climate change

Has climate change changed in the media?

Marion Ferrat January 14, 2014

Whether in a concerned, neutral, alarmist or sceptical tone, climate change is often reported in the media. But has the press approached this subject differently over the years? Marion Ferrat takes a look at the UK press coverage of the last two IPCC reports and investigates how the treatment of climate change has changed in British newspapers.

Glaciers outside of Ammassalik in Greenland – Source: Christine Zenino, Wikimedia Commons.

Last week, polling expert Leo Barasi posted the results of a very interesting study in his public opinion blog Noise of the Crowd. Following the waves of flooding that have hit the UK – and been at the centre of the UK press coverage – for the past month, he analysed the trends in flooding stories in the newspapers since 2005. He found that the number of news articles about flooding that also mentioned climate change dropped from 25% in 2009 to 11% last year.

This result reflects a broader trend in the public perception of climate change. Since the 2009 Copenhagen climate change conference, there has been a decrease in the number of people believing in human impacts on climate, and a rise in climate change scepticism.

One of the triggers of this change was the unfortunate email hacking incident at the University of East Anglia, commonly referred to as Climategate. In November 2009, over 1000 private emails between scientists of the Climatic Research Unit were stolen and released online. Some of these emails were interpreted as scientists hiding data in a bid to convince the world of the dangers of global warming. The controversy took the internet by storm and, although a careful investigation later showed that the scientists had not behaved in an untrustworthy way or manipulated any data, the damage was done.

The London Times, 6 July 1863 – Source: Wikimedia Commons.

After the release of the last IPCC report in September 2013, I carried out a similar analysis of climate change coverage in the UK press. I compared the press coverage of this fifth Assessment Report (AR 5) with that of the previous report (AR 4) in February 2007. Using a newspaper database called Factiva, I read all the news articles published in eight UK daily newspapers during the week of the two reports’ release¹. Here is what I found.

News coverage of IPCC AR 4 and AR 5

The 5^th Assessment Report (2013) saw less coverage than the 4^th Assessment Report (2007), with 22 and 33 articles, respectively. The majority were published in The Times, The Guardian, The Independent and The Daily Telegraph. Over 80% of the news stories were covered by specialist science or environmental correspondents in 2013, against 48% in 2007.

What type of climate change?

I was interested in what was actually being reported in the press. Were journalists more concerned by air temperatures or ocean warming, or perhaps extreme events?

In 2007 and 2013, all newspapers talked about changes in temperature (64% in both years). Discussions of changes in sea level increased from 36% to 45% in 2007 and 2013, respectively, and climate extremes from 15 to 27%.

Coverage mentioning the oceans trebled from 9% in 2007 to 27% in 2013. This is interesting given the controversy surrounding the so-called “warming hiatus”. Global atmospheric temperatures have been relatively stable since 1998, and climate sceptics argue this is evidence that CO2 emissions do not dangerously affect temperatures. Scientists have suggested that the oceans have a complex role to play in modulating atmospheric temperatures.

But the most obvious change was the number of articles mentioning climate models. Despite being a central component of scientific results in both reports, references to models in the press were made in only 9% of the 2007 articles against 45% in 2013.

From scared to sceptical: a changing tone

In 2007, 42% of the articles across all news outlets but The Daily Mirror described the report as bleak, sobering, gloomy, frightening, grim, stark or terrifying. These adjectives were absent from the 2013 coverage, which rather used more neutral words such as most comprehensive, most authoritative or making the most overwhelming case (27% of the articles).

One big difference was the number of direct references to climate change scepticism or denial, which doubled from 30% in 2007 to 59% in 2013.

From cataclysm to careful concern in Britain

Newspapers such as The Daily Express, Daily Mail and The Sun were most concerned with consequences of climate change in Britain. Interestingly, these concerns were different in 2007 and 2013. The references were very sensationalist in 2007, with reports in The Daily Express, The Daily Mirror and The Sun that climate change “would devastate Britain”, which would face “disasters similar to the devastation […] caused by Hurricane Katrina”. They were more moderate in 2013, referring only to Britain likely experiencing “wetter winters and drier summers”.

Says who?

Quotes are an important part of a news article. They give weight to particular aspects of a story and enable journalists to convey opinions whilst maintaining the objectivity of their reporting.

In 2007, 39% of all articles contained quotes from scientists, rising to 55% in 2013. The percentage of articles containing quotes from politicians also rose from 36% to 41%. Most quoted politicians in each case were the Environment Secretary David Miliband (2007) and the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change Ed Davey (2013), both stressing the importance of climate change mitigation.

The largest change can be seen in the percentage of articles including quotes from climate change sceptics, which increased from 6% in 2007 to 27% in 2013.

What has changed?

Overall, the coverage of both IPCC reports was factual, detailed and accurate across all newspapers studied. The 5^th Assessment Report saw less coverage than AR 4, suggesting a general dip in public interest in climate change. One interesting point was the discrepancy between the articles’ content and their titles in tabloid papers. Although the articles themselves were generally quite neutral, their titles voiced a much more pronounced scepticism. Given that most people would first and foremost read and remember an article’s title, their wording can have an important impact on public opinion.

The tone of the 2013 coverage was both less sensationalist (e.g. minimal use of words such as stark and terrifying) and more likely to include mentions of- and quotes by climate change sceptics.

In terms of scientific content, the main difference was the inclusion of the concept of climate models and their limitations and strengths in the 2013 press coverage (in 45% of articles against only 9% in 2007). This is possibly also in response to the ‘warming hiatus’, rather than because climate models have been a larger part of AR 5.

The political nature of the climate change debate was seen in the coverage of both IPCC reports, with over one third of the articles quoting politicians in both years.

The biggest difference was the much larger place given to climate change sceptics in the news coverage, nearly doubling from 30% in 2007 to 59% in 2013. Despite the increased certainty of the IPCC results from AR 4 to AR 5 (moving from 90% to 95% certainty that humans are influencing climate), it is clear that there is more room in the media today for uncertainty and climate change scepticism.

Marion

¹This study covered the release of the Working Group 1 reports. News articles were selected from the News sections only, by searching for the terms climate change and either IPCC or Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

Snacking on climate

Marion Ferrat December 10, 2013

ClimateSnack is a new initiative for early-career climate scientists around the world to improve their writing and communication skills. Snackers get to write tasty climate blogs and discuss them in a friendly and interactive environment. Marion talked to three members of the Imperial College London group for the latest issue of GeoQ!

Good written and oral communication skills are quickly becoming a pre-requisite for early career scientists. Writing, presenting, interacting and collaborating are important for making contacts, developing research proposals, applying for fellowships and communicating one’s work. This is particularly true in a very publicised field such as climate change research, where inter-disciplinarity reigns, and the ability to convey ideas to wide ranging audiences is crucial.

But gaining these skills is not always straightforward. Writing and publishing online can be daunting, so can interacting with researchers outside of one’s field.

Born in January 2013 at the University of Bergen, ClimateSnack brings together postdoctoral and PhD scientists across climate change disciplines, and helps them improve the way they communicate their work in a friendly, interactive environment. In July, Imperial College London became the second institution to join what has now become a global network of hungry climate snackers.

Panorama of Bergen – Source: Sindre, Wikimedia Commons.

I joined ClimateSnack back in August and have really enjoyed chatting about climate change research with so many PhD and postdoctoral students across the college departments and climate disciplines. When thinking of what to write for the Young Scientists section of the GeoQ issue on climate change, I decided that it would be great to discuss this initiative that has taught me very much about communicating climate change research. So I interviewed three core members of the London snacking team and asked them to tell me more about what ClimateSnack is all about. Here is what came out of our interview!

“ClimateSnack is essentially designed to help early-career researchers develop their writing skills and their communication skills in general”, says Dr Will Ball, a postdoctoral researcher in the department of Physics and the founder of the ClimateSnack group at Imperial College London.

“At each institute that we have set up a ClimateSnack group, we physically bring together people in different areas of climate research. They will write thousand-word blogs about their work, keeping it very simple. In fact you want to keep it at the level that any other climate scientist in a different area of climate research would be able to understand. So as a solar physicist, I should be able to communicate my work to somebody working on, say, atmospheric dust”.

These blog pieces are the climate “snacks” that eventually get published online:

“Then we have a centralised hub that all the institutes publish through, which is the website”, Will continues. “Through that, people will be able to interact, get to know each other and give feedback on the actual writing. So they get better at writing, and also learn about the science that’s going on around them. That’s the concept”.

Sian Williams, a PhD student in atmospheric physics looking at dust plumes and land-atmosphere interactions, runs the day-to-day climate snacking affairs in London:

“We have a meeting once a month where people from different departments across Imperial College come together”.

London snackers Rachel White, Will Ball and Sian Williams.

“Every time, we have a few snacks. I try to encourage people to write them and then send them out to anyone who is coming to the meeting in advance, so that people get a chance to read what has been written and give feedback”.

Writing a snack can be a daunting but rewarding experience. Each author reads out his or her piece and the floor is then open to discussion. I remember that reading my own piece out loud was really quite scary! But it helped very much with improving the post, because one instantly picks up on sentences or expressions that don’t quite fit or contain too much jargon.

“People who have come together from different institutions say what they like about the articles, how they think they can be improved. Normally when you write something, be it for a journal or a website, you never really get that direct feedback, so I think it’s a really great opportunity”, Sian continues.

Dr Rachel White, a postdoctoral researcher in regional climate modelling, has recently published her very first snack, writing about the difficulties of simulating global rainfall patterns: “I actually found that it was easier to write than I thought it would be”.

Detail of the portrait of a young woman with writing pen and wax tablets, Museo Archeologico Nazionale di Napoli – Source: Wikimedia Commons.

But putting pen to paper is just the first step: “Trying to check that you have really written what you wanted to write, and that people are going to understand what you meant, is the really interesting process”, Rachel adds. “That’s where the ClimateSnack meetings come in. Different people will have got different things from your article. You have to be quite careful so that everybody understands what you meant. That is a really interesting concept to learn and try and get you head around”.

Will is now an experienced snacker: “Publishing online was nerve-racking, but I developed a better sense of confidence in what I’m doing and in my writing”.

These meetings are not just useful for improving one’s writing, but also for placing early-career researchers in a safe, productive environment where they can hone their discussion and personal engagement skills.

“It’s not just writing. At these meetings you have to communicate, debate, argue, discuss, and you get better at that. And it’s in a safe environment. That’s where you build the confidence and then start moving out”, Will explains.

“Important, imaginative work comes out of collaborating with people who aren’t in your field”, Rachel adds. “Being able to discuss your research and describe it clearly to someone who is in a different field is incredibly important, at conferences, over the internet, everywhere.”

For Will, these communication skills are valuable even within one’s own field: “How many abstracts, how many summary papers have you read that are difficult to understand, even in your own field? [ClimateSnack] makes you more aware of the phrases and the words you use. I’ve noticed that in the way I write. I’m just a little bit more aware of what might confuse somebody.”

Source: Daniel Schwen, Wikimedia Commons.

ClimateSnack has grown at an incredible pace since January. “We are setting up at many other institutes in the UK, and have interest from several others in Europe and in the United States”, Will tells me. “So it’s going to expand very quickly in the next coming months”.

The success and uniqueness of ClimateSnack lies, I think, in its open and constructive environment, and in the opportunities it creates for early-career researchers to forge international collaborations with other climate scientists.

Concluding our interview, Sian adds: “There are opportunities for climate snackers to go on residential courses across Europe, which is really exciting because it’s not only building skills but again building collaborations with different people. And I think the main exciting thing is more people from different universities getting involved”.

Source: ISS Expedition 34 crew, Wikimedia Commons.

I have certainly loved being part of this exciting group and have learned so much about other branches of climate research. It has been fantastic to meet so many climate scientists from different departments and universities and I look forward to hearing about upcoming snacks at the next meeting!

Marion

Climate and Policy Roundup – November 2013

Flo Bullough December 3, 2013

From London to Warsaw and Tokyo: Flo Bullough and Marion Ferrat discuss some of last month’s hot topics in the climate and policy world.

News

UN Warsaw Climate Talks

United Nations Climate Change COP19 Conference. Source – Wikimedia Commons

The UN’s Climate Change Conference in Warsaw concluded this week at the end of a 30-hour deadlock in decision making over the wording of the final deal. After a series of controversies including hunger strikes, walkouts and standoffs the meeting ended with the a deal hammered out. Countries have until early 2015 to publish their plans on curbing greenhouse gas emissions. There was also much discussion over the ‘Loss and Damage’ framework: delegates agreed to set up a compensation mechanism. Under the agreement, countries will receive some aid if hit by natural disasters but developed countries won’t be considered liable, and the fund won’t start functioning until 2020, the Guardian reported. See the link for more information.

Carbon Brief: Warsaw climate negotiations achieve nuggets of progress but defer major decisions: http://www.carbonbrief.org/blog/2013/11/warsaw-climate-negotiations-achieve-nuggets-of-progress,-but-defer-major-decisions/

On the back of the conference, Nature published an editorial reviewing the state of the world’s climate targets. Despite certain drawbacks and the general gloomy feeling about political action on climate change, they concluded: “there is reason for hope”.

House of Lords report on Scientific Infrastructure

220px-House_of_Lords_chamber_-_toward_throne

House of Lords Chamber. Source – UK Parliament, Wikimedia Commons.

Earlier in the summer, the House of Lords Science and Technology Committee launched an inquiry into Scientific Infrastructure. The inquiry was launched to collect evidence on large and medium-sized scientific infrastructure currently available in the UK. It aimed to consider the future needs and strategic planning, funding and governance arrangements, international partnerships and partnerships with industry. The final report for this inquiry has now been launched and highlights the following geo-relevant areas.

– The significant investment and the success of the Diamond Light Source Synchrotron facility

– The varied and sophisticated nature of work done by the following important NERC funded institutions

British Antarctic Survey, British Geological Survey, Centre for Ecology and Hydrology, National Centre for Atmospheric Science, National Centre for Earth Observation and the National Oceanography Centre

House of Lords Publication on Scientific Infrastructure: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201314/ldselect/ldsctech/76/76.pdf

20 things policy makers need to know about science and 20 things scientists need to know about policy-makers!

800px-Upper_Fairfield_Township_gas_well_2a

Science and policy have collided on contentious issues such as shale gas, these tips attempt to help both sides of the process! Source – Ruhrfisch, Wikimedia Commons.

British and Australian scientists put together a list of tips that could help policy-makers and politicians which was published in Nature. These include the importance of bias sample size, randomization and data dredging. By way of response, there was also a ‘Top 20’ of things scientists need to know about policy making written by Chris Tyler at the Guardian.

Nature: Twenty tips for interpreting scientific claims: http://www.nature.com/news/policy-twenty-tips-for-interpreting-scientific-claims-1.14183

The Guardian: Top 20 things politicians need to know about science: http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/nov/20/top-20-things-politicians-need-to-know-about-science

The Guardian: Top 20 things scientists need to know about policy-making: http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/dec/02/scientists-policy-governments-science

Japan scales back on climate change emissions targets

The Japanese government has scaled back its emissions targets after deciding the 25% reduction was too unrealistic. The shift back to coal, oil and gas for power following the Fukishima disaster has hindered recent progress in reductions.

Phys Org: Japan dials back climate change emissions target: http://phys.org/news/2013-11-japan-dials-climate-emissions.html

USGS to monitor water usage in thermoelectric power generation

In line with the ongoing interdependence between water and energy, the United States Geological Survey announced they are to start reporting water usage during thermoelectric power generation in order to quantify the contribution of this energy source to the overall use of water.

USGS Newsroom: Water watch for electric energy production: http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=3735&from=rss

Typhoon Haiyan

Satellite image of Typhoon Haiyan. Source – NASA, Wikimedia Commons.

Typhoon Haiyan hit Southeast Asia in early November: an exceptionally powerful tropical cyclone that devastated portions of Southeast Asia, particularly the Philippines, It is the deadliest Philippine typhoon on record,killing at least 5,632 people in that country alone. There has been much discussion about the sometime assumed contribution of climate change to the disaster although this is rejeteced by many scientists.

Nature: Did climate change cause Typhoon Haiyan? http://www.nature.com/news/did-climate-change-cause-typhoon-haiyan-1.14139

Budget hits keeling curve

The Scripps Institution of Oceanography in California is seeking donations to maintain the historic ‘Keeling Curve’; a 55-year record of rising CO2 levels following years of lack of funding.

The Keeling Curve: Atmospheric CO2 concentrations as measured at Mauna Loa Observatory. Source – Narayanese, Wikimedia Commons

Nature: Budget crunch hits keeling curve: http://www.nature.com/news/budget-crunch-hits-keeling-s-curves-1.14206

Impacts of U.S. Shutdown on Earth and Space Science

The effect of the US Government shutdown for 16 days in October had

Amundsen-Scott South Pole Station. Source – U.S. Antarctic Program, National Science Foundation.

far reaching consequences; not least for research institutes and programs. Amongst the research funding casualties was the Antarctic research program. US research programs such as the NOAA, NASA and USGS were all impacted. Eos magazine produced by AGU assessed the impact on the Earth Science Community

Eos: Impact on Earth and Space Science: http://sites.agu.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/pdf-of-Govt-Shutdown-story.pdf

Washington Post: Impact on Antarctic Research program: http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/us-government-shutdown-stalls-antarctic-research/2013/11/17/7f7e9af4-4e2b-11e3-be6b-d3d28122e6d4_story.html

Research Highlights

Crusty algae unravel history of Arctic sea ice

The first high-resolution proxy for Arctic sea ice cover has been discovered.

Demosponges and coralline algae - Photograph: K. Rasmussen, Wikimedia Commons.

Demosponges and coralline algae – Source: K. Rasmussen, Wikimedia Commons.

Long-lived algae living on the Arctic seafloor and build up as tree-ring-like structures on calcified rocks and record centuries of sea-ice history. Their sensitivity to both water temperature and sunlight is reflected in the algae’s growth rates and Mg/Ca ratio. The 646-year record discovered shows that sea-ice cover has seen the steepest decline in the past 150 years, with the 20^th century characterised by the lowest area of sea-ice since the 14^th century.

High-resolution palaeo-records of Arctic sea-ice are crucial to assess pre-anthropogenic changes in ice cover and complement the satellite observation data available for the last few decades only.

Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA http://doi.org/p6g (2013).

20^th century warming driven by humans

Human activities are responsible for temperature changes in the 20^th century, a new study has shown.

Francesco Estrada and his team used state-of-the art statistical methods to assess the link between temperature, radiative forcing and CO2 emissions over the past century. They showed that temperature changes have been largely driven by atmospheric CO2 concentrations, with a pronounced increase around 1960.

The results also revealed that human activities have driven periods of global warming slowdown, such as the warming ‘hiatus’ observed since the 1990s.

Their study shows that reducing greenhouse gas emissions is an effective way to curb short-term climate warming.

Nature Geosci. doi:10.1038/ngeo1999 (2013).

Natural aerosols matter for climate models

A good understanding of natural aerosol emissions is necessary to better quantify the effects of human activities

Sea spray on Broadstairs Pier - Photograph: Rose and Trev Clough, WIkimedia Commons.

Sea spray on Broadstairs Pier – Source: Rose and Trev Clough, Wikimedia Commons.

on cloud radiative forcing, and therefore climate change.

A study published in Nature showed that uncertainties in the emissions of natural aerosols such as volcanic sulphur dioxide, biogenic volatile organic carbon and sea spray account for almost half of the variability of modelled aerosol radiative forcing.

The results demonstrate the importance of understanding the effects of aerosols on climate in pre-industrial environments, where the impacts of natural aerosols can be studied in detail. This will be important to subsequently reduce model uncertainties of radiative effects in present-day polluted environments.

Nature doi:10.1038/nature12674 (2013).

Around EGU

Radioactive waters, Four Degrees – Marion writes on how radioactive elements make their way to the world’s oceans – and how scientists can use them to study important processes that go on in our waters.

Raising the dead sea, Four Degrees – Flo writes on what can be done to replenish the Dead Sea and

Dead Sea, Ein Boqeq. Source – xta11, Wikimedia Commons.

how it fits in with the region’s complex geopolitics.

Geo-Talk on GeoLog – Flo talks about policy and science communication on GeoLog.

Geology for Global Development – GfGD posted a piece on the role that both science and academia have in successfully bringing together stakeholders in areas where co-operation is essential, but challenging in areas such as Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran.

Events

Grantham Institute Annual Lecture: Professor Thomas Stocker

Professor Thomas Stocker at the Grantham Institute Annual Lecture, Imperial College London - Photograph: Marion Ferrat.

Professor Thomas Stocker at the Grantham Institute Annual Lecture, Imperial College London – Source: Marion Ferrat.

Four Degrees went down to the Grantham Institute for Climate Change Annual Lecture at Imperial College London last week, given by Professor Thomas Stocker, co-chair of the IPCC working group 1. He gave a very thorough and clear talk about the latest IPCC report and the importance of climate targets with a clear message that we need to act now to tackle climate change.

Imperial College news: Act now to limit climate change says climate expert at Grantham Annual Lecture: 1http://www3.imperial.ac.uk/newsandeventspggrp/imperialcollege/naturalsciences/climatechange/newssummary/news_28-11-2013-11-8-22. Professor Stocker also talks about the public perception of climate change and many aspects of the IPCC report in this Nature Climate Change interview.

Rational Parliament Debate: Fracking and Shale Gas

The most recent debate held by the new intiative Rational Parliament was on the topic of fracking and shale gas, see their blog for the details on the discussion and results of the votes of the event held in London on the 26th November. – http://rationalparliament.wordpress.com/2013/11/27/words-and-photos-from-our-debate-on-fracking/

ESA Launch Swarm

On the 22nd November, ESA’s three-satellite Swarm constellation was launched. For four years, it will monitor the Earth’s magnetic field, from the depth of our planet’s core to the heights of its upper atmosphere. http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Observing_the_Earth/Swarm/ESA_s_Swarm_trio_on_its_way_to_watch_over_our_planet_s_magnetic_shield

Flo and Marion

What’s Geology got to do with it? 2 – Coffee

Flo Bullough October 24, 2013

We should start this post with a declaration of interest. We absolutely love coffee. Whether it’s latte, macchiato, flat white (or cafe au lait for Marion!) we drink it everyday! So for our second installation of “What’s geology got to do with it?’ we’re going to highlight the connections between coffee and geology!

Coop loves his coffee! Source

As well as being absolutely delicious (and often powering an entire community of researchers, PhD Students, lawyers etc through work on a daily basis!) coffee is the 2nd most traded commodity in the world, sitting in a list dominated by other commodities important to geoscience!

Crude Oil
Coffee
Cotton
Wheat
Corn
Sugar
Silver
Copper
Gold
Natural Gas

Coffee and Soils!

Coffee berries, a variety of Coffeea Arabica. Source – Marcelo Corrêa, Wikimedia Commons.

In order to supply the international demand for coffee, coffee trees require a large supply of nutrients. These nutrients are delivered through soils which are ultimately formed from the breakdown and erosion of rocks. In addition to allowing coffee trees to grow, the soil makeup will also contribute to a coffee’s unique flavour profile. Having said that, the combination of factors affecting taste is so complex, that even from a single plantation you can find variation in quality and taste.

What does coffee need to grow?

Aside from cool-ish temperatures (~20 degrees) and high altitude (1000-2000 metres above sea level), Coffee requires a wide variety of essential elements in order to grow and deliver the delicious stuff we drink. These elements are delivered through the soil profile. The usual suspects like Phosphorus, nitrogen, potassium, calcium, zinc and boron are all very important. The level of potassium influences total sugar and citric acid content while nitrogen is important for amino acid and protein buildup and can influence caffeine build up. Boron is important for cell division, cell walls and involved in several enzyme activities. It also influences flowering and fruit set and affects the yield. In addition to soil type and content, factors such as slope angle (15% is optimal), water supply (good supply with interspersed dry periods are essential) and altitude exert strong influence on the success of coffee growth.

What soils are best?

Coffee can be grown on lots of soils but the ideal types are fertile volcanic red earth or deep sandy loam. For coffee trees to grow it is important that the soil is well draining which makes heavy clay or heavy sandy soils inadequate. Some of the most longstanding and famous coffees are grown on the slopes of volcanoes or in volcanic soil, also known as ‘Andisols’.

Definition of Andisol (USDA soil taxonomy) – ‘Andisols are soils formed in volcanic ash and defined as soils containing high proportions of glass and amorphous colloidal materials, including allophane, imogolite and ferrihydrite.’

Coffee grows on the slopes of these volcanoes in El Salvador. Source – NASA, Wikimedia Commons

But why are they so fertile? This is due to how young, or immature they are as soils. They still retain many of the elements that were present during the formation of the rock, they haven’t been plundered over hundreds of years of agriculture, they haven’t undergone extensive leaching and are relatively unweathered. This means they often include basic cations such as Mg, Ca or K (which can be easily leached out) and often retain a healthy supply of trace elements. Whilst these soils are very fertile, they only cover around 1% of the ice-free surface area of the earth. They can usually support intensive use for growing coffee and other mass crops such as maize, tea and tobacco. Despite the high fertility of volcanic soils, many do need a nutrient top-up during the growth cycle that comes from natural manure or fertilisers, which are themselves in diminishing supply.

Volcanic soils also have a good structure and texture for coffee growth as they often contain vesicles, which makes them porous and ideal for retaining water. Shallow groundwater is bad for coffee growing as it can rot the roots and it needs to be at least 3 metres deep. Roots of coffee have a high oxygen demand so good drainage is essential.

Where does coffee grow and why?

It is no surpise then that some of the most famous and historic coffee growing regions are in areas of past and current volcanic activity such as Central America, Hawaii and Indonesia. Coffee trees produce their best beans when grown at high altitudes in a tropical climate where there is rich soil. Such conditions are found around the world in locations along the Equatorial zone.
Coffee is grown in more than 50 countries around the world including the following;

Hawaii – coffee is grown in volcanic soil or directly in the loosened rock. The location and island climate provides good growing conditions.
Volcán de Agua overlooking Antigua in Guatemala an area with a big coffee production industry. Source – Zack Clark, Wikimedia Commons.
Indonesia – coffee production began with the Dutch colonialists and the highland plateau between the volcanoes of Batukaru and Agung is the main coffee growing area. Ash from these volcanoes has created especially fertile andisols.
Colombia – thought that Jesuits first brought coffee seeds to South America. One of the biggest producers in the world, regional climate change associated with global warming has caused Colombian coffee production to decline since 2006. Much of the coffee is grown in the cordilleras (mountain ranges).
Ethiopia – grown in high mountain ranges in cloud forests.
Central America – rich soils along the volcanic range through central america, equatorial temperatures and mountainous growing areas make this a powerhouse in the coffee growing world.

Coffee and Climate!

Like many crops and food commodities, good coffee requires good climate. For our favorite bean, this typically means temperate regions at altitudes of 1000-2000 m. But climate is changing and this is likely to have a big impact on coffee growth, and by association, on the livelihood of millions of local coffee farmers who rely on its production.

In its latest report out last month, the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, the leading body assessing climate change impacts) confirmed for the 5th time what climate scientists worldwide already know: that our climate is warming as a result of human activities. Global temperatures have already risen by almost 1C since the end of the 19th century and will continue to rise at even faster rates over the coming century.

There are two ways in which a changing climate will impact coffee growth and production.

First, increasing temperatures or changes in precipitation will directly affect the areas suitable for coffee growth, leading to a loss in coffee growing environments.

A coffee berry being chewed up by hungry Hypothenemus hampei – Source: L. Shyamal, Wikimedia Commons.

Second, and perhaps most importantly, changing climate and higher temperatures will affect a little insect called Hypothenemus hampei (H. hampei for short). H. hampei is small but lethal. This beetle-like insect is what people call a coffee berry borer. It is the most important threat to coffee plantations worldwide.

Born in central Africa, H. hampei began colonising coffee plantations worldwide with the global movement and commerce of coffee beans. H. hampei likes warm climates. Until about a decade ago, it was very happy munching away at low-altitude beans, below the preferred altitude of our beloved Arabica coffee (between 1200-2000 m in East Africa).

But with rising temperatures, the berry borer can now survive at higher altitudes. On the slopes of Mt Kilimanjaro in Tanzania, H. hampei has climbed 300 m in 10 years.

Mount Kilimanjaro – Source: Muhammad Mahdi Karim, Wikimedia Commons.

H. hampei causes over $500 million loss annually in East Africa alone. The borer is gaining both geographical extent (it is only absent from coffee plantations in China and Nepal, having infiltrated Puerto Rico in 2007 and Hawaii in 2010) and altitude. A further 1C increase will see the borer develop faster and gain new territories.

The Colombia coffee belt – Source: Instituto Geografico Agustin Codazzi, Wikimedia Commons.

In Colombia, where coffee accounts for 17% of the total value of crop production, temperatures in the coffee belt region are projected to rise by 2.2C by 2050. This could both shorten the coffee growing season and allow the pest to make its way above 1500 m.

It has been estimated that Colombian plantations would have to be moved up by 167 m for every degree of warming.

In East Africa, studies predict that Arabica coffee, currently grown at 1400-1600 m, will have to shift to 1600-1800 m by 2050 as a result of rising temperatures.

But it is unlikely that East African coffee plantations will be able to adapt. For one, suitable high altitude habitats are not common. Second, population growth is likely to put a huge demographic pressure on arable land (the population in Ethiopia is set to double by 2050 – see this fact sheet by the Population Reference Bureau) and it is likely that the shrinking available arable land will be used to cultivate other crops over coffee.

The impact of climate change on invasive pest species is something that ecologists are studying worldwide. Small changes in average temperatures can have huge bearings on where these pests live and what they feed on, and this seems to already be the case for the coffee berry borer.

Let’s hope Flo and I can continue enjoying our weekly Four Degrees coffee meetings for many years to come!