. It does work, and researchers are trying to bring the cost down. So with plants capturing roughly 11 times human energy use, they're a growing opportunity. New Zealand takes advantage of another kind of energy. These are the geysers and hot springs at Rotorua on the North Island. Once, they were used by the native Maori people for cooking and bathing. Now geothermal power plants harvest heat and turn it into as much as 10% of all New Zealand's electricity. Many power projects are partnerships with the Maori, benefiting the local people and avoiding the "not in my backyard" problems that often complicate energy developments. Globally, geothermal energy offers three times our current use. But we can mine geothermal, extracting the energy faster than nature supplies it, cooling the rocks deep beneath us to make power for people. This energy exists even where you don't see geysers and mud pots, so it can be extracted without harming these natural wonders. A study by MIT showed that the accessible hot rocks beneath the United States contain enough energy to run the country for 130,000 years. And like hydroelectric, geothermal can provide peaking power, ready to go at a moment's notice if the sun doesn't shine and the wind doesn't blow. Mining energy from deep, hot rocks is a relatively new technology, but people have been using windmills for centuries, and the wind blows everywhere. Here's where the United States is very lucky. Let's take a trip up the nation's wind corridor, from Texas in the South to the Canadian border. Bright purple indicates the strongest winds. All along this nearly 2,000 miles, there's the potential to turn a free, non-CO2-emitting resource into electricity. But that takes choices and actions by individuals and governments. Here's what's been happening in West Texas. It's a land of ranches and farms and, of course, oil rigs and pump jacks. But in the early '90s, this was one of the most financially depressed areas in the state. Communities like Nolan Divide fell on hard times. Schools closed. People moved away. But since 1999, the new structures towering above the flat fields aren't oil derricks, but wind turbines. The largest number-- more than 1,600-- is in Nolan County. Greg Wortham is Mayor of Sweetwater, the county seat.
GREG WORTHAM: It wasn't a philosophical or political decision. It was ranchers and farmers and truck drivers and welders and railroads. and wind workers.
RICHARD ALLEY: Steve Oatman's family has been ranching the Double Heart for three generations. Steve may have doubts about the causes of climate change, but not about wind energy.
STEVE OATMAN: But it's been a blessing. It helps pay taxes. It helps pay the feed bill. Rosco, 30 May.
GREG WORTHAM: We talk about this being green energy because it pays money. The ranchers and the farmers call it mailbox money. They have to get up, and sweat, and work hard all day long. Things are pretty stressful. And if you can just walk to the mailbox and pick up some money because you've got turbines above the ground, that makes life a lot easier. RICHARD ALLEY: Each windmill can generate between $5,000 and $15,000 per year. So a ranch with an average of 10 to 20 turbines can provide financial stability for people who have always lived with uncertainty.
STEVE OATMAN: I don't just believe in it because I make a living from it. It's something that's going to have to happen for the country.
RICHARD ALLEY: So now, local schools have growing enrollments and funds to pay for programs.
GREG WORTHAM: We had about $500 million in tax based in the whole county in 2000. And by the late part of that decade, in less than 10 years, it went up to $2.5 billion in tax value.
RICHARD ALLEY: By the end of 2009, the capacity of wind turbines in West Texas totaled close to 10,000 megawatts. If Texas were a country, it would rank sixth in the world in wind power. The US Department of Energy estimates that wind could supply 20% of America's electricity by 2030. New offshore wind farms would generate more than 43,000 new jobs. That translates into a $200-billion boost to the US economy. Worldwide, wind could provide almost 80 times current human usage. No form of energy is totally free of environmental concerns or hefty startup costs. Some early wind farms gave little consideration to birds and other flying critters, like migrating bats. But recent reports by Greenpeace and the Audubon Society have found that properly sighted and operated turbines can minimize problems. Mayor Wortham, for one, welcomes wind turbines into his backyard.
GREG WORTHAM: We like them. Some people don't. But we're more than happy to export our energy to those states who want to buy green, but don't want to see green.
STEVE OATMAN: In the long run, I hope we have wind turbines everywhere they can produce energy. We need them. That's what America is going to have to do. That's the next stepping stone to save ourselves.
RICHARD ALLEY: The state of Texas has invested $5 billion to connect West Texas wind to big cities like Dallas and Fort Worth. Farther south is Houston, one of the most energy-hungry cities in the country. Its port is America's largest by foreign tonnage, and its refineries and chemical plants supply a good portion of the nation. But already, perhaps surprisingly, Houston is the largest municipal purchaser of renewable energy in the nation. 30% of the power city government uses comes from wind, with a target of 50%. And its mayor wants to cut energy costs and increase energy efficiency.
ANNISE PARKER: I want to go from the oil and gas capital of the world to the green and renewable energy capital of the world.
RICHARD ALLEY: Supported by federal stimulus dollars, the local utility is ahead of schedule to install smart meters. These will help consumers economize on energy use. The city has already installed 2,500 LED traffic lights using 85% less energy than traditional incandescent bulbs. That translates into savings of $3.6 million per year. City Hall thinks it can also improve air quality by changing the kinds of cars Houstonians drive.
ANNISE PARKER: If
RICHARD ALLEY: The city already operates a fleet of plug-in hybrids. Now it's encouraging the development of an infrastructure to make driving electric vehicles easy and practical. And in Houston's hot and humid environment, it helps to have an increasing number of energy-efficient, LEED-certified buildings. ANNISE PARKER: We're going to do it because it's the smart thing, because it makes business sense, and it's the right thing.
RICHARD ALLEY: Some estimates are that the US could save as much as 23% of projected demand from a more efficient use of energy.
ANNISE PARKER: Well, if you're going to tackle energy efficiency, you might as well do it in a place that is a profligate user of energy. And when you make a difference there, you can make a difference that's significant.
RICHARD ALLEY: Globally, efficiency could cut the demand for energy by 1/3 by 2030. Bottom line-- there are many ways forward, and we can hit that renewable energy target. And if next-generation nuclear is also included, one plan has the possible 2030 energy mix transformed from one relying on fossil fuels to one that looks like this, with renewables-- sun, wind, geothermal, biomass, and hydropower-- totaling 61%, fossil fuels down to 13%, and existing and new nuclear making up the balance. Another plan meets world energy needs with only wind, water, and solar. And in fact, there are many feasible paths to a sustainable energy future. Today's technologies can get us started, and a commitment to research and innovation will bring even more possibilities. We've traveled the world to see some of the sources the planet offers to meet our growing need for clean energy. There's too many options to cover all of them here. And besides, each nation, each state, each person must make their own choices as to what works best for them. But the central idea is clear. If we approach Earth as if we have an operator's manual that tells us how to keep the planet humming along at peak performance, we can do this. We can avoid climate catastrophes, improve energy security, and make millions of good jobs. For "Earth-- The Operator's Manual," I'm Richard Alley.
NARRATOR: "Earth-- The Operator's Manual" is made possible by NSF, the National Science Foundation, where discoveries begin.
[MUSIC PLAYING] For the annotated, illustrated script with links to information on climate change and sustainable energy, web-exclusive videos, educator resources, and much more, visit pbs.org. "Earth-- The Operator's Manual" is available on DVD. The companion book is also available. To order, visit shoppbs.org, or call us at 1-800-PLAY-PBS.
Optional Follow-up Questions to the Videos
If instructed by your instructor, download the following questions that can be applied to either video:
Understanding the Science of Climate Change
Understanding the Science of Climate Change azs2At this point, you should have either watched one or two of the videos from the introduction, or you're already familiar with how human activities have resulted in the warming of the planet in the last century. Now, we'll explore some of the latest data from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to review and to help us better understand the connections between increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide and climate change.
Data on current atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide are collected and compiled by NOAA and can be found at NOAA Earth System Research Laboratory. The longest record of carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere is from Mauna Loa in Hawaii and was initiated in the 1950s. The resulting curve is often referred to as the “Keeling Curve” (Figure 9.1.1) after the atmospheric scientist who first began collecting CO2 data.

Carbon dioxide is not the only greenhouse gas. Human activities have also increased concentrations of methane and nitrous oxide. The IPCC has compiled data from many sources to summarize the changes in greenhouse gas concentrations for the last 2000 years (Figure 9.1.2), and concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxides have all risen dramatically with industrialization. The increases in carbon dioxide concentrations have the greatest impact on global climate, but the increases in the other greenhouse gases play a supporting role.

To understand Earth's past climate, scientists use data extracted from air bubbles trapped in ice cores from Greenland and Antarctica to study past carbon dioxide concentrations and temperatures. The longest ice core record is from Vostok, Antarctica and gives us a picture of changes in CO2 concentrations and temperatures for the last 800,000 years (Figure 9.1.3). In November 2015, CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere reached 400.16 ppm, a level not seen in the past 800,000 years on Earth. Also, there is a clear correlation between temperature changes and changes in atmospheric CO2 concentrations.

NASA has compiled surface air and ocean temperature data from around the globe and summarized temperature changes into an index (Global Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet) that compares annual average temperature with the average temperatures from 1951-1980 (Figure 9.1.4). Global temperatures have been rising for the last 100 years. We'll explore more temperature data and consider the impact of rising temperatures as we continue in this module.

Activate your learning
Question 1 - Short Answer
How does the current concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere compare with atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations measured in the Vostok ice core (Figure 9.1.3)?
Current carbon dioxide concentrations (400 ppm in November 2015) are higher than at any time in at least the past 800,000 years.
Question 2 - Short Answer
In the Keeling Curve (Figure 9.1.1), there is a clear upward trend in carbon dioxide concentrations, and there is also a smaller oscillating pattern in the data. Each year, CO2 concentration increase and decrease. What could be causing the annual cycle in carbon dioxide concentrations?
The annual cycle is a result of the large deciduous forests in the northern hemisphere. Trees take up more CO2 in the summer time when they have green leaves that are taking up CO2 to create new plant material via photosynthesis. In the fall, this process stops. In the winter, when deciduous trees lose their leaves, CO2 levels in the atmosphere increase as photosynthetic rates decline and as CO2 is released as plant material decays. The upward trend, since recording started in the late 1950s, is a result of the burning of fossil fuels and other anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions.
Question 3 - Short Answer
What is the source of the increasing CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere that is evident in the Keeling Curve (Figure 9.1.1), and that has occurred since about 1850 (Figure 9.1.2)?
The increase of CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere since 1850 is primarily from the burning of fossil fuels (petroleum, coal and natural gas). Other human activities also contribute, such as deforestation.
Question 4 - Short Answer
Global average temperatures have been increasing since about 1920. Explain the relationship between global temperature increase and increasing levels of CO2 in the atmosphere.
As carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere increase, more heat energy is trapped in the Earth's lower atmosphere, which results in an increase in temperature. As temperature increases, evaporation rates also increase. Water vapor is a very powerful greenhouse gas, so there is a positive feedback that causes an additional increase in temperature.
Climate is Already Changing
Climate is Already Changing gar5209The impacts of increasing greenhouse gas concentrations are already being felt around the globe, though the degree of change varies with location. The Third National Climate Assessment (NCS), released in 2014 by the US Global Change Research Program (USGCRP), reports that over the last century increasing average temperatures, increasing weather variability, increasing warmer nights and winters, lengthening of the growing season, and an increase in the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events have already been observed. The severity of these impacts varies throughout the US and the world because of regional topography, proximity to the ocean, atmospheric circulation patterns, and many other factors.
Changing Temperature Patterns
The average temperature in the United States has increased in the last century, with each recent decade being warmer than the past, but this warming is not uniform across the United States (Figure 9.1.5). In general, western and northern regions have warmed more than the southeastern US. In the most recent decade, all regions have shown warming. What impact might this warming trend have on our food production and water supply? For example, we know from our study of water for food production that plants evaporate or transpire water and that the rate of evaporation is dependent on temperature. If temperatures go up, we know that plants will transpire more water. The southwestern US is already a water-scarce area, so increasing temperatures will exacerbate that condition.
We'll explore more connections between climate change and food production in the next section of this module. First, let's investigate changes in some other climate variables.

Changing Precipitation Patterns
In addition to changing temperatures, the recent decades have seen changes in precipitation patterns. Nationwide average precipitation has increased (Figure 9.1.6), but the patterns of change are not as clear as those for temperature. Notice in Figure 9.1.6 that the water-scarce Southwest experienced a decline in precipitation in recent decades. Additionally, some of the precipitation increase in the eastern US came in form of extremely heavy precipitation (Figure 9.1.7) and resulted in flooding (Figure 9.1.8). Both of these effects are anticipated results of increased concentrations of heat-trapping greenhouse gases in the lower atmosphere.



Projected Climate Changes
Projected Climate Changes ksc17So far in module 9, we've studied the basics of the science of climate change and by now you should have a pretty good understanding of the relationship between greenhouse gases and temperature. We've seen how human activities, including our food systems, are contributing carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to the atmosphere. And, as greenhouse gas concentrations increase, more heat energy is trapped, so temperatures at the Earth's surface increase.
We've also seen that temperatures are already increasing around the globe and that precipitation patterns are changing, but what does the future hold? How much will temperatures increase? Will precipitation increase or decrease? Those are very good questions! And, the answers aren't perfectly clear. Atmospheric and climate scientists all over the world are working hard to estimate how Earth's climate will change as greenhouse gas concentrations increase. Future predictions are made by running computer models that simulate natural processes and human activities and estimate future conditions. Model results vary from model to model, but they all predict future warming. Also, as we've already seen, the amount of warming varies from place to place.
What are the predictions for future climate?
The models used to predict future climate are very complicated and incorporate a vast number of variables, natural processes, and human activities. Projecting into the future is always a tricky endeavor and is always fraught with uncertainty. However, all of the models predict continued warming in the future. The magnitude of the warming varies from model to model and depending on which carbon emission scenario is used. For example, warming might slow in the future if we manage to curb our burning of fossil fuels, which would result in lower carbon dioxide emissions.
The model results are presented on two websites (National Climate Change View and Global Climate Change Viewer) that allow us to view the future projections for the US and for the globe on easy-to-read maps. In the summative assessment for this module, you'll explore these websites in greater depth to extract data for your capstone assignment. Right now, we'll just look at a few of the maps to get an idea of how the climate is projected to change in the latter part of this century. Exploring these maps develops our spatial thinking skills, which in turn enhances our math skills! And, who doesn't want to be better at math?
Future climate projections are presented as the projected change compared to the latter part of the last century (1950-2005). So for example, if the projected temperature change for 2050-2074 is 4oF, then that means the 2050-2074 average temperature is projected to be 4oF higher than the average temperature from 1950-2005. All of the following maps present projected change in this manner.
First, let's look at temperature. The National Climate Change Viewer (NCCV) (Figures 9.1.9 and 9.1.10) and Global Climate Change Viewer (GCCV) (Figure 9.1.11) both provide maps of projected temperature changes. Notice that the global map gives temperature change in degrees Celsius, and the US map is in Fahrenheit. One notable aspect of all three maps is that temperature is expected to increase everywhere. As you look at these maps, notice where the temperature change is expected to be the greatest. Can you make any generalizations? What is the expected temperature change in the region where you live right now? For example, if we were in New York City, the map in Figure 9.1.9 suggests that the average maximum temperature by 2050-2074 could be 4oF higher than it was in 1950-2005.



Figure 9.1.11. Projected Change in Annual Mean Temperature (oC) 2050-2074 compared to 1980-2004. Model results are based on the RCP 8.5 emissions scenario, which is a scenario projecting continued increases in greenhouse gas emissions.
The projected changes in precipitation aren't quite as straightforward or certain as the projected temperature changes. Some regions are expected to receive more precipitation and some regions less. You can see in Figure 9.1.12 the southwestern US, a region that is already water-scarce, is expected to receive less annual precipitation on average. On the global map in Figure 9.1.13, equatorial regions are expected to receive a little more precipitation, and there's a band just north and south of the equator where precipitation is expected to decrease. The certainty in the precipitation predictions is lower than for temperature and the variability within a given year and from year to year in how the precipitation falls is expected to increase.


The NCCV also allows you to view projected changes in a few more variables that are not available on the GCCV. Students studying food regions outside of the US will need to work with their instructor to find similar data for their regions.
Precipitation falls on the land surface and flows into streams and rivers, which is called runoff. If precipitation is projected to decrease in the future, it would make sense that runoff would also decrease. Also, as temperatures increase and cause evaporation and transpiration to increase, there is less water available to run off into streams and rivers. The NCCV runoff map (Figure 9.1.14) suggests that runoff will also decrease in many areas of the US. The units for runoff are given in inches of water per month, similar to units for precipitation. In water-scarce regions where the precipitation is low, for example in deserts, often agriculture is irrigation with runoff from upstream regions where the precipitation is higher. Decreases in runoff could have adverse impacts on some regions that rely on runoff for irrigation.
As temperatures increase, there is an expected decrease in annual snowpack. While this is bad news for avid skiers, it's also bad news for regions that rely on water stored in snowpack in the winter that melts and is used for irrigation in the summer months. Figure 9.1.15 illustrates the projected change in annual mean snow in inches. Regions that don't normally get snow are indicated as zero (the deep south and southwest). The Rockies, Sierra Nevadas, Cascades as well as the mountains in the northeast are all expected to see significant decreases in annual snowpack.
The combination of increased temperatures with increased evaporation and transpiration rates will leave soils drier. Soil moisture content is projected to decrease across much of the US (Figure 9.1.16). Soil moisture is measured in units of depth of water (inches) and is the water available to plants. Some of our very important agricultural regions, the Midwest, are expected to see some of the largest declines in soil moisture storage.
The last data set, evaporative deficit, (Figure 9.1.17) gives us an idea of how much water could evaporate compared to how much water is actually available. An increase in evaporative deficit is a symptom of a transition to a hotter and drier climate. Not surprisingly the entire US is projected to see an increase in evaporative deficit, with the highest increases being in the Southwest and Midwest.
In summary, the future projected climate for the US is generally hotter and drier. Precipitation projections are more variable and less certain, but the increase in temperature and resulting increase in evaporation and transpiration will result in less runoff and drier soils in much of the US. The implications for agriculture are significant. We've already seen how water is essential for crop growth and changes in the temperature regime may have some surprising impacts on growing our food. In the next section, we'll explore projected climate changes and the potential impacts on agriculture in more detail. We'll also consider some possible adaptation strategies that can make our food systems more resilient to our changing climate.




The Role of Our Food Systems in Climate Change
The Role of Our Food Systems in Climate Change ksc17Food systems, including agriculture, play a significant role in contributing to global warming, perhaps contributing between 19% to 29% of global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions (Vermeulen et al. 2012). Growing food requires energy. While the sun is the source of energy for plant growth, a majority of the energy that fuels our modern food system comes from fossil fuels (petroleum and natural gas). Petroleum is used as a fuel for tractors and other vehicles that transport food. Natural gas is used in fertilizer production and other fossils fuels are burned to generate electricity that is used in the processing and refrigeration of food. The burning of fossil fuels is our largest source of greenhouse gases globally, and food production is a significant contributor to greenhouse gases.
The Food And Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) estimates that “the food sector (including input manufacturing, production, processing, transportation marketing and consumption) accounts for around 95 exa-Joules (1018 Joules), ...— approximately 30 percent of global energy consumption — and produces over 20 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions” (from Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations).
In addition to carbon dioxide emissions from the fossil fuel consumption associated with agricultural activities discussed above, agriculture also contributes to greenhouse gas emissions in other ways (Figure 9.1.18). The loss of above-ground vegetation when grasslands and forests are converted to agriculture contributes about six percent of the global warming potential from greenhouse gas emissions. In addition, methane released from irrigated agriculture and from digestion and decomposition of manure from ruminants combined with nitrous oxide emissions from mismanagement of fertilizers contributes about 14 percent of the increase in total warming potential (Nelson 2014).

Text description of the Figure 9.1.18.
The image is a pie chart titled “Global warming potential from greenhouse gas emissions by sector (2009)”, sourced from the World Resources Institute (2014). The chart illustrates the percentage contribution of different sectors to global greenhouse gas emissions based on their warming potential. The largest segment, shown in dark blue, represents Energy, which accounts for 70% of emissions, making it the dominant contributor. Other sectors include Agriculture (14%), Land use and forestry (6%), Waste (3%), Industrial processes (5%), and Bunker fuels (2%), which refers to fuel oil used on ships. Each sector is represented by a distinct color, with energy occupying the majority of the circle, emphasizing its overwhelming impact compared to other sources. The chart highlights the critical role of energy production and consumption in driving climate change, while also showing smaller but significant contributions from agriculture and land use.
Module 9.2: Food Production in a Changing Climate
Module 9.2: Food Production in a Changing Climate jls164In Module 9.1, we explored the causes of global climate change, the ways that our food systems contribute to greenhouse gas emissions, and how climate variables are expected to change in different parts of the US. In this unit, we’ll consider the expected impacts of global climate change on food production.
Farmers have always had to struggle against the vagaries of the weather in their efforts to produce food for a growing population. Floods, droughts, heatwaves, hailstorms, late frosts, and windstorms have plagued farmers for centuries. However, with increased levels of CO2 in the atmosphere trapping more heat energy, farmers will face more extreme weather events, greater variability, and more extreme temperatures. Unpredictable and varied weather can lead to a domino effect through the entire food system, creating shortages and food price spikes. Farmers are developing strategies for resilience in the face of a changing climate, such as, more efficient irrigation, better soil health, and planting more resilient crop varieties.
Climate change can have both direct and indirect impacts on agricultural food production. Direct effects stem directly from changes in temperature, precipitation, and CO2 concentrations. For example, as temperatures increase in crop water demands and stresses on livestock increase. Changes in the maximum number of consecutive dry days can affect crop productivity. Increases in precipitation can increase soil erosion. Increased incidence of extreme weather events can also have direct impacts on agriculture, in the form of floods, droughts, hail and high winds.
Indirect effects of climate change include changes in weed, disease, and insect populations and distributions, which will have impacts on costs of managing pests and may increase crop losses. Increased incidence of wildfire can favor survival on invasive species. Some weeds respond well to increasing CO2 concentrations and may put greater pressure on crops.
In summary, a 2015 report on Climate Change, Global Food Security, and the U.S. Food System states that by 2050, global climate change may result in decreased crop yields, increased land area in crop production, higher food prices, and slightly reduced food production and consumption, compared to model results for 2015 with no climate change (Brown et al. 2015).
Global Effects of Climate Change
Human influences will continue to alter Earth’s climate throughout the 21st century. Current scientific understanding, supported by a large body of observational and modeling results, indicates that continued changes in the atmospheric composition will result in further increases in global average temperature, changes in precipitation patterns, rising sea level, changes in weather extremes, and continued declines in snow cover, land ice, and sea ice extent, among other effects that will affect U.S. and global agricultural systems.
While climate change effects vary among regions, among annual and perennial crops, and across livestock types, all production systems will be affected to some degree by climate change. Temperature increases coupled with more variable precipitation will reduce crop productivity and increase stress on livestock production systems. Extreme climate conditions, including dry spells, sustained droughts, and heatwaves will increasingly affect agricultural productivity and profitability. Climate change also exacerbates indirect biotic stresses on agricultural plants and animals. Changing pressures associated with weeds, diseases, and insect pests, together with potential changes in timing and coincidence of pollinator lifecycles, will affect growth and yields. When occurring in combination, climate change-driven effects may not simply be additive, but can also amplify the effects of other stresses on agroecosystems.
From Expert Stakeholder Workshop for the USDA Technical Report on Global Climate Change, Food Security, and the U.S. Food System
Brown, M., P. Backlund, R. Hauser, J. Jadin, A. Murray, P. Robinson, and M. Walsh
June 25-27, 2013, Reston, VA,
Brown, M.E., J.M. Antle, P. Backlund, E.R. Carr, W.E. Easterling, M.K. Walsh, C. Ammann, W. Attavanich, C.B. Barrett, M.F. Bellemare, V. Dancheck, C. Funk, K. Grace, J.S.I. Ingram, H. Jiang, H. Maletta, T. Mata, A. Murray, M. Ngugi, D. Ojima, B. O’Neill, and C. Tebaldi. 2015. Climate Change, Global Food Security, and the U.S. Food System. 146 pages.
Climate Variables that Affect Agriculture
Climate Variables that Affect Agriculture azs2In the first part of this module, we looked at observed and predicted changes in temperature and precipitation. Now, we'll consider some of the impacts that changes in temperature and precipitation may have on crops. For example, the projected increase in temperature will increase the length of the frost-free season (the period between the last frost in the spring and the first frost in the fall), which corresponds to a similar increase in growing season length. Increases in frost-free season length have already been documented in the US (Figure 9.2.1). An increase in growing season length may sound like a great thing for food production, but as we'll see, that can make plants more vulnerable to late frosts and can also allow for more generations of pests per growing season, thus increasing pest pressure. The complexity of the system makes adapting to a changing climate quite challenging, but not insurmountable.

Crops, livestock, and pests are all sensitive to temperature and precipitation, so changes in temperature and precipitation patterns can affect agricultural production. As a result, it's important to consider future projections of climate variables so that farmers and ranchers can adapt to become more resilient.
Projected changes in some key climate variables that affect agricultural productivity are shown in Figure 9.2.2. The lengthening of the frost-free or growing season and reductions in the number of frost days (days with minimum temperatures below freezing), shown in the top two maps, can have both positive and negative impacts. With higher temperatures, plants grow and mature faster, but may produce smaller fruits and grains and nutrient value may be reduced. If farmers can adapt warmer season crops and planting times to the changing growing season, they may be able to take advantage of the changing growing season.
The bottom-left map in Figure 9.2.2 shows the expected increase in the number of consecutive days with less than 0.01 inches of precipitation, which has the greatest impact in the western and southern part of the U.S. The bottom-right map shows that an increase in the number of nights with a minimum temperature higher than 98% of the minimum temperatures between 1971 and 2000 is expected throughout the U.S., with the highest increase expected to occur in the south and southeast. The increases in both consecutive dry days and hot nights are expected to have negative effects on both crop and animal production. There are plants that can be particularly vulnerable at certain stages of their development. For example, one critical period is during pollination, which is very important for the development of fruit, grain or fiber. Increasing nighttime temperatures during the fruit, grain or fiber production period can result in lower productivity and reduced quality. Farmers are already seeing these effects, for example in 2010 and 2012 in the US Corn Belt (Hatfield et al., 2014).
Some perennial crops, such as fruit trees and grape vines, require exposure to a certain number of hours at cooler temperatures (32oF to 50oF), called chilling hours, in order for flowering and fruit production to occur. As temperatures are expected to increase, the number of chilling hours decreases, which may make fruit and wine production impossible in some areas. A decrease in chilling hours has already occurred in the Central Valley of California and is projected to increase up to 80% by 2100 (Figure 9.2.3). Adaptation to reduced chilling hours could involve planting different varieties and crops that have lower chilling hour requirements. For example, cherries require more than 1,000 hours, while peaches only require 225. Shifts in the temperature regime may result in major shifts in certain crop production to new regions (Hatfield et al., 2014).
To supplement our coverage of the climate variables that affect agriculture, read p. 18, Box 4 in Advancing Global Food Security in the Face of a Changing Climate, and scroll down to the Learning Checkpoint below.


Learning Checkpoint
What are some of the challenges that farmers will face in a changing climate?
Possible Answers:
- increased temperatures
- leads to increased ET - increased water needs for the same crop production and increased water needs for irrigation
- heat stress
- can lead to reduced crop yields
- change in timing and intensity of rainfall
- more extreme weather events – floods and droughts
- increased CO2 concentrations
- may benefit some crops and weeds
- may negatively affect the nutritional makeup of some crops
- shifting zones of crop production
- changing threats from pests, disease, and invasive species
- insects
- weeds
In the first part of this module, we explored some maps from the National Climate Change Viewer. Discuss how the predicted changes in climate that you saw in those maps (Module 9.1 Projected Climate Changes) will likely affect farmers.
Direct Effects of Climate Change on Crops
Direct Effects of Climate Change on Crops azs2Plants, whether crops or native plant species have adapted to flourish within a range of optimal temperatures for germination, growth, and reproduction. For example, plants at the poles or in alpine regions are adapted to short summers and long, cold winters, and so thrive within a certain range of colder temperatures. Temperature plays an important role in the different biological processes that are critical to plant development. The optimum temperature varies for germination, growth, and reproduction varies and those optimum temperatures needed to occur at certain times in the plant's life cycle, or the plant's growth and development may be impaired.
Let's consider corn as an example. In order for a corn seed to germinate, the soil temperature needs to be a minimum of 50oF. Corn seed typically will not germinate if the soil is colder than about 50oF. The minimum air temperature for vegetative growth (i.e., the growth of stem, leaves, and branches) is about 46oF, but the optimum range of temperatures for vegetative growth of corn is 77-90oF. At temperatures outside of the optimal range, growth tends to decline rapidly. Many plants can withstand short periods of temperatures outside of the optimal range, but extended periods of high temperatures above the optimal range can reduce the quality and yield of annual crops and tree fruits. The optimal reproduction of corn occurs between 64 and 72oF, and reproduction begins to fail at temperatures above 95oF. Reproductive failure for most crops begins around 95oF.
Water availability is a critical factor in agricultural production. We saw in Module 4 how increased temperature leads to increased transpiration rates. High rates of transpiration can also exhaust soil water supplies resulting in drought stress. Plants respond to drought stress through a variety of mechanisms, such as wilting their leaves, but the net result of prolonged drought stress is usually reduced productivity and yield. Water deficit during certain stages of a plant's growth can result in defects, such as tougher leaves in kales, chards, and mustards. Another example, blossom end rot in tomatoes and watermelon, is caused by water stress and results in fruit that is unmarketable (Figure 9.2.4 and for more photos of blossom end rot on different vegetables, visit Blossom end rot causes and cures in garden vegetables).
In addition to water stress and impacts on plant productivity and yield, increased temperatures can have other effects on crops. High temperatures and direct sunlight can sunburn developing fruits and vegetables. Intense heat can even scald or cook fruits and vegetables while still on the plant.
Crop yield
A warming climate is expected to have negative impacts on crop yields. Negative impacts are already being seen in a few crops in different parts of the world. Figure 9.2.5 shows estimated impacts of climate trends on crop yields from 1980-2008, with declines exceeding 5% for corn, wheat, and soy in some parts of the world. Projections under different emissions scenarios for California's Central Valley show that wheat, cotton, and sunflower have the largest declines in yields, while rice and tomatoes are much less affected (Figure 9.2.6). Notice that there are two lines on the graphs in Figure 9.2.6 projecting crop yields into the future. The red line corresponds to temperature increases associated with a higher carbon dioxide emissions scenario. We saw in Module 9.1 that the more CO2 we emit, the more heat energy is trapped in the lower atmosphere, and therefore the warmer the temperatures. For some crops, those higher temperatures are associated with great impacts on the crop's yield.
Why are some crops affected more by observed and projected temperature increases than others? It depends on the crop, the climate in the region where the crop is being grown, and the amount of temperature increase. Consider the Activate your learning questions below to explore this more deeply.
Why do some crops see a positive yield change with increasing temperatures, such as alfalfa in Figure 9.2.6? Generally, warmer temperatures mean increased crop productivity, as long as those temperatures remain within the optimal range for that crop. If a crop is being grown in a climate that has typical temperatures at the cooler end of the plant's optimal range, than a bit of warming could increase the crop's productivity. If the temperatures increase above the optimal range or exceed the temperature that leads to reproductive failure, then crop yields will decline.


Activate your learning
Inspect Figure 9.2.5 above. Which crops' yields have already been most affected by climate change, and which crops the least?
What are some possible reasons for the difference in yield impact between corn, wheat, and rice that you see in Figure 9.2.5?
Consider the graph for Wheat in Figure 9.2.5. What is the % yield impact in Russia and United States? What could cause differences in yield impact between regions?
Indirect Effects of Climate Change on Plants
Indirect Effects of Climate Change on Plants gar5209Weeds, Insects, and Diseases
Warming temperatures associated with climate change will not only have an effect on crop species; increasing temperature also affects weeds, insect pests, and crop diseases. Weeds already cause about 34% of crop losses with insects causing 18% and disease 16%. Climate change has the potential to increase the large negative impact that weeds, insects, and diseases already have on our agricultural production system. Some anticipated effects include:
- several weed species benefit more than crops from higher temperatures and increased CO2 levels
- warmer temperatures increase insect pest success by accelerating life cycles, which reduces time spent in vulnerable life stages
- warmer temperatures increase winter survival and promote the northward expansion of a range of insects, weeds, and pathogens
- longer growing seasons allow pest populations to increase because more generations of pests can be produced in a single growing season
- temperature and moisture stress associated with a warming climate leaves crops more vulnerable to disease
- changes in disease prevalence and range will also affect livestock production
Modeling and predicting the rate of change and magnitude of the impact of weeds, insects, and disease on crops is particularly challenging because of the complexity of interactions between the different components of the system. The agricultural production system is complex and the interactions between species are dynamic. Climate change will likely complicate the management of weeds, pests, and diseases as the ranges of these species changes.
Effects on Soil Resources
The natural productive capacity of a farm or ranch system relies on a healthy soil ecosystem. Changing climate conditions, including extremes of temperature and precipitation, can damage soils. Climate change can interfere with healthy soil life processes and diminish the ecosystem services provided by the soil, such as the water holding capacity, soil carbon, and nutrients provided by the soils.
The intensity and frequency of extreme precipitation events are already increasing and is expected to continue to increase, which will increase soil erosion in the absence of conservation practices. Soil erosion occurs when rainfall exceeds the ability of the soil to absorb the water by infiltration. If the water can't infiltrate into the soil, it runs off over the surface and carries topsoil with it (Figure 9.2.7). The water and soil that runoff during extreme rainfall events are no longer available to support crop growth.
Shifts in rainfall patterns associated with climate change are projects to produce more intense rainstorms more often. For example, there has been a large increase in the number of days with heavy rainfall in Iowa (Figure 9.2.8), despite the fact that total annual precipitation in Iowa has not increased. Soil erosion from intense precipitation events also results in increased off-site sediment pollution. Maintaining some cover on the soil surface, such as crop residue, mulch, or cover crops, can help mitigate soil erosion. Better soil management practices will become even more important as the intensity and frequency of extreme precipitation increases.


How Farmers Adapt to Climate Change
How Farmers Adapt to Climate Change azs2Farmers have had to adapt to the conditions imposed on them by the climate of their region since the inception of agriculture, but recent human-induced climate change is throwing them some unexpected curve balls. Extreme heat, floods, droughts, hail, and windstorms are some of the direct effects. In addition, there are changes in weed species and distribution, and pest and disease pressures, on top of potentially depleted soils and water stress. Fortunately, there are many practices that farmers can adopt and changes that can be made to our agricultural production system to make the system more resilient to our changing climate.
Farmers and ranchers are already adapting to our changing climate by changing their selection of crops and the timing of their field operations. Some farmers are applying increasing amounts of pesticides to control increased pest pressure. Many of the practices typically associated with sustainable agriculture can also help increase the resilience of the agricultural system to impact of climate change, such as:
- diversifying crop rotations
- integrating livestock with crop production systems
- improving soil quality
- minimizing off-farm flows of nutrients and pesticides
- implementing more efficient irrigation practices
The video below introduces and discusses several strategies being adopted by New York farmers to adapt to climate change. In addition, the fact sheet from Cornell University's Cooperative Extension about Farming Success in an Uncertain Climate produced by Cornell University's Cooperative Extension outlines solutions to challenges associated with floods, droughts, heat stress, insect invasions, and superweeds. Also, p. 35, Box 8 in Advancing Global Food Security in the Face of a Changing Climate outlines some existing technologies that can be a starting point for adapting to climate change.
Learning Checkpoint: How can farmers adapt to climate change?
- Watch 15 min video by Cornell University about Agriculture and Adaptation about how New York farmers are adapting to climate change.
- Read the fact sheet from Cornell University's Cooperative Extension about Farming Success in an Uncertain Climate
- Read p. 35, Box 8 in Advancing Global Food Security in the Face of a Changing Climate
- Answer the questions below
Video: Climate Smart Farming Story: Adaptation and Agriculture (15:09)
Check Your Understanding
How can frost damage increase with climate change, even if temperatures are overall warming?
What are some ways that the risk of frost damage can be reduced in a warming climate?
Why is triticale a beneficial forage crop for farmers to grow?
What is an important management strategy that farmers can use in growing grapes to work with a changing climate?
What climate change impacts are the farmers in the video dealing with?
What strategies are implemented by the farmers in the video to manage their farms in a changing climate?
References:
- Hatfield, J., G. Takle, R. Grotjahn, P. Holden, R. C. Izaurralde, T. Mader, E. Marshall, and D. Liverman, 2014: Ch. 6: Agriculture. Climate Change Impacts in the United States: The Third National Climate Assessment, J. M. Melillo, Terese (T.C.) Richmond, and G. W. Yohe, Eds., U.S. Global Change Research Program, 150-174. doi:10.7930/J02Z13FR. On the Web: http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/report/sectors/agriculture
- Lengnick, L. 2015. Resilient Agriculture: Cultivating Food Systems for a Changing Climate, New Society Publishers.
Climate Change in the Coupled Human-Natural System
Climate Change in the Coupled Human-Natural System azs2We've covered quite a bit of ground in this module. We explored how human activities have led to an increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide, which in turn is increasing the surface temperature of the Earth and changing precipitation patterns. The resulting impacts on our agricultural production system are complex and potentially negative. As a result, farmers are adopting new practices and technologies to adapt to our changing climate and create more resiliency in the agricultural system.
Let's put global climate change and its interaction with our agricultural system into the Coupled Human-Natural System (CHNS) diagram that we've been using throughout the course. The development of global climate change is illustrated in the CHNS diagram in Figure 9.2.9, where the increased burning of fossil fuels within the human system results in more CO2 in the atmosphere. The response in the natural system is that more heat energy is trapped. The resulting feedback that affects the human system is that temperature increases along with all of the other climate change effects that we discuss in this module.

Figure 9.2.9. Coupled Human-Natural System diagram illustrating the development of global climate change
This loop shows the human system with an arrow labeled drivers pointing to natural system with an arrow labeled feedbacks pointing back to human system. Those four concepts are defined as follows:
Human system (human system internal interactions): human population growth, industrialization, and increased burning of fossil fuels
Drivers: increased emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases
Natural system (natural system processes and interactions): increased greenhouse gas concentrations trap more heat energy in atmosphere
Feedbacks: increased temperatures, extreme weather events, sea level rise and precipitation variability
What would be the next step in the diagram? Consider the feedbacks associated with the arrow at the bottom of the diagram that will affect the human system. What are the possible responses in the human system to these feedbacks? Our response can be categorized into two broad categories: mitigation and adaptation. We've already discussed adaptation strategies that can be implemented by farmers to adapt to a changing climate. Some examples are to change the crops grown to adapt to the higher temperatures or to install more efficient irrigation systems so that crops can be grown more efficiently.
What about mitigation? Mitigation strategies are those that are targeted at reducing the severity of climate change. One important mitigation strategy is to reduce the burning of fossil fuel, and our agricultural system is a significant contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. Shifting to use renewable energy sources and more fuel-efficient equipment are two mitigation strategies. There are other important mitigation strategies that target other greenhouse gas emissions, such as nitrous oxide from fertilizer use and methane from ruminants and some types of irrigated agriculture.
In the next couple of modules, we'll talk more about strategies to make our agricultural systems more resilient and sustainable, and you'll see how our food production can become more resilient to climate change. In addition, you'll get the opportunity to explore the project climate change impacts on your capstone region and to consider how those projected change might affect the food systems of that region.
Summative Assessment: Climate Change Predictions in your Capstone Region
Summative Assessment: Climate Change Predictions in your Capstone Region jls164Summary
The summative assessment for Module 9 involves exploring the predictions of future climate variables from climate models for the US, then considering the possible impacts of increased temperature on your capstone region. Also, you will propose strategies to increase the resilience of the food systems in your capstone region to increasing temperatures.
The summative assessment for this module has two parts:
- Exploration of the National Climate Change Viewer - view national predicted change in climate variables for the US
- Data collection and interpretation from the National Climate Change Viewer for your capstone region
The second part requires that you work on the data collection for Stage 3 of the capstone project. Your grade for the module summative assessment will be based on your answers to the questions in the worksheet, which you will answer using the data you download and organize for the capstone.
For the capstone project, you will need to consider the resilience and vulnerabilities of the food systems in your assigned region to projected increases in temperatures. Your task now is to determine what are the temperature increases projected in your assigned region as a result of human-induced climate change. Also, you'll need to start thinking about what impacts those changes may have on the food system in your region. You'll use the National Climate Change Viewer (NCCV) to explore predicted changes in climate variables for the US and to investigate the projected changes in minimum and maximum monthly temperatures in your assigned region.
Instructions
Download the worksheet linked on the next page.
Submitting Your Assignment
Type your answers in essay format into the provided worksheet. If you can, highlight your answers. Submit your document to Module 9 Summative Assessment in Canvas.
Grading Information and Rubric
Your assignment will be evaluated based on the following rubric. The maximum grade for the assignment is 35 points. Pay very close attention to this rubric. The final questions on the worksheet are worth the most points!
| Criteria | Possible Points |
|---|---|
| 1. Summary of projected changes in climate demonstrates a clear understanding of the data retrieved from the NCCV. Correct units of measure are used in the discussion of climate variables. | 10 |
| 2. Summary of climate change impacts on crops shows that the students understand basic connections between plants growth and climate variables. | 10 |
| 3. The answer demonstrates that students considered the adaptation strategies presented in this module and identified strategies appropriate for the regions, including consideration of the region's crops, climate, and food systems. | 10 |
| Answers are typed and clearly and logically written with no spelling and grammar errors | 5 |
Summary and Final Tasks
Summary and Final Tasks ksc17Summary
In Module 9, we covered the human activities that have led to climate change and the resulting impacts on global climate. We explored some of the climate variables that will affect agriculture and then considered possible adaptation strategies that can be employed to make agriculture more resilient to climate change.
In the next two modules, we will delve deeper into the complexity of the coupled human-natural food system, continuing to employ spatial thinking. In Module 11, we will explore strategies to make food systems more resilient and sustainable. In order, to do that though we need to understand how vulnerable those systems are to stressors like climate change, and to identify the adaptive capacity of those systems. In that final module before the capstone, many of the concepts covered in the course will come together.
Finally, your capstone data collection should be proceeding. The Summative Assessment for Module 9 required that you capture some critical information for your capstone region. The data gathered about projected temperature changes in your capstone region is integral to your final assessment of the resilience of the food systems in your capstone region.
Reminder - Complete all of the Module 9 Tasks!
You have reached the end of Module 9. Double-check the to-do list on the Module 9 Roadmap to make sure you have completed all of the activities listed there before you begin Module 10.
References and Further Reading
Cornell University, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Climate Change Facts, 2013, Farm Energy, Carbon, and Greenhouse Gases, (https://cpb-us-e1.wpmucdn.com/blogs.cornell.edu/dist/8/4308/files/2015/02/CornellClimateChange_Farm_Energy_mitigation_FINAL-262l8bt.pdf)
Cornell University, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Climate Change Facts, 2013, Farming Success in an Uncertain Climate (https://ecommons.cornell.edu/bitstream/handle/1813/54950/CornellClimateChange_Farming-Success-in-an-Uncertain-Climate_FINAL-2l8vftg.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y)
Hatfield, J., K. Boote, P. Fay, L. Hahn, C. Izaurralde, B.A. Kimball, T. Mader, J. Morgan, D. Ort, W. Polley, A. Thomson, and D. Wolfe, 2008. Agriculture. In: The effects of climate change on agriculture, land resources, water resources, and biodiversity. A Report by the U.S. Climate Change Science Program and the Subcommittee on Global Change Research. Washington, DC., USA, 362 pp. (CCSP_Ag_Report.pdf from http://www.sap43.ucar.edu/documents/Agriculture.pdf)
Hatfield, J., G. Takle, R. Grotjahn, P. Holden, R. C. Izaurralde, T. Mader, E. Marshall, and D. Liverman, 2014: Ch. 6: Agriculture. Climate Change Impacts in the United States: The Third National Climate Assessment, J. M. Melillo, Terese (T.C.) Richmond, and G. W. Yohe, Eds., U.S. Global Change Research Program, 150-174. doi:10.7930/J02Z13FR. (NCA3_Full_Report_06_Ag.pdf from http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/report/sectors/agriculture)
Lengnick, L., 2015, Resilient Agriculture: Cultivating Food Systems for a Changing Climate, New Society Publishers, 288 pp.
Nelson, G.C., 2014, Advancing Global Food Security in the Face of a Changing Climate, The Chicago Council on Global Affairs.
Vermeulen, S.J., B.M. Campbell, J.S.I. Ingram, 2012, Climate Change and Food Systems, Annual Review of Environmental Resources, Vol. 37: 195-222. (Vermeulen_etal_2012_ClimateChangeFoodSystems.pdf from http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev-environ-020411-130608 )
