SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the do-you-want-[endangered]-fries-with-that? dept.
Some of our favorite foods and drinks could be considered "endangered" because the places where they are grown are being severely impacted by climate change. If this isn't proof that we need to do something about climate change, I don't know what is. To start off, here are a few foods that are part of our every lives that might not be around for long.
- Coffee
- Chocolate
- Beer
- Maple Syrup
- Seafood: Lobsters and Salmon
- Peanut Butter
- Potatoes
What can we do about it?
Some farmers and researchers have started looking into bringing back ancient or near-extinct crops that might be better suited for this new reality.
Amaranth is one example. Once considered a sacred grain by the Aztec, amaranth was banned by the Spanish because it was used in sacrificial ceremonies.
[...] Cultivated in Ethiopia for more than 7,000 years, the enset plant is known as the "false banana" because of its similarity to the banana tree. It can withstand heavy drought and heavy rain, making it a plant that can naturally withstand climate change. [It] produces two times more food per unit of land than cereal crops.
[...] While most plants making a comeback are known for being drought resistant and having a high tolerance for heat, other plants (like taro) can be grown in flooded areas, a concern for rising sea levels in Asia and other parts of the world.
[...] Some believe that [...] seed banks are the best way to prepare for climate change. John Torgrimson, executive director of the Seed Savers Exchange in the United States, told Truthout that "while not every traditional variety tastes great or looks great, its genetics may be invaluable 50 or 100 years from now when the climate is different. There are qualities in varieties that we don't even know about. It might be resistant to a particular disease; it may grow well in a particular region; it may have certain traits that will allow us to deal with climactic conditions going forward. Diversity is an insurance policy".
(Score: 4, Interesting) by VLM on Monday October 03 2016, @01:23PM
that might not be around for long
In the united states. See below.
What can we do about it?
Move to Canada, they have better health care system anyway.
I thought it was pretty bogus so I googled a bit and at least for Sugar Maples I found
http://www.fs.fed.us/nrs/atlas/tree/318 [fs.fed.us]
It superficially seems to boil down (oh the sappy jokes in a maple syrup discussion) to everything gonna move about one or two states north. Sugar maple production being centered more or less in the UP of Michigan, going a state or two north means Canada.
Of course this covers all species in all areas, for example unless you live in or around New Orleans today you probably have no idea what a "spruce pine" is. But after some global warming, pretty much everyone in the former confederacy is gonna have them in their backyards.
Paradoxically I worked in a food store a long time ago as a starving student and based solely on sales, americans don't use maple syrup and badly confuse tinted corn syrup with maple syrup. So if maple syrup goes away (aka moves to Canada) then like 1% of the population being foodies will freak out and nobody else will notice. Seriously I personally shelf stocked pallets of fake corn syrup for every individual shipping box of tiny expensive maple syrup.
I mean I buy the stuff because I like it and I'm a bit foodie and when I'm going to eat something disgustingly unhealthy its going to be top tier (like I do eat cheezeburgers but not McDonalds). If the price goes up 10x its not going to affect me too much other than being slightly healthier, and its going to affect everyone else even less...
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday October 03 2016, @01:27PM
The maple stuff is maybe 5x the price of Aunt Jemima... so it's noticeable.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by VLM on Monday October 03 2016, @01:51PM
As a luxury good, its already almost like arguing if doubling the price of the latest Lamborghini would increase or decrease sales. In a culture where all cars are called Lamborghinis even though 99.9% of the population buys something like a Yaris and calls it a Lamborghini anyway.
I would rather not have syrup, or not have much syrup, than to choke down fake pancake syrup. That stuff is gross, like boiled down Sprite soda. Which is what it is, basically. I mean, I know high carb junk food is very bad for my health, so when I do indulge, why eat the crap stuff? Pancake syrup, ugh.
(Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Monday October 03 2016, @09:38PM
I'm just glad that they've finally tried to bring some reason to the grading system. Most people never realized that the old grading framework was developed back in the day that people were looking for a relatively flavorless sugar replacement, so "Grade A Fancy" was the best thing if you didn't have cane sugar handy, while "Grade B" was for people who actually liked maple flavor (which is one of the things that makes true maple syrup more distinctive than the corn syrup fake stuff).
Fancy Grade was never good for anything -- in my book -- other than a sugar substitute, or perhaps for pouring on vanilla ice cream (or, for classic New England, fresh snow). The flavor was way too delicate to make it worthwhile for much -- you might as well buy the corn syrup -- though people used to pay a premium for it. ("It's fancy!")
I have friends who cook their own syrup after tapping their trees every year, and I always request the "extra dark." More flavor than even standard Grade B (or, as it's now known under new legislation in many places, "Grade A - Very Dark Color").
(Score: 2) by VLM on Monday October 03 2016, @09:56PM
My theory is the old grading system evolved in the bad old days where clear at least meant it didn't have dirt in it. Now a days with advanced analysis equipment I think you can pretty much assume its not just tea or food coloring or carmelized cane sugar, so dark more flavorful doesn't matter.
I did see the PBS cooking show with the blind taste testing where the depth of color does not necessarily correlate with approval of flavor. Perhaps the ancients decades ago really prized the floral notes that show best with an uncarmelized less maple flavored syrup...
Honey has some weird point based grading where the more "fail" the lower the grade (where "fail" is all manner of contaminants) That might be the way to go for syrup.
(Score: 1) by kurenai.tsubasa on Monday October 03 2016, @03:31PM
And… *drools*… it's soo worth it.
Quick! We need to science the shit out of this. We need a crack team of engineers to build giant climate controlled domes so we can continue to grow maple trees! Perhaps we can build a network of canals [wikipedia.org] to bring water to these maple syrup production domes! What could possibly go wrong?
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday October 03 2016, @03:43PM
If we want to science the shit out of maple syrup, I'm reminded of this endeavor:
https://soylentnews.org/~takyon/journal/2037 [soylentnews.org]
Just recreate it on a molecular level, out of whatever shitty sources of biomass your area can grow. It's a step towards the Star Trek/HHGTTG future.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by t-3 on Monday October 03 2016, @06:40PM
Domes and stuff probably wouldn't be necessary if we just planted enough trees. The climatic effect of large forests will help lower the temperature and increase rainfall. Plus if we can get some New-Deal-era projects going again, like earthworks through the Sonoran Desert and reforesting that area, unemployment and climate change could both be mitigated a little. Of course, there would be a ton of "environmentalists" opposing returning the Sonoran desert to the forested state it was in before the native cultures clear cut everything and then died when the canals dried up.
(Score: 2) by Arik on Monday October 03 2016, @05:37PM
Huh? This is a long ways from New Orleans: http://www.sprucepine-nc.gov/
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by VLM on Monday October 03 2016, @06:45PM
LOL they'll be growing them there soon enough. Well in a couple centuries.
http://www.fs.fed.us/nrs/atlas/tree/115 [fs.fed.us]