Design of the Svalbard seed vault as of early 2007

In 1992, the Global Biodiversity Convention (GBC) was adopted in Rio de Janeiro, and which placed the biodiversity issue center stage–calling for the world-wide preservation of biodiversity and its equitable and sustainable use. The convention was established in response to both the increasing rate of plant extinction (through habitat loss), fears by poorer nations of “biopiracy”, and the increasing agricultural use of land for high-value crops, to the exclusion of lesser-value ones–a practice that diminishes crop biodiversity. These lesser-value crops are typically grown by independent and small farms in less economically advanced countries. Many of these so-called “orphan crops” risk becoming extinct. Further, many species of plant or tree that fall outside the conventional definition of agriculture–such as the sea-water tolerant mangrove tree–are being ignored, to the possible peril of future agriculture.

Recent warming trends pose the greatest threat to preserving global “agrobiodiversity” due to its predicted alterations in temperature, precipitation, and sea level (thus the intrusion of saline water into fresh water ecosystems). Also, computer models show that global warming will increase the frequency and duration of flood and drought cycles. To protect civilization’s long-term food supply (and to protect against the social chaos of food shortages from consequent crop failures) from these potentially calamitous effects, scientists and agricultural policy experts, in cooperation with various governments, have begun establishing cryogenic gene banks to preserve the seeds of various, valuable crops for future agricultural use. The most notable example of this is the International Rice Research institute (IRRI) in the Philippines which stores over 100,000 strains of rice.

Read more of this story »

To understand our current environmental dilemma, it helps to look at earlier civilizations that also got into environmental trouble. Our early twenty-first century civilization is not the first to face the prospect of environmentally induced economic decline. The question is how we will respond.

As Jared Diamond points out in his book Collapse, some of the early societies that were in environmental trouble were able to change their ways in time to avoid decline and collapse. Six centuries ago, for example, Icelanders realized that overgrazing on their grass-covered highlands was leading to extensive soil loss from the inherently thin soils of the region. Rather than lose the grasslands and face economic decline, farmers joined together to determine how many sheep the highlands could sustain and then allocated quotas among themselves, thus preserving their grasslands. Their wool production and woolen goods industry continue to thrive today.

Not all societies have fared as well as the Icelanders. The early Sumerian civilization of the fourth millennium BC had advanced far beyond any that had existed before. Its carefully engineered irrigation system gave rise to a highly productive agriculture, one that enabled farmers to produce a food surplus, supporting formation of the first cities and the first written language, cuneiform.

By any measure it was an extraordinary civilization, but there was an environmental flaw in the design of its irrigation system, one that would eventually undermine its food supply. The water that backed up behind dams built across the Euphrates was diverted onto the land through a network of gravity-fed canals. As with most irrigation systems, some irrigation water percolated downward. In this region, where underground drainage was weak, this slowly raised the water table. As the water climbed to within inches of the surface, it began to evaporate into the atmosphere, leaving behind salt. Over time, the accumulation of salt on the soil surface lowered the land’s productivity.

Shifting from wheat to barley, a more salt-tolerant plant, postponed Sumer’s decline, but it was treating the symptoms, not the cause, of their falling crop yields. As salt concentrations continued to build, the yields of barley eventually declined also. The resultant shrinkage of the food supply undermined this once-great civilization. As land productivity declined, so did the civilization.

Read more of this story »

Confession time. I have to admit that I may have been a bit of a grumpy environmental blogger, failing to give due credit where credit is due..

In particular, I have frequently complained about bio-fuels driving up world food prices in absence of a few wider considerations, I’ve been dismissive at the EU’s lack of ability to actually implement anything that makes a real difference to the environment, and most recently I described an environmental tax levied on cows as the most stupid idea ever. So it is maybe time to examine these issues in a more positive light – negativity is, after all, the enemy of progress.

Read more of this story »

In a report presented in Budapest on Thursday, scientists from the IPCC reported that the decline in the quantity and quality of water would affect health and agriculture in arid areas around the world.

The Western United States, Mediterranean Sea basin, and parts of Southern Africa and northeastern Brazil were singled out as places where drought could lead to less water for farming, and hence food shortages.

The UN World Food Program also reported yesterday that drought in Australia has slowed down the nation’s grain harvest, which has raised wheat prices and has diminished the amount of this food source for the WFP. The WFP has traditionally used Australian wheat to feed 80 million of the world’s hungry.

Read more of this story »