This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

America’s Great 2012 Drought

George Washington's picture




 

The progress of the drought has been horrific:

12 week 2012 Drought: As Bad as During the 1930s Dust Bowl?

The current drought is covering almost as much of the U.S. as during the 1930s dust bowl:

drought 2012 Drought: As Bad as During the 1930s Dust Bowl?

As the Weather Channel  pointed out last month,  the area covered by drought rivals some of the dust bowl years:

map specnews29 ltst 4namus enus 650x366 2012 Drought: As Bad as During the 1930s Dust Bowl?

As of June – the area covered by severe drought was still lower than during the Dust Bowl years, but still made the top 10 list:

map specnews30 ltst 4namus enus 650x366 2012 Drought: As Bad as During the 1930s Dust Bowl?

But – despite the recent rains in some areas, which reduced by 1% the area covered by drought – the farm states remain parched, and the area covered by severe drought is still growing.

Unfortunately, the one certainty is higher food prices.

Much of the area hit during the Dust Bowl – and again today – is naturally prone to drought.  As the Weather Channel notes:

The area is known as semi-arid and is naturally prone to drought and high winds. In fact, early settlers referred to it as the “Great American Desert.”

Interestingly, HowStuffWorks notes:

About 90 percent of the 450 million hectares of arid land in North America suffers from moderate to severe desertification [source: Center for International Earth Science Information Network]

But as Ezra Klein notes, there have been much bigger droughts in the distant past:

Scientists have looked at data from tree rings and found (pdf) that North America endured brutal “megadroughts” during the medieval period. These droughts were similar in intensity to today’s dry spells, but lasted 20 to 40 years and were possibly linked to massive La Niña ocean events:

ancient droughts Americas Great 2012 DroughtRed square = Here there be monstrous droughts.

 

Fortunately, we haven’t seen anything that bad in recent times.

Postscript:   July was reportedly the warmest month recorded in the U.S. since records began in 1895.  And AP reports:

The first seven months of 2012 were the warmest on record for the nation. And August 2011 through July this year was the warmest 12-month period on record, just beating out the July 2011-June 2012 time period.

Some say this proves global warming is a dire threat, while others say that it is dishonest to claim that short-term weather proves anything.

But we can all agree on the following:

 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Thu, 08/09/2012 - 21:32 | 2692817 nmewn
nmewn's picture

Taxpayer's subsidizing moonshiners outta DC & the Hamptons.

Who woulda ever thunk it...lol.

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 20:59 | 2692744 New_Meat
New_Meat's picture

dang, a greenie on ya.  Who knew? - Ned

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 19:52 | 2692573 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

and our statues suck

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 16:20 | 2692117 GoingLoonie
GoingLoonie's picture

The farming techniques are much better.  Additionally, there is much more water retained from dams, watersheds and other aqua-ifrastructure.  

For example in Arkansas in July, famers were losing complete crops, selling cattle, and unable to grow hay.  The large field irrigators (big sprinklers to me) were not working as the water would evaporate before it hit the ground.  But through all this the rivers and creeks were still fairly high because of the system we have built through the years.  I here it is being tested, but still in tact.

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 16:38 | 2692168 Red Heeler
Red Heeler's picture

"But through all this the rivers and creeks were still fairly high because of the system we have built through the years."

Nonsense. Read this RSS feed and tell me again about river water levels:

 http://drought.unl.edu/LinkClick.aspx?link=http%3a%2f%2fmoderator.droughtreporter.unl.edu%2frssfeed%2f&tabid=59&mid=2022

 

 

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 17:07 | 2692231 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Well done...

It is truly amazing how people will simply make shit up to fit their pre concieved biases....

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 17:22 | 2692253 narapoiddyslexia
narapoiddyslexia's picture

Not to beat a dead horse, but Julius Caesar once said, "Libenter homines id quod volunt credunt."

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 17:28 | 2692263 Red Heeler
Red Heeler's picture

Back in Ceasar's day they had a better excuse.

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 16:11 | 2692092 steve from virginia
steve from virginia's picture

 

Big difference today is irrigation.

 

In the 1930s irrigation was limited to surface water diversion from rivers and streams along with shallow wells with wind-driven pumps. Today, irrigation is from Midwest (Ogallala) Aquifer by way of deep wells (drilled with oil rigs) and electric motor- or diesel pumps.

 

Problem today is aquifer is oversubscribed: water is pulled out faster than the recharge rate. Also, parts of it are contaminated with toxic chemicals, fertilizers and fracking fluids. Growth hormones/estrogen, gasoline additives, pesticides, glycols and other waste. Ground water is last line of defense between drought and total crop loss.

 

Competition is between water needs of conventional agriculture and those of other industries such as power, resource extraction and pipeline transport. Sprawling cities and towns also demand more water.

 

Notable is that four of the top-ten drought years were in the 1930s. The Dust Bowl period ran from 1931 to 1939. The far west is even more drought prone having 'super droughts' that last fifty years and longer.

 

Needed is a move away from Soviet-style mega-farms and CAFOs (animal feedlots) with water-dependent crops (a quarter of which are for biofuel for cars). Needed is more pasturage, perennial crop plants, more tree/nut crops (all of which are drought resistant).

 

Industrial agriculture is water and petroleum dependent. Business as usual means exhausted aquifers, saline soils, desertification and food shortages.

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 23:00 | 2692960 disabledvet
disabledvet's picture

is this your "Battle Royale" over water:http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2363035/posts? how much is our massive expansion in urban and suburban sprawl, exurbs and "Megalopolis's" to blame? i say...A LOT.http://geography.about.com/cs/urbansprawl/a/megalopolis.htm

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 17:24 | 2692257 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

Another problem is commercial agriculture destroys the soils, leaving them dependent on fertilizers, which do nothing to hold moisture and conserve what we receive.

The complete farm that makes use of multiple products( row criops, animals and trees) is another way to help reduce the need for water.

Organic practices encourage the building of top soils that help as well. 

One reason my fields are still green and healthy and I'm in an extreme drought area.

Fri, 08/10/2012 - 00:07 | 2693115 Revert_Back_to_...
Revert_Back_to_1792_Act's picture

How the USA has changed.

http://archive.org/details/victory_garden

 

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 19:50 | 2692560 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

at least were consistent and even handed at fucking up everything under the false pretense of our ego

most of modern agriculture is expending most of our energy at trying to keep the land from reverting back to its natural state. Very few areas of land are naturally bare. None are tilled. Most of nature works with a diverse set of plants, bugs and birds all competing, pooping and eating in the same place.

Permaculture.  

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 18:14 | 2692368 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

I was wondering how you were weathering this.... (pun intended)

I just drove through Ohio on the 'pike and the corn looked horrific unless there was clear evidence of irrigation...

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 19:55 | 2692578 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

Hi Flak,

I'm weathering just fine, but I grow grass and feed livestock. Presently, I'm under stocked, so no worries. The corn farmers here are looking at 5-15% yields. Mostly, it will cut for silage. The beans are still on the cusp. Wheat got in early enough to do well. 

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 23:15 | 2692987 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Good to hear you are doing fine....

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 17:02 | 2692221 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

The Medieval Warm Period is associated with the intense drought in the SW that likely led to the collapse of the Anasazi.....

I'd rate real estate in Phoenix to be a slightly worse investment than beachfront property in Florida....

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 16:09 | 2692087 johnnymustardseed
johnnymustardseed's picture

Republicans refuse to believe, they need to come and visit Iowa. Seven foot corn with no cobs on them.  WHAT IF you cynical assholes, Al Gore is right. Even Rupert Murdoch the asshat says it is real..... There might be a point of no return.

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 20:56 | 2692737 New_Meat
New_Meat's picture

mustardthingie: a reddie on ya.  'cuz Iowa-denizens, of all flavahz, have sold their soul to the unsustainable production of ethanol through fermenting food.  Stupid laws have compelled auto fuel users to purchase this shit (well, when used as fuel, now if they were sellin' it as white litnin' that would be another story.)

Entire state sold out to the nonsense, where the totality of the (non-solar) energy input exceeds the economic value of the product.

and the poor bastards in Mexico have their tortillas becoming economically out of reach.

Al Gore is right that he wants his second chakra to be released.  But Tipper and I don't agree.

- Ned

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 20:15 | 2692568 maximin thrax
maximin thrax's picture

OR, if BOTH Gore and Murdoch say "it's" real (assuming you mean anthropologically-induced warming), maybe then it must be bunk?

If "it's" real, and the CO2 already produced is up there for decades, and drought disrupts the plants that would actually draw down that CO2, then maybe the best course is to mail cyanide tablets to every citizen whose last name begins with A to Y so our species can regroup in the few tolerable acres left on the planet. Any other solution would be a half measure at best.

The droughts were worse in the 1930's. What if "climate change" has disrupted an eon-old cycle of extreme drought in the Great Plains by actually modifying both the severity and duration of drought? Is there anyone asking that question? Why is climate change expected to only result in record highs, record lows, bigger hurricanes, record drought and record floods, nothing good for anyone? 

More heating means a more vigorous weather pattern, with greater transfer of heat to the poles. That leads to more wind, more pressure gradients and more precip. So could an invigorated trophosphere actually succeed in breaking droughts where a cooler, more lazy pattern might not?

It has been interesting watching powerful hurricanes approach the continental US over the past few years get caught in an atmospheric meat grinder as continental storm systems that are also more vigorous due to "climate change" weaken the hurricanes by shearing their tops and tilting their circulation. So, yes the hurricanes get stronger BUT the enhanced land-borne storms cut them up like ninja warriors.

BTW, conservative cynicism comes from understanding the end game of the Al Gore global warming types - total control of every human action that may contribute to global warming. Which is control of just about, oh, EVERYTHING. That's just about as totaletarian a government as has ever existed. Think on that for a few days. What's more important - individual liberty OR the Planet? Is there ANYTHING more important than the planet? Say adios to Liberty, because once it becomes government's job to Save the Planet no individual can ever count himself, his family, his city, even his own nation as more important than the whole Planet. 

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 17:30 | 2692271 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

What if no one is right and there is another answer all together? What is your solution? Tax credits? Is that going to grow corn? 

Maybe you should stop growing corn and find crops that better fit your land profile, that conserve your soils and are drought tolerant. 

The solution to this problem, whatever it is, will not come from a political party. So, get off you ass and do something constructive, then pass on that knowledge to your friends. Conservation has benefits beyond politics and finance.

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 21:36 | 2692827 johnnymustardseed
johnnymustardseed's picture

Great idea, maybe you and the cows you own would like to eat cactus

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 22:21 | 2692900 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

What's the matter? Incapable of thinking for yourself? Can't think of a solution, so you rail against the inevitable? What a moron. 

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 19:55 | 2692577 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

well said.

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 16:44 | 2692185 Red Heeler
Red Heeler's picture

Any guy who claims the end is near because of our over-consumption and then spends his time jetting around to his three different homes, the largest of which is 10,000 square feet, could make a cynic of damn near anyone.

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 19:56 | 2692582 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

let alone a massage therapist 

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 20:51 | 2692725 New_Meat
New_Meat's picture

"I command you to release my second chakra!"

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 21:54 | 2692855 nmewn
nmewn's picture

lol...Gore, I'm gonna have to TiVo his Current coverage of the O'Barry nomination...a riot could break out at any minute ;-)

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 15:39 | 2691983 Red Heeler
Red Heeler's picture

Prepare for the thinning of the herd.

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 15:38 | 2691975 adr
adr's picture

My 100 year old grandmother says the dust bowl days were a lot worse than now. In fact I think you would find anyone still alive that lived through the dust bowl would tell you it was a lot worse back then.

Even with the reduced crop yields the US will still produce far more than the country actually consumes. If you took ethanol and agricultural exports out of the mix, we wouldn't even need half the crops that are planted. The US is even exporting record amounts of beef and pork.

We pay more at the grocery store because big corporate agriculture would rather sell to foreign countries and let Americans starve, than make a bit less profit. The only thing the government should do is place massive export tariffs on refined petroleum and agricultural products. Prices would plummet to 20% of the current level overnight.

Our situation today is much closer to the Ukraine under Stalin, than the good old country farm selling food directly to people. Working people might not be able to afford to eat, but Big Ag will still export a record amount of food in 2012.

 

Sorry but maybe we should focus on feeding ourselves at a reasonable cost before we attempt to feed the rest of the world. That also means removing all welfare in the US. No more food stamps, no more unemployment, and no more welfare of any kind.

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 23:52 | 2693095 Flakmeister
Flakmeister's picture

Do you think that AC might have something to do with it? Ask some one in Oklahoma how it would be now without AC, just like in the '30s....

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 18:40 | 2692409 Ignorance is bliss
Ignorance is bliss's picture

Its a known fact that governments often see citizens as 2nd class humanoids. One is always better off as a traveler in a foreign land. For some reason Gov't tend to treat visitors much better then their own second class herd. Perhaps because we are a captive audience for their unrelenting abuse.

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 17:37 | 2692280 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

We pay the prices at the market because that is what the market will bear. Why would you sell for less than you can charge? 

The real reason is people buy garbage instead of buying basic items and COOKING THEM AT HOME. Food is cheaper in America as a percentage of income than anywhere else. 

Tariffs would only cut production. No one produces if they can't make a profit. Please study economics before you delude yourself and others with similar statements.

As for you last three items on your wish list, how are you going to do that? This I gotta see.

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 15:27 | 2691930 AdrenalineTrade
AdrenalineTrade's picture

Can Bernanke print rain?

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 16:57 | 2692215 DaveyJones
DaveyJones's picture

no but he can piss money away

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 18:05 | 2692346 Sudden Debt
Sudden Debt's picture

piss...

SO THAT'S WHAT HE MEANTH ABOUT THE TRICKLE DOWN EFFECT!

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 15:25 | 2691927 AdrenalineTrade
AdrenalineTrade's picture

Bullish

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 15:19 | 2691910 Gringo Viejo
Gringo Viejo's picture

Unfortunately, there are over 312,000,000 mouths to feed as opposed to 80,000,000 in 1934.

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 20:12 | 2692645 CompassionateFascist
CompassionateFascist's picture

No prob...we'll simply import our food along w everything else. Pay for it by printing more ZOGbux. 

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 15:17 | 2691908 Whatta
Whatta's picture

GW, I stumbled onto this a couple of weeks back arguing global warming elsewhere...

"The heads of all of the New Deal agricultural and relief agencies issued a "Report of the Great Plains Drought Area Committee" in August 1936.

In the report, they said that the dust bowl was caused not just by the dry weather but also by unwise farming practices. Earlier settlers plowed under the natural tall grasses that covered the plains and planted crops they had planted in the wetter East. When the drought came, the crops failed, the ground was uncovered and the incessant winds produced the dust storms.

Government planners wrote that periods of drought like the 1930s were likely to occur again and that "the agricultural economy of the Great Plains will become increasingly unstable and unsafe ... unless over-cropping, over-grazing and improper farm methods are prevented... The future of the region must depend, therefore, on the degree to which farming practices conform to natural conditions."

http://www.livinghistoryfarm.org/farminginthe30s/water_03.html

Point One regarding the above being...lesson NOT learned. Point Two, they knew even back then that this would happen again (and again) as weather patterns are always in flux.


Thu, 08/09/2012 - 15:35 | 2691963 Toolshed
Toolshed's picture

You are incorrect. While there is no way to control the weather (in a realistic practical manner anyway), there have been numerous changes in farming as a result of lessons learned form the "dust bowl" of the 1930's. Many practices have been implemented to prevent topsoil erosion as a result of farming activity. These changes will likely prevent another "dust bowl" scenario, or at the very least, reduce it's severity. And where should American farmers grow their crops? Canada? Well......not yet anyway.

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 17:40 | 2692286 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

No, you are incorrect. You have no idea of the original makeup of the plains grass systems. While no till systems are an improvement over previous practices, commercial farmers still rape the soil every year planting corn and beans. Top soil is lost EVERY year in these systems.

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 16:03 | 2692072 LithiumWarsWAKEUP
LithiumWarsWAKEUP's picture

Toolshed, you got it right. They don't plow 16" deep anymore...  Most wheat farmers barely turn up a few inches deep with their 'drill/disk'. Thus, it won't blow away as in the 30's. Still, it ain't fun for the farmers, for sure. Gov't will surely help them, which is ok by me. Better to keep your farmers than lose them. Lose your farmers,,,you get a Revolution. See History.

 

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 21:09 | 2692757 Spastica Rex
Spastica Rex's picture

Q: What does every successful farmer farm?

A: The government.

I'm from wheat/cattle country.

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 17:46 | 2692295 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

Wheat is normally planted in a rotation after corn or beans- often beans, as it allows a little growth to develop before winter strikes and starts early in spring. Have you ever seen a bean field after it is harvested? Bare as a baby's ass. If the wheat is slow to develop, the soil is lost.

No, people only use deep plows if the soil becomes panned, unfortunately, it is these very practices that cause the pan to develop. You cannot properly husband your soils in a commercial ag system.

Heavy use of green manures can help, but most big ag farmers are not going to take fields out of production to plant a green manure crop.

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 15:16 | 2691905 Whoa Dammit
Whoa Dammit's picture

The problem is population growth since the dust bowl. In 1934, the peak drought year, the US had a population of 126 million and the world population was a little over 2 billion. 

 

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 15:11 | 2691888 HungrySeagull
HungrySeagull's picture

Dust storms will arrive if the Topsoil is destroyed or otherwise unplantable in the drought.

 

This one will be specially radioactive.

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 15:20 | 2691913 NotApplicable
NotApplicable's picture

Actually, the lack of rain means a lack of cesium. Not good for the West Coast, but my acerage yet to be covered with hoop-houses has benefitted from it.

My water bill, on the other hand...

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 17:16 | 2692232 ZerOhead
ZerOhead's picture

Getting some light rains here in the north east finally. I have acres and acres of available water on my property to irrigate with but can't obtain permits to use it on the fields or the parched old growth forest. I think I would likely need permits to even use it to put out any forest fires...

My smallish black-earth garden sits just above the water table fortunately.

Thu, 08/09/2012 - 15:11 | 2691887 Whatta
Whatta's picture

The good news in my area of Texas....we are only considered a Severe Drought at this time...woooohoooo, better than last year anyway. The grass in the pasture is merely crunchy brown now instead of gone like last year.

Greater Depression meet Dust Bowl II.

We need a government solution to this mess gawddammit!!! /snark off

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!