Rutgers Scientists Warn NJ Farmers About Impacts of Climate Change

Rapid and Superficial Presentation

Farmers Push Back and ask a Bunch of Denial Questions

Today, I headed out to the Westin Hotel at Princeton Forrestal Village (immerse yourself in “The Westin Essence”), for an important presentation to the annual conference of the NJ Farm Bureau.

I had to call to ask for directions, but I knew I found the place, because instead of the usual Mercedez Benz’s and BMW’s, the parking lot was packed with pickup trucks with bumper stickers: “No Farmers, No Food”.

Inside, I found the elegant “Ballroom Salons” packed with guys in blue jeans, flannel shirts, and boots – not the typical Gucci’s.

The issue of climate change has been extremely controversial in the agricultural community, which – to put it mildly – has not been receptive to the science of climate change. State climatologists have even been fired for talking to farmers about climate – for an example of that story, listen to this superb piece “Hot in My Backyard” (especially Act One – CO2 in Colorado).

I)  Robson Introduction

I went to hear Rutgers scientist Dr. Marjorie Kaplan speak – she was listed on the agenda. But instead, we got her boss, Dr. Anthony Broccoli.

To soften the edge, Broccoli was introduced by Rutgers Dean Mark Robson as a former agricultural meteorologist – hey, he’s no dangerous radical, just one of the boys!

Seeming to anticipate and nip the denialism in the bud, Robson’s introduction began by noting that it was not Rutgers’ role to conduct a debate about whether climate change was happening, but to provide useful information to help farmers plan.

To provide examples of that, Robson noted that Rutgers has found that certain cranberry varieties are more tolerant to heat.

To make it real, Robson highlighted new insect problems that NJ has never had before.

Warmer winters allow insect populations to thrive and become stronger over winter. This results in more insect pressure in spring, leading to earlier and more intense pesticide spraying. Farmers need to understand and plan for these kind of impacts – and more.

II)  Broccoli presentation

Broccoli was a substitute for Dr. Kaplan, a former DEP scientist now with Rutgers’ Climate Adaptation program (full disclosure: I worked in the same office with Kaplan at DEP).

My guess is that Broccoli made the presentation because the the Farm Bureau crowd was sure to push back and because the conference was mentioned in the news. Rutgers probably wanted to go with the A team in this hostile and male dominated climate. I feel bad for Dr. Kaplan, who was present and obviously available to present – the Old Boys network undermined her.

Broccoli make a brief presentation to NJ’s farmers about the question he highlighted and framed on his powerpoint:

“How will climate change affect you?” (as if it were a future condition not already happening – reload: “How is climate change affecting you?”)

Broccoli rushed through his superficial presentation like he couldn’t wait to get out of the place – he highlighted 5 points with data slides:

1) Increasing temperature trend – data show warming of 2 degrees fahrenheit over the last 100 years, but that rate has doubled since 1980.

2) unusually warm and cold month data show that that the latest warmest months are 25 warm and 2 cold. Prior to 1930, there were 41 cold months and after 1990, there were 32 warm months.

3) rainfall data is not as clearcut as the temperature trend. But the trend data don’t tell the story,  the variability does. Significant variability by decade (drought – wet) and fall/spring season.

The rainfall is becoming more intense – from 1958 – 2011, heavy rainfall events comprised 74% of total rainfall.

4) rising sea levels – 1.5 feet over last 100 years, projections higher (he did not quantify projections). Significant implications for flooding and salt water intrusion into South Jersey water supplies. (Hey, are there any NJ farms in flood prone river valleys?)

5) Rutgers has a Climate Change Adaptation Alliance involving all impacted stakeholders. He closed by noting that agriculture is the most directly impacted by climate change, compared to others.

I think he finished in about 10 minutes!

Not at all persuasive.

There was very, very little on actual agricultural related impacts, nothing on crop productivity or on forests. [and nothing on adaptation, the topic on the agenda and no real examples to flesh out the question he himself framed: ” how will climate change affect you”.]

How could that be, when everything from the timing of the seasons, the pattern of rainfall, the insects and pests populations, and temperature regimes plants face are radically changing? There is quite a bit of science to present that was totally ignored.

Robson provided more concrete examples in his introduction. How could Broccoli be so vague and superficial to an audience of real farmers if he began his scientific career as an agricultural meteorologist?

I again got the sense that Broccoli was intimidated and afraid to engage the implications of the issue, particularly with a hostile audience.

III)  Questions:

The questions all repeated various climate denier myths, which Broccoli shot down in rapid fire, almost dismissive response:

1. Q – What explains the 60-% increase in polar ice caps?

A – The result of annual variability and conditions like the jet stream, which was favorable to melt conditions in 2012 and not so in 2103. Even that increase, it still would have been a record low prior to 2007.

2. What do you attribute temperature increase to?

There is scientific consensus –  97% of scientist agree that cause is man made greenhouse gas emissions, especially CO2.

3. How about the ice age 15,000 years ago?

That is due to the shape of the earth’s orbit. Changes in orbit shape trigger ice age. Current orbit is same as 20,000 – 100,000 years ago, that triggered ice age, but we are experiencing warming nonetheless.

4. Explain the climate impacts of particulates from wood burning stoves?

Broccoli said he was beyond his expertise on particulates, but contrasted wood with fossil ruled by noting that wood is a renewable resource. New tree growth absorbs some of the carbon emissions.

5. How do “carbon monoxide” emissions from volcanoes compare to human emissions?

This question, which confused CO with CO2, was asked by Kurt Alsteed, a current member of the NJ Highlands Commission. (correction: Kurt Alstede, Vice-Chair of the Highlands Council – I’ve been thinking about the Pinelands Commission lately.  Alstede just earned a new nickname: Volcano!

Broccoli dismissed these emissions as less than 1% of human CO2 emissions from fossil fuels.

6. There is a fear in the Ag. community of a controlled regulatory scheme. But are there any positive aspects of climate change?

A – There are techniques that can sequester more carbon in soils. That could be a mitigation strategy. (I could almost see the lightbulbs going off – we can get mitigation offset money!!!)

NJ benefits from local production, and local markets and consumption, which has a positive impact due to less transportation emissions.

That’s all – over by 1:53 pm – total time about 20 minutes.

The audience, without missing a beat, quickly moved on to the next agenda item – policy resolutions – more on that later.