|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: Monsanto lobbyist make fool of himself [Re: Bikerfool]
#21476291 - 03/29/15 08:35 PM (8 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
once more, these still remain arbitrary numbers without the actual study
|
twighead
mͯó



Registered: 08/27/08
Posts: 29,830
Loc: Glenn Gould's Fuck Windmill
Last seen: 16 hours, 20 minutes
|
Re: Monsanto lobbyist make fool of himself [Re: Bikerfool]
#21476350 - 03/29/15 08:47 PM (8 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Bikerfool said:
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said: well you can cite numbers but those numbers dont tell how they managed to come to those figures, they also dont denote the nutrition density for the amount of water used
can you show us the study on how that water was used and how they came to these conclusions. maybe you can also tell us why california may be running out of water soon
The USGS cited this organization's findings in reference to how much water it takes to grow different kinds of food:
http://www.waterfootprint.org/?page=files/home
And I'm pretty sure they're smart enough to take evaporation into account when compiling this data.
The nutrition of red meat vs. vegetables seems pretty well documented.
I can't say exactly why California is running out of water but I don't think that 5.3 million head of cattle is helping the situation.
It's probably mostly the 20 million people in a 100 square mile area in an already arid area which is seeing less and less water due to continual droughts for much of the last 15 years 
But yeah its definitely not helping
|
Bikerfool
Your Local Edgelord


Registered: 11/21/05
Posts: 1,579
Last seen: 9 days, 22 hours
|
Re: Monsanto lobbyist make fool of himself [Re: Prisoner#1]
#21476378 - 03/29/15 08:56 PM (8 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Dude, there's links to various reports in the link I posted.
Quote:
Summary The projected increase in the production and consumption of animal products is likely to put further pressure on the globe’s freshwater resources. The size and characteristics of the water footprint vary across animal types and production systems. The current study provides a comprehensive account of the global green, blue and grey water footprints of different sorts of farm animals and animal products, distinguishing between different production systems and considering the conditions in all countries of the world separately. The following animal categories were considered: beef cattle, dairy cattle, pig, sheep, goat, broiler chicken, layer chicken and horses. The study shows that the water footprint of meat from beef cattle (15400 m3/ton as a global average) is much larger than the footprints of meat from sheep (10400 m3/ton), pig (6000 m3/ton), goat (5500 m3/ton) or chicken (4300 m3/ton). The global average water footprint of chicken egg is 3300 m3/ton, while the water footprint of cow milk amounts to 1000 m3/ton. Per ton of product, animal products generally have a larger water footprint than crop products. The same is true when we look at the water footprint per calorie. The average water footprint per calorie for beef is twenty times larger than for cereals and starchy roots. When we look at the water requirements for protein, we find that the water footprint per gram of protein for milk, eggs and chicken meat is about 1.5 times larger than for pulses. For beef, the water footprint per gram of protein is 6 times larger than for pulses. In the case of fat, we find that butter has a relatively small water footprint per gram of fat, even lower than for oil crops. All other animal products, however, have larger water footprints per gram of fat when compared to oil crops. The study shows that from a freshwater resource perspective, it is more efficient to obtain calories, protein and fat through crop products than animal products.
|
Bikerfool
Your Local Edgelord


Registered: 11/21/05
Posts: 1,579
Last seen: 9 days, 22 hours
|
Re: Monsanto lobbyist make fool of himself [Re: Bikerfool]
#21476416 - 03/29/15 09:03 PM (8 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
2.1 Method We follow the water footprint definitions and methodology as set out in Hoekstra et al. (2009). The blue water footprint refers to consumption of blue water resources (surface and groundwater) along the supply chain of a product. ‘Consumption’ refers to loss of water from the available ground-surface water body in a catchment area. Losses occur when water evaporates, returns to another catchment area or the sea or is incorporated into a product. The green water footprint refers to consumption of green water resources (rainwater in so far as it does not become run-off). The grey water footprint refers to pollution and is defined as the volume of freshwater that is required to assimilate the load of pollutants given natural background concentrations and existing ambient water quality standards. We consider eight farm animal categories: beef and dairy cattle, pig, sheep, goat, broiler and layer chicken and horses. When estimating total feed amounts and total water footprints per category, we include ‘buffaloes’ in the category of ‘beef cattle’ and ‘asses and mules’ in the category of ‘horses’. The water footprint of a live animal consists of different components: the indirect water footprint of the feed and the direct water footprint related to the drinking water and service water consumed (Chapagain and Hoekstra, 2003, 2004). The water footprint of an animal is expressed as: WF[a,c, s] WFfeed [a,c, s]WFdrink [a,c, s]WFserv[a,c, s] (1) where WFfeed[a,c,s], WFdrink[a,c,s] and WFserv[a,c,s] represent the water footprint of an animal for animal category a in country c in production systems s related to feed, drinking water and service water consumption, respectively. Service water refers to the water used to clean the farmyard, wash the animal and carry out other services necessary to maintain the environment. The water footprint of an animal and its three components can be expressed in terms of m3/yr/animal, or, when summed over the lifetime of the animal, in terms of m3/animal. For beef cattle, pig, sheep, goat and broiler chicken – animals that provide their products after they have been slaughtered – it is most useful to look at the water footprint of the animal at the end of its lifetime, because it is this total that will be allocated to the various products (e.g. meat, leather). For dairy cattle and layer chicken, it is most straightforward to look at the water footprint of the animal per year (averaged over its lifetime), because one can easily relate this annual animal water footprint to its average annual production (milk, eggs).
|
Bikerfool
Your Local Edgelord


Registered: 11/21/05
Posts: 1,579
Last seen: 9 days, 22 hours
|
Re: Monsanto lobbyist make fool of himself [Re: twighead]
#21476450 - 03/29/15 09:08 PM (8 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
It's probably mostly the 20 million people in a 100 square mile area in an already arid area which is seeing less and less water due to continual droughts for much of the last 15 years 
But yeah its definitely not helping
Yeah for sure. I wouldn't want to mention the weakening of the Jet Stream due to climate change as a contributing factor since climate change isn't real.
|
Shiithead
Your Huckleberry



Registered: 04/05/13
Posts: 10,000
Loc: God's Flat Green Earth
|
Re: Monsanto lobbyist make fool of himself [Re: Stonehenge]
#21476855 - 03/29/15 10:48 PM (8 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Glyphosate will make your dick fly off.
--------------------
Ephesians 6:12 For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. Psalm 12:6 The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Hebrews 11:3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear. Revelation 3:11 Behold, I come quickly: hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown.
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!


Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: Monsanto lobbyist make fool of himself [Re: Bikerfool]
#21477010 - 03/29/15 11:42 PM (8 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Bikerfool said:
Quote:
2.1 Method We follow the water footprint definitions and methodology as set out in Hoekstra et al. (2009). The blue water footprint refers to consumption of blue water resources (surface and groundwater) along the supply chain of a product. ‘Consumption’ refers to loss of water from the available ground-surface water body in a catchment area. Losses occur when water evaporates, returns to another catchment area or the sea or is incorporated into a product. The green water footprint refers to consumption of green water resources (rainwater in so far as it does not become run-off). The grey water footprint refers to pollution and is defined as the volume of freshwater that is required to assimilate the load of pollutants given natural background concentrations and existing ambient water quality standards. We consider eight farm animal categories: beef and dairy cattle, pig, sheep, goat, broiler and layer chicken and horses. When estimating total feed amounts and total water footprints per category, we include ‘buffaloes’ in the category of ‘beef cattle’ and ‘asses and mules’ in the category of ‘horses’. The water footprint of a live animal consists of different components: the indirect water footprint of the feed and the direct water footprint related to the drinking water and service water consumed (Chapagain and Hoekstra, 2003, 2004). The water footprint of an animal is expressed as: WF[a,c, s] WFfeed [a,c, s]WFdrink [a,c, s]WFserv[a,c, s] (1) where WFfeed[a,c,s], WFdrink[a,c,s] and WFserv[a,c,s] represent the water footprint of an animal for animal category a in country c in production systems s related to feed, drinking water and service water consumption, respectively. Service water refers to the water used to clean the farmyard, wash the animal and carry out other services necessary to maintain the environment. The water footprint of an animal and its three components can be expressed in terms of m3/yr/animal, or, when summed over the lifetime of the animal, in terms of m3/animal. For beef cattle, pig, sheep, goat and broiler chicken – animals that provide their products after they have been slaughtered – it is most useful to look at the water footprint of the animal at the end of its lifetime, because it is this total that will be allocated to the various products (e.g. meat, leather). For dairy cattle and layer chicken, it is most straightforward to look at the water footprint of the animal per year (averaged over its lifetime), because one can easily relate this annual animal water footprint to its average annual production (milk, eggs).
you really should read into this shit a little deeper because the wastes from foods for human consumption are included in the diets of cattle, so the corn, soybeans, sugar beets, etc... that are sold for humans are counted against cattle because the cattle are eating the residues but water footprint of the animals they derive the the bone meal, manure and other animal products used in agriculture arent counted against the plants. are you not seeing this heavy slant especially given that the concept of this water footprint was devised by a couple of folks pushing their vegan/vegetarian agenda. how disingenuous
|
Shroomism
Space Travellin



Registered: 02/13/00
Posts: 66,015
Loc: 9th Dimension
|
Re: Monsanto lobbyist make fool of himself [Re: Bikerfool]
#21477043 - 03/29/15 11:55 PM (8 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Bikerfool said:
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said: maybe you can tell us why we havent run completely out of water decades ago or
Yeah you see, there's this place called California. They grow a lot of the food we eat. It's very likely that they're going to run out of water in the next couple of years.
California has 5.3 million head of cattle.
1 pound of beef requires an 1600+ gallons of water for production 1 pound of lentils requires 700 gallons of water for production 1 pound of soy beans require 257 gallons of water for production.
It seems pretty cut and dry to me.
Reduce meat production, increase vegetable protein production.
Have more food, have more water so people don't have to abandon their homes as quickly.
I think the one of the bigger problems is that despite California running out of water, Nestle continues to bottle ~80-400 millions of gallons of it a year and selling it back to Californians and exporting the majority of it off to other states and even to China
--------------------
|
Adolin




Registered: 06/28/11
Posts: 8,292
Loc: USA
Last seen: 1 year, 3 months
|
Re: Monsanto lobbyist make fool of himself [Re: Shroomism]
#21477055 - 03/30/15 12:04 AM (8 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Shroomism said:
Nestle continues to bottle ~80-400 millions of gallons of it a year and selling it back to Californians and exporting the majority of it off to other states and even to China
do chinese people seriously buy american water?
what a bunch of fuckin idiots
|
twighead
mͯó



Registered: 08/27/08
Posts: 29,830
Loc: Glenn Gould's Fuck Windmill
Last seen: 16 hours, 20 minutes
|
Re: Monsanto lobbyist make fool of himself [Re: Adolin]
#21477063 - 03/30/15 12:09 AM (8 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Look at what Americans buy from China
|
lowbrow
Paddy Time!!!!


Registered: 09/12/08
Posts: 9,757
Last seen: 7 minutes, 32 seconds
|
Re: Monsanto lobbyist make fool of himself [Re: Prisoner#1]
#21477078 - 03/30/15 12:17 AM (8 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said: the funny thing is these same tards that oppose the GMOs and claim that scientists are on the dole form big corporations, that the thousands of studies on these products are bullshit because monsanto funded them (even when they didnt), are the same tards that swear the science behind global warming is real even though this will be a trillion dollar industry when the legislation is passed
That's straight up delusional.
-------------------- Amanita86 said: Sui is trying to mod right now. Kinda like a newborn calf tryin ta stand fer the first time ain’t it..
|
jakefake


Registered: 09/22/14
Posts: 818
Loc: Alps to Apennines
Last seen: 2 years, 3 months
|
Re: Monsanto lobbyist make fool of himself [Re: Bikerfool]
#21495598 - 04/03/15 08:21 AM (8 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Bikerfool said:
Quote:
jakefake said:
Quote:
Bikerfool said: The world is grossly overpopulated...
Prove it.
I don't have to. If it's not obvious to you then that's your problem.
No, it's not obvious to me. What are the giveaway signs for you? That you cannot lie down because there's always someone underneath you? That you cannot eat, because someone has already eaten what you were going to eat? That you can't get to a place where there are no people in sight? That you can't get adverse possession of any land, because none is abandoned? What is it that gives you this impression, Bikerfool?
--------------------
|
Bikerfool
Your Local Edgelord


Registered: 11/21/05
Posts: 1,579
Last seen: 9 days, 22 hours
|
Re: Monsanto lobbyist make fool of himself [Re: jakefake]
#21496440 - 04/03/15 01:08 PM (8 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Bikerfool said: I don't have to. If it's not obvious to you then that's your problem.
Did I stutter?
I've got more important things to do than debate with someone over the internet about something that they've already made up their mind about.
See ya.
|
jakefake


Registered: 09/22/14
Posts: 818
Loc: Alps to Apennines
Last seen: 2 years, 3 months
|
Re: Monsanto lobbyist make fool of himself [Re: jakefake]
#21502882 - 04/04/15 03:17 PM (8 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Bikerfool said: The world is grossly overpopulated...
The thing is, Malthus already hit the nail on the head 200 years ago: the world tends to have the right number of people for the means of production that is available at the time.
--------------------
|
|