Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

From the article:

"Pollyannaish plant physiologists will point out that the cereal-crop math applies only to those regions already at peak growing temperature, and they are right — theoretically, a warmer climate will make it easier to grow corn in Greenland. But as the pathbreaking work by Rosamond Naylor and David Battisti has shown, the tropics are already too hot to efficiently grow grain, and those places where grain is produced today are already at optimal growing temperature — which means even a small warming will push them down the slope of declining productivity. And you can’t easily move croplands north a few hundred miles, because yields in places like remote Canada and Russia are limited by the quality of soil there; it takes many centuries for the planet to produce optimally fertile dirt."



In the very long term, how can you dispute the benefit of human expansion in Antarctica? Humans have thrived in times when there was little glaciation and suffered in times of increased glaciation. The only benefit of glaciers is that we're accustomed to the climate they promote. I have no doubt that mankind could adjust to and thrive in a world without glaciers. It's ridiculous how afraid humans are to engineer their planet compared to a century ago.


I think Antarctica is 1/2 the size of North America. You have a house of 400m^2, I present you with a house of 100m^2 and invite you to consider the upside.


It's not a trade though, especially with most/all of Canada and Alaska becoming livable. Not to mention unrelated benefits. like year-round arctic navigation and safer navigation around Antarctica




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2027 batch! Applications are open till November 2.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: