'Water footprints' and how much water is in your hamburger

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • NedGrimley Brigham City, UT
    July 12, 2012 12:27 p.m.

    Swell, one more thing for me to feel guilty about.

  • Michael De Groote
    July 12, 2012 11:41 a.m.

    Whether you think a "water footprint" is something to be concerned about or not, you have to admit it is interesting to think about. I just found it somewhat subversive, on my part, to see how much water the balloons wasted that they had in their video. :-)

    Water is a renewable resource, but sometimes its use has impact. For example, if there is a high water-use production facility in a drought-prone area. Or, if the water is highly polluted in the manufacturing process. Some energy extraction efforts pump water/steam deep into the earth where it will stay for a pretty long time.

    Since this article was just a roundup, I didn't go very deep on the issue. I may in the future.

  • Are You for Real? Salt Lake City, UT
    July 12, 2012 10:44 a.m.

    I am sick and tired of humans apologizing for using the resources that are so abundant in this earth. They talk about water as if it will expire and no longer exist once you drink it. No people, there is a cycle that returns ALL of the water consumed back into the earth.

    FAIL! Don't buy into yet another guilt ridden attempt to manipulate us back into the dark ages.

  • SpaceCowboy69 Syracuse, UT
    July 12, 2012 10:42 a.m.

    Just another assault on the "Western" lifestyle and pushing us into an "eco-friendly" diet. Manufacture a problem that doesn't exist to rile up the masses. Man-made global warming has been proven a hoax, so onto the next contrived crisis.

  • Supercool11 R-Valley, NV
    July 12, 2012 10:26 a.m.

    Leave it to the large inter-governmental agency to manufacture a problem that isn't really a problem. Maybe the global warming myth is losing too much traction these days. Who doubts that the next step will be to try implement a hamburger tax to feed the the hungry coffers of the E.U. and U.N.

    It's a false argument. The fact is a cow does not contain 20,000 gallons of water, that is taken off the face of the earth. The molecules go into the cow and then back out and then are eventually evaporated and fall as rain someplace else.

    The fact is that beef production makes use of the world's most abundant resource, grass to make a product high in biological value and protein.

    Most of the cotton production in the U.S. is on non-irrigated ground, meaning it just uses rain. Consumption of water is not the problem, distribution is.