55
Food price fears after Europe’s heatwave destroys estimated €2bn of crops (www.theguardian.com)
submitted 3 months ago by to c/climate@slrpnk.net
11 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 14 points 3 months ago (5 children)

Still an under-reaction. The next years will be absolutely brutal. Supply chain disprutions due to blockages, destroyed refineries, heat waves already disrupting crop yields and a looming, ungodly (h)el(l) nino picking up steam? Buckle up.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (4 children)

    What degree of brutal? I feel like I have been told that before and then very little happens.

    Food and energy prices could both double and it would still be fairly minor in comparison to the damage to my monthly finances caused by Liz Truss...

    But maybe some of that is that I already live far more sustainably than most? I cycle instead of drive. Don't eat much meat, grow what I can focusing on the higher priced things although its a very small garden so not getting a huge amount there. Guerilla gardening and foraging is the most "profitable" though.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (3 children)

    Here is an primer on the topic.

    Of course, the regional effects of end stage capitalism that most of the western world now gets to experience will most likely at least match the fallout of said events. Still, globally there will be a lot of suffering and we will all be depper in the water, so to speak.

    As to how to prepare? I can't really tell. I'm building up a stockpile currently, but the usual climate resilience rules apply. Of coursey minimize your footprint, but also build a local community, try to optimize growing etc.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago (2 children)

    Given the amount of food that is lost in making meat, could this be more a case of just having to change what people eat rather than the apocalypse that some seem to make it sound like?

    The amount of land and water required to feed someone on beef, compared to the amount required to feed them oats?

    Now I am curious how that looks with fertiliser too. Kcal yield of growing oats without fertiliser compared to kcal yield of beef even if you use fertiliser to grow their food.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Saw a yt video recently that claimed the calorie efficiency of eating cows is about 3% (which sounds reasonable if you think about it). So then for every 100 calories we feed a cow, a human eats 3.

    So even if you do use fertilizer to grow all of it... Growing 30 times less of it to fill the same need is a massive difference.

    And then there's the reduction of green house gasses that goes along with that too.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 3 months ago

    So unless fertiliser results in more than 30x yield, the cow is worse than eating the food directly.

    Only thing is if its grass fed then its food humans can't eat. But grain or soy fed cattle? We could eat that! And I can't imagine many people are using fertiliser to grow grass. Well, except people into lawns.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent