SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Evan Halper writes in the LA Times that with efforts to reduce carbon emissions lagging, researchers, backed by millions of dollars from the federal government, are looking for ways to protect key industries from the impact of climate change by racing to develop new breeds of farm animals that can stand up to the hazards of global warming. "We are dealing with the challenge of difficult weather conditions at the same time we have to massively increase food production" to accommodate larger populations and a growing demand for meat, says Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack. For example a team of researchers is trying to map the genetic code of bizarre-looking African naked-neck chickens to see if their ability to withstand heat can be bred into flocks of US broilers. "The game is changing since the climate is changing," says Carl Schmidt. "We have to start now to anticipate what changes we have to make in order to feed 9 billion people," citing global-population estimates for 2050.
Warmer temperatures can create huge problems for animals farmed for food. Turkeys are vulnerable to a condition that makes their breast meat mushy and unappetizing. Disease rips through chicken coops. Brutal weather can claim entire cattle herds. Some climate experts, however, question the federal government's emphasis on keeping pace with a projected growing global appetite for meat. Because raising animals demands so many resources, the only viable way to hit global targets for greenhouse gas reduction may be to encourage people to eat less meat and point to an approach backed by Microsoft founder Bill Gates that takes animals out the process altogether. "There's no way to produce enough meat for 9 billion people," says Bill Gates. "Yet we can't ask everyone to become vegetarians. We need more options for producing meat without depleting our resources."
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Wednesday May 07 2014, @03:20AM
... and that's what this is about. Scare people into believing livestock cannot survive a degree or two of 'climate change' and you fuel the 'livestock is cruel' meme in the minds of the uninformed public.
Funny how domestic livestock are found in an even wider range of climates than their nearest relatives in the wild, and do better under a wider range of conditions... care to guess why? Because one of the best traits livestock can have is adaptability, so you don't lose your herd the first time you have a really harsh winter or a really hot summer. Livestock producers have selected for this since time immemorial.
Chickens are particularly adaptable, and can thrive anywhere in the range from -20F to +110F... even varieties that haven't been selected for some particular range of temperature tolerance. (When it gets below -20F or above +110F, and they're on their own, they finally decide it's time to spend the day in the barn.)
And if producers are dim enough to buy into this -- if you skew herds and flocks toward varieties that are primarily heat-adapted, well, those same critters can't deal with the hard winters that are more the norm in livestock-producing areas. If everyone bought into these varieties, voila, first hard winter and you're rid of those pesky livestock producers.
[quoting myself from That Other Site, because I'm too lazy to reconstruct it, plus a few thoughts I've had since]
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.