However, this paper is temperature effects only and doesn't take into account of CO2 fertilisation effects, adaptation or economic factors like trade. What happens when you do? Well, its complicated! I am not an expert! But some papers that might prove useful....
Adaptation isn't easy or cost free, but this paper finds that measures like improved water and fertiliser management could make climate change impacts on agriculture fairly manageable (obviously we have to actually do them for this to be the case) https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aafa3e
When you intergrate data on climate impacts and CO2 fertilisation with the effects of trade as an adaptation measure, the results become yet more complex. This paper does so and questions the benefit of the 1.5 targets vs 2, for agriculture https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/aae6a9/meta
And I haven't even mentioned nutrition either! I think that climate change impacts on agriculture is one of the most complicated things to assess and understand. There are huge risks but its straightforward. This thread is just a partial picture but hopefully some useful links!
*not straightforward!!
Tim has rightly pointed out that I have forgotten pests and diseases! https://twitter.com/timgbenton/status/1278347267846660101
I thought this thread did some pretty good numbers, but maybe for the big retweets and likes I should have just tweeted a load of old bollocks
Thought I'd update my "climate change and agriculture - its complicated" thread with an interesting new paper. Crop yields in the US will be harmed by extremes of heat, but benefit (and lead to slight net yield increase) from increased rainfall extremes https://www.nature.com/articles/s41558-020-0830-0
You can follow @mammuthus.
Tip: mention @twtextapp on a Twitter thread with the keyword “unroll” to get a link to it.

Latest Threads Unrolled: