3 ms·

The problem was real. Without the efforts of Henry A Wallace and Norman Borlag to increase grain yields through hybridization, we would have been in serious tro

The problem was real. Without the efforts of Henry A Wallace and Norman Borlag to increase grain yields through hybridization, we would have been in serious trouble. With improved high-density planting and fertilizer, combined with better drought-resistant and pest-resistant high-yield grains we enjoyed a 10X (ten times!) increase in yields per acre. Don't tell me that didn't make all the difference! All the rest of it balanced on this monumental effort. Spearheaded by two people, one managing agricultural policy and reinventing ag processes and education and the other taking up hybridization to customize crops to regions of the world. We own them more than we can calculate.

defrost 2y ago
Alternatively; if you build more roads you get more traffic, if you grow more food you get more people. Had crop productivity not increased then nor would have human population also increased to match.
Aunche 2y ago
It's similar to saying that Y2K was just a panic because nothing catastrophic happened at the turn of the millennium. You're ignoring all the work out into preventing it from happening. Today, around 70% of birthing age women use contraception. In Western nations you can argue that this was primarily due to feminism, but in Asia, this was only possible because governments were afraid of overpopulation and made them widely available.
Terr_ 2y ago
I think that confuses "we would not have been able to divert spending on food and usage of land into other benefits which we enjoy" with "we would have starved". Being that there's also how human population growth does have nnegative feedback loops other than massive famine-death.
SapporoChris 2y ago
Well, I looked up Cereal production over time. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/cereal-production?tab=table https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/cereal-production?tab=tab... With 10X increases in yields per acre, I expected to see some really dramatic yield improvements over time. Some countries did have great improvements. However, from 1961 to 2022 United states only improved production by 151%. Basically what I see is that well established countries had modest improvements, but no where near 10x. To check my time line, I noted from the following that the Green Revolution started in the late 60's. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolution Our diet consists of a lot more than grains. I'm sure the improvements helped, yes they made a difference. I am not convinced we'd be in serious trouble without them.
- galdosdi 2y ago
  > Our diet consists of a lot more than grains. Ideally, yes, but there's a reason they're called staples. It's very easy to have a diet where most of the _calories_ if not actual volume nor mass of food comes from grain. Grains and fats are very calorie dense, but grains are far cheaper than butter or steak. Many civilizations have been based on a huge portion of food being tortillas, rice, bread, pasta. Grains are important. Whether they should be as big a part of your diet for health reasons is another question, but their historical importance due to calorie density is not in question and is self evident.
- lazide 2y ago
  These improvements happened before the late 60’s.

defrost 2y ago

Alternatively; if you build more roads you get more traffic, if you grow more food you get more people. Had crop productivity not increased then nor would have human population also increased to match.

Aunche 2y ago

It's similar to saying that Y2K was just a panic because nothing catastrophic happened at the turn of the millennium. You're ignoring all the work out into preventing it from happening. Today, around 70% of birthing age women use contraception. In Western nations you can argue that this was primarily due to feminism, but in Asia, this was only possible because governments were afraid of overpopulation and made them widely available.

Terr_ 2y ago

I think that confuses "we would not have been able to divert spending on food and usage of land into other benefits which we enjoy" with "we would have starved". Being that there's also how human population growth does have nnegative feedback loops other than massive famine-death.

SapporoChris 2y ago

Well, I looked up Cereal production over time. https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/cereal-production?tab=table https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/cereal-production?tab=tab... With 10X increases in yields per acre, I expected to see some really dramatic yield improvements over time. Some countries did have great improvements. However, from 1961 to 2022 United states only improved production by 151%. Basically what I see is that well established countries had modest improvements, but no where near 10x. To check my time line, I noted from the following that the Green Revolution started in the late 60's. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Revolution Our diet consists of a lot more than grains. I'm sure the improvements helped, yes they made a difference. I am not convinced we'd be in serious trouble without them.

galdosdi 2y ago
> Our diet consists of a lot more than grains. Ideally, yes, but there's a reason they're called staples. It's very easy to have a diet where most of the _calories_ if not actual volume nor mass of food comes from grain. Grains and fats are very calorie dense, but grains are far cheaper than butter or steak. Many civilizations have been based on a huge portion of food being tortillas, rice, bread, pasta. Grains are important. Whether they should be as big a part of your diet for health reasons is another question, but their historical importance due to calorie density is not in question and is self evident.
lazide 2y ago
These improvements happened before the late 60’s.