Apparently everyone knows that global warming only makes climate more extreme. A hot, dry summer has triggered another flood of such claims. And, while many interests are at work, one of the players that benefits the most from this story are the media: the notion of “extreme” climate simply makes for more compelling news.
Consider Paul Krugman writing breathlessly in The New York Times about the “rising incidence of extreme events,” He claims that global warming caused the current drought in America’s Midwest, and that supposedly record-high corn prices could cause a global food crisis.
But the United Nations climate panel’s latest assessment tells us precisely the opposite. For “North America there is medium confidence that there has an overall slight tendency toward less dryness” Moreover, there is no way that Krugman could have identified this drought as being caused by global warming without a time machine; Climate models estimate that such detection will be possible by 2048, at the earliest.
And, fortunately, this year’s drought appears unlikely to cause a food crisis, as global rice and wheat supplies retain plentiful. Moreover, Krugman overlooks inflation: Prices have increased six-fold since 1969. So, while corn futures (期货) did set a record of about $8 per bushel (葡式耳) in late July, the inflation-adjusted price of corn was higher throughout most of the 1970s, reaching 516 in 1974.
Finally, Krugman conveniently forgets that concerns about global warming are the main reason that corn prices have skyrocketed since 2005. Nowadays 40 percent of corn grown in the United States is used to produce ethanol (乙醇), which does absolutely nothing for the climate, but certainly distorts the price of corn — at the expense of many of the world’s poorest people.
1. In what way do the media benefit from extreme weather?
2. What is the author’s comment on Krugman’s claim about the current drought in America’s Midwest?
3. What is the chief reason for the rise in corn prices according to the author?