Monday, June 18, 2007

Food Shortages and Food Inflation: Malthusian future?

Image: Food skyscraper of the future?


Although Malthus has long been laughed at by those convinced that technology will solve any problem, in any finite system, one must reach some sort of system limits, as demand for a resource outstrips that method of producing it.

Although it may happen for slightly different reasons than postulated under the Malthusian catastrophe scenario, it appears this is starting to happen with food and will soon be found in a supermarket near you, via food inflation.

There is a confluence of forces that make serious food inflation, at the minimum, particularly likely over the next five to ten years:

Factor number one is the bee die back, and the effect it is likely to have on food prices over the next few years, as yields are curtailed due to a reduction in pollination. One economist figures that this will put over $15 Billion in North American crops at risk, all adding to potential for food inflation.

Factor number two is the growing wealth of emerging markets, and their propensity to emulate a western-style meat-heavy type diet, as wealth grows. This puts increased pressure on grain crops in particular, as it takes anywhere from about 5-20 pounds of grain to produce a single pound of meat. As large populations in China and India move further away from vegetarian or semi-vegetarian type diets, this strains limited global food stores even further, adding to food inflation.

Note: If you're on a blog aggregator, you can visit the Confused Capitalist here or here (http://confusedcapitalist.blogspot.com/) for additional articles and exclusive content!

Factor number three is the changing climate. Scientists have long known that food yields can come under pressure in at least two ways as global temperatures climb. Firstly, at higher temperatures, some plants - despite ample water - either cease production, or lower production. In either case, yields are lowered. Secondly, changing climate results in more extreme weather, including droughts, hurricanes, extreme rainfall etc. Total yields are obviously reduced under those circumstances too. (Alt citation, PDF)

This was recently brought home to me by an Australian cousin, who laments the drought his country has been going through for some time: he tells of kids in some parts of the country now entering high school, who have never seen rain.

Factor number four is the number of lunatic politicians, in their bid to never offend anyone while running for office, avoid telling the truth about ethanol from corn: it's doubtful it actually produces any additional (net) energy after it's energy inputs are calculated, AND it's going to (in fact, already has) further increased food costs.

I watched a shameful 20/20 series where every single presidential candidate at a town-hall type meeting claimed that ethanol was part of the solution, rather than more likely to contribute to an even bigger problem. Whatever happened to a "give 'em hell", Harry Truman style candidate? Are they all too meek, too bland, and too gutless for even one of them to stand up and tell the truth? And the truth is, is that ethanol, bio-diesel, or any other fuel made from food sources is only going to add to food inflation, possibly to serious food inflation.

One article also discusses many of these issues and interestingly points out that China, to feed itself, should be adding a quantity of arable land equal to Maine, every year. Instead, it has lost that amount every year over the past decade. Another article, in the respected Popular Science magazine, discusses these looming food questions.

There are, of course, always those head cases who are convinced that technology will solve any problem. However, increasing technological solutions have coincided with increased energy demands and, in a global warming world, one of these trends most likely has to give.

I read a recent article suggesting that food skyscrapers may be the way of the future - but these won't be coming any time soon and, due to costs, may end up with all those other strange Popular Science ideas that never see the light of day due to cost or technical issues that can't reasonably be overcome.

The Confused Capitalist will provide some practical and investment advice on how to deal with this over the coming while.

More reading sources:





JW

The Confused Capitalist

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Good article but I don't understand how you can be confused. Capitalism is starving millions of people right now. Soon it will starve North Americans too. You should get a new name.
Taurus Ox,
Canada

Jay Walker said...

You may be right, but unfortunately, the inverse of capitalism, communism, proved even worse at feeding people.

Jay Walker

whysuck? said...

Dude, good ideas but no offense, they sound lunatic. I MEAN DUDE!Why would U be confused/ doesn't make sense...