Susan Boyle - Britains Got Talent Final - I Dreamed A Dream. L'empreinte eau de la France. Première de couverture L’empreinte eau est un indicateur de l’usage direct ou indirect qui est fait de l’eau douce. Elle se décompose en empreinte eau bleue (eau de surface et eau souterraine), verte (eau de pluie) et grise (eau utilisée pour diluer les polluants). Cette étude, initiée et financée par le WWF-France, et menée par l’Université de Twente (Pays-Bas), révèle pour la première fois les caractéristiques de l’empreinte eau de la France. L’empreinte eau de production de la France (l’eau utilisée sur le territoire pour la production de biens et services) est de 90 milliards de m3 par an.
Les cultures agricoles représentent 86 % de cette empreinte eau, essentiellement sous forme d’eau verte. Le maïs représente à lieu seul 50 % de l’empreinte eau bleue de production agricole, avec un impact massif sur les bassins de la Loire, de la Garonne et de la Seine. L’empreinte eau d’un consommateur français est de 1.786 m3 par an, soit l’équivalent du volume intérieur de deux Boeing 747. STAT. The tragedy of ISO’s new water footprinting standard | Insight: Global Water Intelligence. Published 7th August 2014 Insight from Christopher Gasson, GWI publisher The International Standards Organisation published ISO 14046 last week outlining the principles, requirements and standards for measuring a water footprint.
It is a brilliant but tragic document. It creates the definitive definition of a water footprint, but at the same time kills off the concept once and for all. That said, ISO 14046 is still an important contribution to the debate on corporate water stewardship. The idea behind a water footprint is to come up with an objective measure of the environmental impact of water use in the same way that a carbon footprint represents an objective measure of greenhouse gas emissions. For example, you might start by saying that a kilogramme of beef has a water footprint of 15,000 litres, because if you add up all of the water used to grow the feed for the animal and all the water it might drink, and the water used at the abattoir for processing, it comes to that amount. Re: HLPE consultation on the V0 draft of the Report: Water and Food Security | HLPE open e-consultation.
Dear Sir or Madame, first of all I would like to congratulate you to this very comprehensive report on a very relevant aspect. While reading it, I noticed that you focus entirely on the water footprint according to Hoekstra and colleagues when it comes to assessing the amount of water consumed in food production. While this approach developed by the Water Footprint Network is well known, easy to understand, and well established, I would like to draw your attention to the limitations and drawbacks of such a volumetric method. Simply aggregating volumes of blue, green, and gray water fails to a address the much more relevant dimension of water use: the local impacts resulting from it. Obviously 1 m³ of rain water consumption in Brazilian soy bean production does not compare to 1 m³ of ground water consumption in Spanish tomato production.
Further, I would like to mention that an ISO standard (ISO 14046: Kind regards from Berlin, Markus Berger. Re: HLPE consultation on the V0 draft of the Report: Water and Food Security | HLPE open e-consultation. To whom it may concern The report is quite an impressive work. However, I agree with previous comments, that it is trying to cover everything at the expense of covering the details as well as providing a consistent report.
I will focus my comments on the environmental assessment and footprint of water consumption for ensuring food security. Especially the chapter 2.5.1 is very biased and does not account for international consensus finding and discussions around the water footprint concept. Pfister S, Ridoutt BG (2013) Water Footprint: Pitfalls on Common Ground. Pfister, S. and Hellweg, S. (2009). These papers discuss the relevance of the location of water use, since water used in arid places is more relevant than that used in water-abundant places. Furthermore the combination with grey water is very strange, since dilution volumes without physical meaning are combined with water volumes. Kind regards Dr.