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).
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.
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.
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.
...
> A lot of traditional wheat/sunflower/barley/oats has gone over to beans and corn bc roundup and GMO.
So wheat absolutely can be grown on the same places that beans grow, despite your leading claim. And I grew up in the Midwest plains; wheat IS a crop that can be grown there. Marginal? The breadbasket of the US? Huh. News to those who live there.
US farmers are planting less wheat, which made the crop harvest marginal, and along came a 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.
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.
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 ).
the methane isnt the issue, building and operating the processing plants is
"Fungible describes goods, assets, or commodities that are mutually interchangeable, meaning one unit is equivalent to another of the same type and value.
they are two parts of a three part whole.
they arent perfectly fungible either - the core nitrogen, potassium, and phosphorus can come in many forms, and need some chemical processing to get into the right shape for use
For supplemental fertilizer you buy though you are correct.
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.
its not particularly available to the rest of the globe because you need different refining.
i find it to be kinda funny that albertan oil prices jump with global markets when albertas major complaint is about a lack of access to global markets.
Canada also doesnt have the export capacity for selling potash directly. if its being redirected away from the US, its US importers deciding they can get a better price by re-exporting it
like a "in theory in ten years from now, these other customers could swap what oil theyre using, so were gonna charge you more now just in case"
which itself is a major factor - the US imports tons of potash from canada, only to re-export it elsewhere. a clampdown from canada would be more likely to hit a south korea or china more than the midwest
Though potash is one part of three (Nitrogen < Hormuz / Phosphorus < Florida / Potassium < Saskatchewan) used in commerical fertilizer I believe.
(One person's perspective living in Southern Alberta)
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.
Conveniently for them, it's very difficult to attribute any specific weather event to climate change in isolation.
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.
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.
These are the people who roll coal
Many of these causes imply spending copious money that they are less well disposed to stuff in their pockets or give as tax breaks to their benefactors.
Others make good political ammunition for their uneducated base.
Amazingly invisible fact to the US political right. Glaringly obvious, yet they can't see it. It's almost like they don't even have their country's best interests at heart...