Canada has already gotten less extreme cold, longer growing seasons, shorter snow and ice cover seasons, earlier spring peak streamflow, thinning glaciers, thawing permafrost, and rising sea level. The annual average temperature in Canada has increased at roughly twice the global mean rate. Patterns are different across regions of the country, however. Temperatures have increased more in northern Canada than in southern Canada. Annual mean temperature over northern Canada increased by roughly 3 times the global mean warming rate.
These warming rates have already been happening for the past forty years. Future projections where the warming trends continue and increase Canada’s farmable land from 100 million hectares to 520 million hectares by 2080. The United States has 166 million hectares of net cropland area and is ranked second in the world after India, which has 180 million hectares of croplands. However, the 520 million hectare scenario is RCP 8.5 which is unlikely to happen.
Under climate change projected by Canadian Earth System Model (CanESM2) Representative Concentration Pathway 4.5 [RCP 4.5], ∼1.85 million km2 of land may become suitable for farming in Canada’s North, which, if utilized, would lead to the release of ∼15 gigatonnes of carbon if all forests and wetlands are cleared and plowed. This would be a 285 million hectare scenario for 2080.
By 2099, roughly 76% (55% to 89%) of the boreal region might reach crop feasible GDD conditions, compared to the current 32%. The leading edge of the feasible GDD will shift northwards up to 1200 km by 2099 while the altitudinal shift remains marginal.
Farms cover 62.2 million hectares or 6.3% of Canada’s land area. Farmable land is more but actual farms cover a lower area.
Japan has 4.4 million hectares of farmland.
Germany 11.6 million hectares of farmland
France 30 million hectares of farmland
UK 18.6 million hectares of farmland.
Canada has more farmland than Germany, France, UK combined and almost as much as all of them plus Japan.
There is an Atlas of historical and projected climate for Canada.
The “high carbon” on the Canada Climate Atlas and is based on the RCP 8.5 emissions scenario. This scenarios is unlikely to happen. The Less Climate Change / “Low Carbon” Scenario is the RCP 4.5 scenario. Greenhouse gas emissions slow, peak mid-century, and then drop rapidly. RCP 4.5 is described by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) as a moderate scenario in which emissions peak around 2040 and then decline.
Journal PLOS ONE predicts about 4.2 million square kilometers of Canada that are currently too cold for farming crops like wheat will be warm enough by 2080 if greenhouse gas emissions continue to climb. In 2020, only a million square kilometers in Canada are warm enough for growing crops like wheat, corn and potatoes.
Brian Wang is a Futurist Thought Leader and a popular Science blogger with 1 million readers per month. His blog Nextbigfuture.com is ranked #1 Science News Blog. It covers many disruptive technology and trends including Space, Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, Medicine, Anti-aging Biotechnology, and Nanotechnology.
Known for identifying cutting edge technologies, he is currently a Co-Founder of a startup and fundraiser for high potential early-stage companies. He is the Head of Research for Allocations for deep technology investments and an Angel Investor at Space Angels.
A frequent speaker at corporations, he has been a TEDx speaker, a Singularity University speaker and guest at numerous interviews for radio and podcasts. He is open to public speaking and advising engagements.
Leif Erikson noticed this over 1,000 years ago when he started promoting farm land sales in Greenland. This was the Paleo SUV Age.
Very interesting article and references. And indeed Canada may be among the (few) relative winners of climate change.
However, as others here also pointed out, one also has to consider soil fertility and water availability, both of which may suppress yields.
It would be interesting to include those to come up with expected agricultural yields instead of just area.
This is a way too simplistic view of climate change’s impact on Canada. Canada is already seeing massive droughts in key farmland zones coupled with forest fires.
IMO, no one can forecast the climate change impact. We’re in uncharted waters
As Scott points out, a lot of land in Canada is already fine for farming as far as climate is concerned, but the soil got scraped off by the glaciers some 10s of thousand years ago. However there are some regions where the soil is OK but climate was just too cold.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clay_Belt
The ‘Lesser Clay Belt’ has been successfully farmed for decades but between a shorter growing season and more miserably cold winters, attempts to farm the the Greater Clay Belt were abandoned. It is plausible that a similar attempt now would be successful.
OTOH some farmland in southern Alberta are irrigated using water from glaciers in the Rocky Mountains. If/when those glaciers melt completely that irrigated agriculture might have to be abandoned. More generally there is the question of what happens to rainfall patterns in a warmer world.
1. Will there be enough land to replace the soon to be defunct farmland being lost to the south and keep output stable?
2. Will any future US governments remain friendly to Canada and not piss them off?
Can’t believe I still have to do this these days.
What a crazy conclusion from your video. You only have to look at the current rate of warming to see that it’s off the charts in terms of speed and suddenness. It should also be obvious that just because the earth has changed temperature in the past it doesn’t mean it happens by magic. We know the reasons for many of these changes and guess what? This time it’s because of greenhouse gasses because 1) that’s what you would expect from an increase in GHGs and 2) no other factor fits the bill.
Can’t believe I still have to do this these days.
What a silky conclusion from this video. You only have to look at the current rate of warming to see that it’s off the charts in terms of speed and suddenness. It should also be obvious that just because the earth has changed temperature in the past it doesn’t mean it happens by magic. We know the reasons for many of these changes and guess what? This time it’s because of greenhouse gasses because 1) that’s what you would expect from an increase in GHGs and 2) no other factor fits the bill.
What about the extremely high CO2 levels 1,000 of years ago? Back in dinosaur days. Did Fred Flintstone’s gas guzzler cause that?
Can’t believe I still have to do this these days.
What a dumb conclusion from this video. You only have to look at the current rate of warming to see that it’s off the charts in terms of speed and suddenness. It should also be obvious that just because the earth has changed temperature in the past it doesn’t mean it happens by magic. We know the reasons for many of these changes and guess what? This time it’s because of greenhouse gasses because 1) that’s what you would expect from an increase in GHGs and 2) no other factor fits the bill.
You are suggesting that 1000 years ago China had invented SUVs and was already spewing megatonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere. What else could have caused cyclic warming and cooling over the millennia if not human CO2 emissions?
But if we are not living in unique and special times, what do we tell the little kiddies to make them feel special? Oh, Greta! Everything will be alright.
A major problem with this prediction is that most of the rich fertile farmland is already in use. For example in Ontario, most of southern and eastern Ontario is good farmland but is already fully utilized. As you go north and west from there you quickly hit Canadian Shield which is not suitable for farming. Basically a mix of rock, thin soils and lakes. Canadian Shield covers a huge chunk of the country.
Isn’t the topsoil about an inch thick in most of the Canadian interior?
Careful, this almost sounds like a positive observation about climate change. Only alarmism allowed by the woke.
You’ll get cancelled.