Remix.run Logo
ericpauley 5 hours ago

Title claims "due to plains drought" but the article text largely attributes this to increased planting of soy for its lower fertilizer requirements (related to Strait of Hormuz).

pragmatic 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Wheat isn’t grown in the same places that beans grow.

If you can, you’re rotating beans and corn every year. (“Roundup ready” of course)

Wheat is on the marginal drier land. Not that they couldn’t plant wheat there but beans are way more profitable and so they don’t.

The plains is by definition more arid, marginal land a step up from pasture/grazing.

A lot of traditional wheat/sunflower/barley/oats has gone over to beans and corn bc roundup and GMO.

On my family’s farm I don’t remember the last time we had wheat crop but that was our staple for like 50 years.

jandrewrogers 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Wheat isn’t grown in the same places that beans grow.

It depends on what you mean by "beans". The Palouse agricultural region is famously one of the highest yielding wheat and legume producing regions in North America.

mech998877 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Whean and soybeans are often grown on the same land. Your 1st and 5th sentences seem to contradict eachother, I might not be understanding.

9rx an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

> If you can, you’re rotating beans and corn every year.

Nah. Wheat isn't profitable if you look at it in isolation, but it is still net advantageous to have in the rotation.

> (“Roundup ready” of course)

Nah. IP soys aren't as attractive as they once were, granted, but the premium is still compelling enough to grow some.

mohamedkoubaa 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

At many of these publications the editor chooses the title, not the author. They know full well that most people will read the headline but not the article.

iugtmkbdfil834 4 minutes ago | parent [-]

Sadly, this is very accurate.

Relevant example from today:

"The commodities guru who warned about silver falling now, is saying the hantavirus could do the same to oil"

Click later:

Guy is just hedging against losses.

I am genuinely starting to wonder how much of the trade swings are from algo trades reacting to headlines ( and subsequent ones reacting to content;p ).

fullstop 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Has the USA's potash supply been reduced due to strained relations with Canada? They are our top supplier, by far.

metiscus 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Fertilizer is pretty fungible and is a global market, so even if the US is primarily supplied by Canada, and overall global demand remained constant, prices would go up since there will be supply reduction due to the Hormuz strait being closed.

downrightmike an hour ago | parent [-]

Having the two major inputs turned off turns fungible to non-fungible

sandworm101 15 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

US and Canadian production is largely irrelevant to the price. These are world comodities. If worldwide production drops, prices rise. As with oil/gas producers, domestic potash producers are under no obligation to sell locally. If prices are higher in europe/asia/africa, that domestic potash will be loaded onto ships until domestic prices rise to match.

koverstreet 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Are you forgetting the nitrogen? :)

fullstop 4 hours ago | parent | next [-]

The US produces most of their own nitrogen, but the same is not true of potash.

mythrwy 3 hours ago | parent [-]

The US does have potash mines for example around Carlsbad New Mexico. But these cover only a percentage of domestic need. Perhaps they could be scaled up not sure.

jandrewrogers 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Also famously near Moab, Utah.

bluGill 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

The US provides a lot of its own supply there.

colechristensen 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Nitrogen is pulled out of the air which is free but the process requires hydrogen which is acquired from disassembled methane, the price of which is a significant contributor.

HarHarVeryFunny 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

A lot of crops need nitrogen. What has been impacted by Trump's Iran war is the supply of Urea through the Straight of Hormuz.

If the closure persists then no doubt other sources can ramp up to fill the void, but it's going to be too late for this season. Some Asian farmers have already chosen not to bother planting rice crops since the increase in fertilizer (urea) cost has meant they'd be losing money.

Fuel prices are also impacting imported produce prices.

SecretDreams 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yes. Despite what others have said, yes. But, in general, because of the current global dynamics, fertilizer is more expensive wherever you're going to be getting it from. It just doesn't help that the US has picked a trade war with all allies at the same time, while also engaging in real wars that disrupt global supply chains of critical resources.

maerF0x0 3 hours ago | parent [-]

It shocks me when I realize it's only been 16/48 of his term. We still have 2/3rds to go.

SecretDreams 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Yes, the amount of change the world has experienced over the last 16/48 has been pretty dramatic. And the perception of the US external to he US has changed proportionally. I'd like to think the trend won't persist for the full 48, but I also did not expect quite so much in the first 16/48.

colechristensen 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

It's the nitrogen fertilizer almost all of which is manufactured from methane + air.

bluGill 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Pedantically, most of it is manufactured by biological processes in the soil. Soy Beans are really good at this which is why it is planted so much (the food value is secondary, but enough to give it the edge over alternatives)

For supplemental fertilizer you buy though you are correct.

colechristensen 4 hours ago | parent [-]

[flagged]

eduction 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You are wrong and the drought attribution is correct: Winter wheat is the dominant variety in the U.S. and is (and is projected to be further) down due to drought.

"a severe drought in the U.S. Plains has curbed production of hard red winter wheat, the largest variety grown in the U.S... The USDA projected U.S. wheat production in the 2026/27 season at 1.561 billion bushels, down from 1.985 billion in 2025/26, as a severe drought in the U.S. Plains was likely to slash the hard red winter wheat crop by 25% from a year earlier."

"The USDA rated just 28% of the U.S. winter wheat crop in good-to-excellent condition in a weekly crop conditions report on Monday, the lowest rating for this point in the growing season in four years."

This was mentioned in the very first sentence, it's the very first attribution of falling wheat harvest.

Yes Hormuz and rising oil costs are also a factor, a secondary one since they are impacting spring wheat planting decisions as you mention.

dragonwriter 13 minutes ago | parent [-]

> Winter wheat is the dominant variety in the U.S. and is (and is projected to be further) down due to drought.

Both drought and the fertilizer shortage (which, as the article notes, was too late to effect planting decisions but DID impact the costs, and thereby decisions on the applied quantities, of nutrients for the winter wheat crop this year) are impacting winter wheat yields.

SecretDreams 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Agreed.

But there's a very weird underlying sentiment on HN where many people seem to directly or indirectly jump whenever they can to downplay the existence of climate change. Sometimes, they are emboldened by articles like this which intentionally use misleading headlines.

You're completely right, though, that in this instance, soy beans were mostly focused on because of consumer trends and less fertilizer need. Wheat is just an expensive crop right now. Also, soybeans would actually be less resilient to drought which furthers your point re: the article headline.

FrustratedMonky 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Maybe a positive. Soy Beans are more healthy.

So lower fertilizer demand, and healthier produce, could be a net positive.

Kind of like an oil shortage is driving an increase in EVs and renewable energy.

Finally waking up the US that oil dependence is a National Security issue that renewables are possible solution for. That renewables aren't the 'woke' enemy, but a valid technical option.

So, maybe a net positive.

jqpabc123 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Finally waking up the US that oil dependence is a National Security issue

Even worse, oil dependence is a competitive liability --- not an advantage.

AI is energy intensive. And more expensive, carbon based based energy is a competitive disadvantage.

A competitive disadvantage in AI is an economic issue --- which ultimately translates into a National Security issue.

China leadership understands this. USA leadership is clueless.

FrustratedMonky 3 hours ago | parent [-]

We're in an energy crunch, and Republicans think it is a good idea to cancel wind farms because they ruin the view.

iso1631 2 hours ago | parent [-]

They don't care about the view, they want to cancel them because they are "woke"

These are the people who roll coal

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolling_coal