1/7. The only trace on that graph which does not show large improvement in cereal yield per hectare is the trace for Niger.
The graph ended with an anomalously bad crop year for cereals in Niger (2021). Fortunately, 2022 was much better; here's an article worldbank.org/en/news/press-…
2/7. By displaying high productivity countries like the USA along with Niger, you forced OurWorldInData to scale the graphs so that it's hard to see the trend in Niger.
But if you display Niger alone, as I've done here, you'll see that cereal yields declined there until about thirty years ago, but they've improved since then (except for 2021).
@Willard1951 @JimBlack48 @BlasphemousBan1 @S_Metzeler @Anvndarnamn5 @GAJAJW @RClausius42 @Data79504085 @BenKoby1911 @priscian @EthonRaptor @Michael_D_Crow @Mark_A_Lunn @NomadicQuantum @AristotleMrs @ScienceBlog3 @AuroriaEn @AndreGrossza @DenisDaly @Veritatem2021 @JusticeTrudeau @judgementalbe1 @ChrisBBacon3 @Coleski14 @wallytoms0 @Climatehope2 @LesserMegadeath @WernerReinhard5 @S_D_Mannix @ammocrypta @Jaisans @CarrudoDon @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @Joeyd87745119 @Devonian1342 @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @JustThi30117912 @BointonGiles @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @DaleGribble_666 3/7. The other major staple crop in Niger is cassava. Its yields have improved considerably. sealevel.info/Niger_Cassava_…
4/7. That's probably because cassava benefits tremendously from additional CO2, especially in the dry conditions which are prevalent in most of Niger. Here's a paper about it:
Cruz et al 2018. Elevated CO2 reduces whole transpiration and substantially improves root production of cassava grown under water deficit. Archives of Agronomy and Soil Science 64: 1623-1634. doi:10.1080/03650340.2018.1446523tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.108…
5/7. Most of Niger is desert or near-desert, which means most of its land is poorly suited for growing crops. Over the 60 year period shown, Niger's population increased by about 640%. As a result, the amount of land under cultivation drastically increased, resulting in more marginal land being put to the plow.
That, of course, can be expected to lower the average cereal yield per hectare. Nevertheless, other than a bad year in 2021, yields there have been improving since the mid 1990s.
6/7. That's probably because of the well-known fact that, in addition to improving production by CO2 fertilization, rising CO2 levels improve crops' water use efficiency and drought resilience. Here's a paper about wheat:
Fitzgerald GJ, et al. (2016) Elevated atmospheric [CO2] can dramatically increase wheat yields in semi-arid environments and buffer against heat waves. Glob Chang Biol. 22(6):2269-84. doi:10.1111/gcb.13263.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.11…
@Willard1951 @JimBlack48 @BlasphemousBan1 @S_Metzeler @Anvndarnamn5 @GAJAJW @RClausius42 @Data79504085 @BenKoby1911 @priscian @EthonRaptor @Michael_D_Crow @Mark_A_Lunn @NomadicQuantum @AristotleMrs @ScienceBlog3 @AuroriaEn @AndreGrossza @DenisDaly @Veritatem2021 @JusticeTrudeau @judgementalbe1 @ChrisBBacon3 @Coleski14 @wallytoms0 @Climatehope2 @LesserMegadeath @WernerReinhard5 @S_D_Mannix @ammocrypta @Jaisans @CarrudoDon @LiveLifeBK24 @TheDisproof @Joeyd87745119 @Devonian1342 @Hji45519156 @waxliberty @SuperFoxyLoxy @JaapTitulaer @wjack76995 @Rocky35418823 @NobaconEgbert @balls95652097 @JustThi30117912 @BointonGiles @SeekerTheGreat1 @ubique60 @DaleGribble_666 7/7. The science has been settled for over a century: elevated CO2 is tremendously beneficial for agriculture. The climate activists who refuse to acknowledge that established fact are science deniers. sealevel.info/learnmore.html…
As you can see, as atmospheric CO2 levels have risen, the natural CO2 removal rate has sharply accelerated. (That's a strong negative/stabilizing climate feedback.) sealevel.info/AR6_WG1_Table_…
BBanana wrote, "Temperature increases have already reduced global yields of major crops."
That's false. It's long been known that warming generally improves agricultural productivity. Here's a CIA study which summarized the relation:
2/10. Fig.7 from that study shows the number of people who could be supported per hectare of arable land, vs. temperature. The 7 curves represent varying precipitation rates. In each case, higher temperatures allow the support of higher populations, due to better crop yields.
3/10. Also, elevated CO2 directly improves crop yields, and mitigates drought impacts. That's helping make famines rare for first time in history.
Those too young to grok how revolutionary that is should count themselves blessed! Famine used to be a scourge comparable to war & disease.
According to NOAA's AGGI chart, over the last 1/3 century CH4 has accounted for just 8.6% of the radiative forcing increase from anthropogenic GHGs. Not 18% or 25%.
That's about 1/10ᵗʰ of the contribution which we get from the ongoing rise in CO2. If that tiny contribution to modest and benign warming worries you, perhaps counseling would help.
Despite the modest uptick in CH4 level over the last 15 years, the rate of rise in CH4's radiative forcing is still much slower than it was 50-60 years ago.
3/4. The relatively sharp rise in CH4 level in the 1960s & 1970s was insufficient to reverse the worrisome 1950s-70s cooling trend.
Here's a clip from CBS TV, in which Walter Cronkite, The Most Trusted Man in America™, reporting:
Hubert Lamb (source for that CBS story) was the founding director of the UEA Climate Research Unit.
Here's a 1974 CIA report, based on the best current science, about the worrisome cooling trend:
Here's an excerpt, from the Summary:
"The western world's leading climatologists have confirmed recent reports of a detrimental global climatic change… during 50 of the last 60 years the Earth has, on the average, enjoyed the best agricultural climate since the eleventh century… The world is returning to the type of climate which has existed over the last 400 years. That is, the abnormal climate of agricultural-optimum is being replaced by a normal climate of the neo-boreal era. The climate change began in 1960…"
The grim climate to which we were thought to be returning was the Little Ice Age. "Boreal" means cold:
boreal. adj. Relating to or characteristic of the climatic zone south of the Arctic, especially the cold temperate region dominated by taiga and forests of birch, poplar, and conifers…
The global cooling scare was one of the main reasons for the shiny new anti-air-pollution laws governing power plants, in the 1970s. The other main reason was "acid rain." (Note: Unlike "acidified" oceans, which are actually alkaline, acid rain really is acidic.)
1/25. The leading organization promoting the Climate Industry's "climate emergency" PR campaign is the IPCC. It has severe credibility issues. Investigative journalist Donna Laframboise explains some of them in this lecture about the IPCC's 2007 AR4 Report:
(It's 31 minutes but she speaks very clearly, so she's perfectly understandable at 2x speed.)
(Caveat: I've been an IPCC Expert Reviewer on a couple of their assessment reports.)
2/25. It's only gotten worse since then. The IPCC's 2022 AR6 Report explicitly promotes what I call "homeopathic climatology" (TCRE/RCB), which represents an overt rejection of science.
3/25. The TCRE ("Transient Climate Response to cumulative CO2 Emissions") and RCB ("Remaining Carbon Budget") concepts are homeopathy applied to climatology: the belief that the mere memory of a substance is all that's necessary for it to have its effect.