alt Hacker NewsCaffeine production is likely difficult in the face of a drier climate. Caffeine is present in the plant as a pesticide. Insects are a much bigger problem in wet climates over dry.
Having grown up in a wet climate (Chicago) but now living in a dry one (Utah) I can say that finding a droubt tolerant species which concerns itself with pesticide production may be difficult. The same water which coffee relies on is the same stuff pests rely on to reproduce. My mother was from Utah, and she always lamented at the small size of her flowers growing up in Chicago. They are much larger in Utah because they can get big without insects eating them.
(I say all this as a point of interest, but I don't drink coffee myself.)
Replies
Ah, so that's why they don't drink much coffee in Utah. I thought it was because of some Broadway musical!
> My mother was from Utah, and she always lamented at the small size of her flowers growing up in Chicago. They are much larger in Utah because they can get big without insects eating them.
Counter-anecdote from a Utah local: every time we travel to a "wet" area (any travel but Arizona / Nevada) we always find the climate to be more verdant and flowery. Perhaps ecosystems are more multi-faceted in nature.
Counter-counter-anecdote: Our Roses love the weather here.
That's interesting, it's something I haven't really thought about.
There is some desire for less caffeine as it adds bitterness. Eugenioides, a parent species to arabica the commonly cultivated species, inherently has less caffeine and is said to have a remarkably sweet cup. It's had some attention in barista competitions in the last few years.
Google says Chicago has 45 days of full sun while Salt Lake City has 222 days. I think sun has much more to do with it than insects.
It’s the same reason Alaska can grow freakishly big produce in a short season. There’s not much darkness during the growing season.
As a daily coffee drinker I wouldn't mind less caffeine in coffee. I drink coffee for its flavour (and have tried dozens of different coffees from many different roasters). I have tried some decafs but they just taste different and generally much flatter. They also behave very strangely in my espresso machine, requiring a much finer grind to sustain brewing pressure. From my limited understanding of decaf processes, they all remove more than just caffeine, so the effect on flavour is unavoidable.
One sort-of exception are the mormon tea plants that grow readily in the region. They don't have caffeine, but they do contain several other strong compounds that likely evolved to combat pests. Those plants love hot dry conditions and sandy/rocky soil.
Current models don't predict the climate overall getting drier with climate change- in fact average rainfall goes up slightly.
Some areas will get drier, others (like the Sahara and Sahale for example) have and will get wetter.
> finding a droubt tolerant species which concerns itself with pesticide production may be difficult
Tobacco, no?
Not that this applies to you, but coffee is definitely one of the things the Utah-based religions and metacultures should reconsider. Both coffee and tea are extraordinarily healthy compared to their more commonly preferred soda/diet sodas, and much more satisfying. Further, they already allow tea in subculture rulesets like Korea (one can speak with former proselytizers that sold the ideas in the region if doubt is one's initial thoughts). Most trace back their current adherence to cultural baggage of the same diet notions that led to Seventh day Adventists's diets, Wheaties, Kellogg Cereals, etc. Some great articles in Dialogue for the Utah-metaculture based curious. It's clear that the health advice banning coffee is a remnant of earlier times and currently operates as a shibboleth and token of obedience without merit.