DevEX - reference for building teams, processes, and platforms
The water footprint of livestock products
1. Livestock Live Talk at ILRI, Nairobi, 7 February 2013
The water footprint of livestock
products
Arjen Hoekstra
University of Twente, the Netherlands
2. The total water footprint of the average consumer in the world
3800 litre/day
3.8% of the water footprint relates to home water use
96.2% of the water footprint is ‘invisible’,
related to the products bought on the market
91.5% agricultural products, 4.7% industrial products
22% of the water footprint does not lie within the country of
the consumer, but other parts of the world
Source: Hoekstra & Mekonnen (2012) The Water Footprint of Humanity, PNAS
3. Water footprint of national consumption
Animal
products
Global average water footprint
Animal
products
Source: Hoekstra & Mekonnen (2012) The Water Footprint of Humanity, PNAS
4. The water footprint of animal products
► The water footprint of the agricultural sector is 92% of the total water
footprint of humanity.
► The water footprint of animal production is 29% of the water footprint of the
global agricultural sector.
Source: Mekonnen & Hoekstra (2012) A global assessment of
the water footprint of farm animal products, Ecosystems
5. Meat consumption per capita
World meat production
India 3.3 kg/yr UK 86 kg/yr Global average 47 kg/yr
Kenya 16 kg/yr USA 123 kg/yr
Source: FAOSTAT (2010). Data for 2007.
6. Overview of presentation
► Globalization of water
► The water footprint concept
► The water footprint of animal products
► What can we do?
7. The spatial distribution of the water footprint of humanity
Source: Hoekstra & Mekonnen (2012) The Water Footprint of Humanity, PNAS
8. The spatial distribution of the water footprint within Europe
Source: Hoekstra & Mekonnen (2012) The Water Footprint of Humanity, PNAS
9. Europe: the world’s largest virtual water import region
wheat, sunflower seed, cotton,
industrial products
soybean cotton cotton,
wheat industrial
products
cotton
cocoa cotton
coffee
soybean
coffee
soybean,
sunflower seed
41% of the water footprint of European consumers is outside Europe
Source: Hoekstra & Mekonnen (2012) The Water Footprint of Humanity, PNAS
10. Number of months with blue water scarcity > 100%
Blue water scarcity = blue water footprint / blue water availability
Source: Hoekstra et al. (2012) Global monthly water scarcity:
blue water footprints versus blue water availability, PLoS ONE
12. The water footprint of a product
the volume of fresh water used to produce the product, summed over the
various steps of the production chain.
when and where the water was used:
a water footprint includes a temporal and spatial dimension.
Source: Hoekstra et al. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual, Earthscan, London, UK
13. The water footprint of a product
Green water footprint
volume of rainwater evaporated or
incorporated into a product
Blue water footprint
volume of surface or groundwater
evaporated or incorporated into a
product
Grey water footprint
volume of polluted water
Source: Hoekstra et al. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual, Earthscan, London, UK
14. Components of a water footprint
Traditional
water use Direct water footprint Indirect water footprint
statistics
Green water footprint Green water footprint
Gross water withdrawal Water
consumption
Return flow Blue water footprint Blue water footprint
= Net water withdrawal
Water
Grey water footprint Grey water footprint
pollution
Source: Hoekstra et al. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual, Earthscan, London, UK
16. The water footprint of food
Global average water footprint
litre/kg litre/kcal
starchy roots 400 0.5
cereals 1600 0.5
sugar crops 200 0.7
pulses 4000 1.1
vegetables 300 1.3
fruits 1000 2.1
pork 6000 2.2
poultry 4000 3.0
beef 15000 10.2
Source: Mekonnen & Hoekstra (2012) A global assessment of
the water footprint of farm animal products, Ecosystems
17. The water footprint of crop products
► 146 crops and over 200 derived crop
products, including various flours, beverages,
fibres and biofuels.
► global coverage
► high spatial resolution (5x5 arc minute grid)
►explicit distinction rainfed-irrigated
► explicit distinction green-blue-grey
18. Global water footprint of wheat
Source: Mekonnen & Hoekstra (2010) The green, blue and grey water footprint of crops and
derived crop products, Value of Water Research Report Series No.47, UNESCO-IHE.
19. Global water footprint of soybean
Source: Mekonnen & Hoekstra (2010) The green, blue and grey water footprint of crops and
derived crop products, Value of Water Research Report Series No.47, UNESCO-IHE.
20. The water footprint of animal products
► six animal types
► global coverage
► per country
► explicit distinction extensive-mixed-intensive
production systems
► accounting for composition and origin of
animal feed
► explicit distinction green-blue-grey
21. The water footprint of a cow
Food
► 1300 kg of grains
(wheat, oats, barley, corn, dry peas, soybean, etc)
► 7200 kg of roughages
(pasture, dry hay, silage, etc) 99%
Water 1%
► 24000 litres for drinking
► 7000 litres for servicing
Source: Hoekstra & Chapagain (2008) Globalization of Water, Blackwell, Oxford, UK
22. The water footprint of beef
Source: Hoekstra & Chapagain (2008) Globalization of Water, Blackwell, Oxford, UK
24. Grazing systems Water footprint:
•mostly green
•local
Mixed systems Water footprint:
•green-blue-grey
•local
Water footprint:
•green-blue-grey
•partly imported
Industrial systems
25. Dryland
Grazing in
dry- and wetlands:
water footprint has a
low opportunity cost
Wetland
27. The water footprint of an animal product
The two major factors
Type of Feed conversion efficiency Water footprint of an
production system Feed composition animal product
grazing, mixed or concentrates vs. roughages Water footprint of the
industrial feed
Feed origin
organic or
organic or conventional Water footprint related to
conventional drinking and other on-farm
rain-fed or irrigated
imported or local activities
Source: Mekonnen & Hoekstra (2012) A global assessment of
the water footprint of farm animal products, Ecosystems
28. The two major factors
80
60
Feed conversion ► feed conversion improves from
grazing to industrial systems.
kg feed (dry mass)/kg output
40
20
0
mixed
mixed
mixed
grazing
grazing
grazing
industrial
industrial
industrial
poultry pork beef
100
Concentrate feed in total feed dry matter
► but at the cost of more
80 high-nutrient concentrate feed with a
60
larger water footprint than roughages.
%
40
20
0
mixed
mixed
mixed
grazing
grazing
grazing
industrial
industrial
industrial
Source: Mekonnen & Hoekstra (2012) A global assessment of
poultry pork beef the water footprint of farm animal products, Ecosystems
29. The water footprint of animal versus vegetal products
Water footprint
Food item
Litre per kg Litre per kcal Litre per gram protein Litre per gram fat
Sugar crops 197 0.69 0.0 0.0
Vegetables 322 1.34 26 154
Starchy roots 387 0.47 31 226
Fruits 962 2.09 180 348
Cereals 1644 0.51 21 112
Oil crops 2364 0.81 16 11
Pulses 4055 1.19 19 180
Nuts 9063 3.63 139 47
Milk 1020 1.82 31 33
Eggs 3265 2.29 29 33
Chicken meat 4325 3.00 34 43
Butter 5553 0.72 - 6.4
Pig meat 5988 2.15 57 23
Sheep/goat meat 8763 4.25 63 54
Bovine meat 15415 10.19 112 153
Source: Mekonnen & Hoekstra (2012) A global assessment of
the water footprint of farm animal products, Ecosystems
30. The water footprint of animal versus vegetal products
► The water footprint of any animal product is larger than the water footprint of
a wisely chosen crop product with equivalent nutritional value.
Source: Mekonnen & Hoekstra (2012) A global assessment of
the water footprint of farm animal products, Ecosystems
31. Meat versus vegetarian diet
Industrialised countries:
Vegetarian
Meat diet kcal/day litre/kcal litre/day kcal/day litre/kcal litre/day
diet
Animal Animal
950 2.5 2375 300 2.5 750
origin origin
Vegetable Vegetable
2450 0.5 1225 3100 0.5 1550
origin origin
Total 3400 3600 Total 3400 2300
Source: Hoekstra (2013) The Water Footprint of Modern Consumer Society, Routledge, London, UK.
32. Meat versus vegetarian diet
Industrialised countries:
Meat diet kcal/day litre/kcal litre/day Vegetarian kcal/day litre/kcal litre/day
diet
Animal
950 2.5 2375 Animal origin 300 2.5 750
origin
Vegetable Vegetable
2450 0.5 1225 3100 0.5 1550
origin origin
Total 3400 3600 Total 3400 2300
Source: Hoekstra (2013) The Water Footprint of Modern Consumer Society, Routledge, London, UK.
33. Meat versus vegetarian diet
Developing countries:
Meat diet kcal/day litre/kcal litre/day Vegetarian kcal/day litre/kcal litre/day
diet
Animal
350 2.5 875 Animal origin 200 2.5 500
origin
Vegetable Vegetable
2350 0.5 1175 2500 0.5 1250
origin origin
Total 2700 2050 Total 2700 1750
Source: Hoekstra (2013) The Water Footprint of Modern Consumer Society, Routledge, London, UK.
35. Reducing the water footprint of animal products
Feed crop cultivation Livestock raising
Reduce green - Increase green water productivity more From industrial towards grazing or mixed systems
water footprint production from rain-fed lands - Reduce concentrate feed
- Increase fraction of roughages
Preferably grazing in areas unsuitable for crop
Reduce blue - Towards supplementary or deficit irrigation
growth (dry lands, wetlands, mountains)
water footprint - Precision irrigation
Reduce grey Organic or precision farming: - No preventive antibiotics
water footprint reduce use of fertilisers and pesticides - No excessive manure
36. Reducing humanity’s water footprint – Companies
Shared terminology & calculation standards
– Global Water Footprint Standard
Product transparency
– water footprint reporting / disclosure
– labelling of products
– certification of businesses
Quantitative footprint reduction targets
– benchmarking
The Water Footprint Assessment Manual
Earthscan, London, UK, 2011
37. The Water Footprint Network
Mission: Promoting sustainable, equitable and efficient water use through
development of shared standards on water footprint accounting and guidelines
for the reduction and offsetting of impacts of water footprints.
Network: bringing together expertise from academia, businesses, civil society,
governments and international organisations.
38. Overview of partners Water Footprint Network
Partners by category
XL company 30
Large company 10
Medium company 23
Small company 33
Government 10
International organisation 9
Academic Institute 29
Civil society / ngo 25
www.waterfootprint.org
Picture left: Kenya Picture right: kenya narok area rift valley; agriculture harvest grain & masai herders with grazing cows
Source: Hoekstra, A.Y. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2012) The water footprint of humanity, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 109(9): 3232–3237. Mekonnen, M.M. and Hoekstra, A.Y. (2011) National water footprint accounts: the green, blue and grey water footprint of production and consumption, Value of Water Research Report Series No.50, UNESCO-IHE, Delft, the Netherlands.
Source: Mekonnen, M.M. and Hoekstra, A.Y. (2010) The green, blue and grey water footprint of farm animals and animal products, Value of Water Research Report Series No.48, UNESCO-IHE, Delft, the Netherlands.
Source: http://chartsbin.com/view/bhy
Virtual water balance per country and gross virtual water import and export of EU27 related to trade in agricultural and industrial products over the period 1996-2005. Only the biggest gross flows (>13 Gm 3 ∕yr) are shown.
The water footprint of a product (a commodity, good or service) is the total volume of freshwater used to produce the product, summed over the various steps of the production chain. The water footprint of a product refers not only to the total volume of water used; it also refers to where and when the water is used. Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The water footprint assessment manual: Setting the global standard, Earthscan, London, UK. See page 195.
Green water footprint – Volume of rainwater consumed during the production process. This is particularly relevant for agricultural and forestry products (products based on crops or wood), where it refers to the total rainwater evapotranspiration (from fields and plantations) plus the water incorporated into the harvested crop or wood. Blue water footprint – Volume of surface and groundwater consumed as a result of the production of a good or service. Consumption refers to the volume of freshwater used and then evaporated or incorporated into a product. It also includes water abstracted from surface or groundwater in a catchment and returned to another catchment or the sea. It is the amount of water abstracted from groundwater or surface water that does not return to the catchment from which it was withdrawn. Grey water footprint – The grey water footprint of a product is an indicator of freshwater pollution that can be associated with the production of a product over its full supply chain. It is defined as the volume of freshwater that is required to assimilate the load of pollutants based on natural background concentrations and existing ambient water quality standards. It is calculated as the volume of water that is required to dilute pollutants to such an extent that the quality of the water remains above agreed water quality standards. Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The water footprint assessment manual: Setting the global standard, Earthscan, London, UK. See page 187, 189, 190.
Water footprint – The water footprint is an indicator of freshwater use that looks at both direct and indirect water use of a consumer or producer. Green water footprint – Volume of rainwater consumed during the production process. This is particularly relevant for agricultural and forestry products (products based on crops or wood), where it refers to the total rainwater evapotranspiration (from fields and plantations) plus the water incorporated into the harvested crop or wood. Blue water footprint – Volume of surface and groundwater consumed as a result of the production of a good or service. Consumption refers to the volume of freshwater used and then evaporated or incorporated into a product. It also includes water abstracted from surface or groundwater in a catchment and returned to another catchment or the sea. It is the amount of water abstracted from groundwater or surface water that does not return to the catchment from which it was withdrawn. Grey water footprint – The grey water footprint of a product is an indicator of freshwater pollution that can be associated with the production of a product over its full supply chain. It is defined as the volume of freshwater that is required to assimilate the load of pollutants based on natural background concentrations and existing ambient water quality standards. It is calculated as the volume of water that is required to dilute pollutants to such an extent that the quality of the water remains above agreed water quality standards. As an indicator of ‘water use’, the water footprint differs from the classical measure of ‘water withdrawal’ in three respects: 1. It does not include blue water use, in so far as this water is returned to where it came from. 2. It is not restricted to blue water use, but also includes green and grey water. 3. It is not restricted to direct water use, but also includes indirect water use. Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The water footprint assessment manual: Setting the global standard, Earthscan, London, UK. See page 3.
Livestock products typically require more water per kilogram (or per calorie) than crop products.
Mekonnen, M.M. and Hoekstra, A.Y. (2011) The green, blue and grey water footprint of crops and derived crop products, Hydrology and Earth System Sciences , 15(5): 1577-1600. Mekonnen, M.M. and Hoekstra, A.Y. (2010) The green, blue and grey water footprint of crops and derived crop products, Value of Water Research Report Series No.47, UNESCO-IHE.
Source: Mekonnen, M.M. and Hoekstra, A.Y. (2010) A global and high-resolution assessment of the green, blue and grey water footprint of wheat, Hydrology and Earth System Sciences , 14(7), 1259–1276. Mekonnen, M.M. and Hoekstra, A.Y. (2010) A global and high-resolution assessment of the green, blue and grey water footprint of wheat, Value of Water Research Report Series No.42, UNESCO-IHE.
Source: Mekonnen, M.M. and Hoekstra, A.Y. (2010) A global and high-resolution assessment of the green, blue and grey water footprint of wheat, Hydrology and Earth System Sciences , 14(7), 1259–1276. Mekonnen, M.M. and Hoekstra, A.Y. (2010) A global and high-resolution assessment of the green, blue and grey water footprint of wheat, Value of Water Research Report Series No.42, UNESCO-IHE.
Mekonnen, M.M. and Hoekstra, A.Y. (2012) A global assessment of the water footprint of farm animal products, Ecosystems , 15(3): 401–415. Mekonnen, M.M. and Hoekstra, A.Y. (2010) The green, blue and grey water footprint of farm animals and animal products, Value of Water Research Report Series No.48, UNESCO-IHE.
The water footprint of a beef cow is 3,100,000 litres. In an industrial beef production system, it takes in average three years before the animal is slaughtered to produce about 200 kg of boneless beef. The animal consumes nearly 1300 kg of grains (wheat, oats, barley, corn, dry peas, soybean meal and other small grains), 7200 kg of roughages (pasture, dry hay, silage and other roughages), 24 cubic meter of water for drinking and 7 cubic meter of water for servicing. This means that to produce one kilogram of boneless beef, we use about 6.5 kg of grain, 36 kg of roughages, and 155 litres of water (only for drinking and servicing). Producing the volume of feed requires about 15300 litres of water in average.
The water footprint of beef is 15500 litres of water per kg of beef.
The water footprint of a piece of beef depends on how it was produced, e.g. composition of animal feed, origin of the feed ingredients. Hoekstra, A.Y. (2010) The water footprint of animal products, In: D'Silva, J. and Webster, J. (eds.) The meat crisis: Developing more sustainable production and consumption, Earthscan, London, UK, pp. 22-33.
Mekonnen, M.M. and Hoekstra, A.Y. (2010) The green, blue and grey water footprint of farm animals and animal products, Value of Water Research Report Series No.48, UNESCO-IHE, Delft, the Netherlands.
Source: Mekonnen, M.M. and Hoekstra, A.Y. (2010) The green, blue and grey water footprint of farm animals and animal products, Value of Water Research Report Series No.48, UNESCO-IHE, Delft, the Netherlands.
Source: Mekonnen, M.M. and Hoekstra, A.Y. (2010) The green, blue and grey water footprint of farm animals and animal products, Value of Water Research Report Series No.48, UNESCO-IHE, Delft, the Netherlands.
Source: Mekonnen, M.M. and Hoekstra, A.Y. (2010) The green, blue and grey water footprint of farm animals and animal products, Value of Water Research Report Series No.48, UNESCO-IHE, Delft, the Netherlands.
Source: Mekonnen, M.M. and Hoekstra, A.Y. (2010) The green, blue and grey water footprint of farm animals and animal products, Value of Water Research Report Series No.48, UNESCO-IHE, Delft, the Netherlands.
Since food consumption gives the most important contribution to the water footprints of people, even in industrialised countries, dietary habits greatly influence the associated water footprint. In industrialised countries the average calorie consumption today is 3400 kcal per day; roughly 30% of that comes from animal products. When we assume that the average daily portion of animal products is a reasonable mix of beef, pork, poultry, fish, eggs and dairy products, we can estimate that 1 kcal of animal product requires roughly 2.5 litres of water on average. Products from vegetable origin, on the other hand, require roughly 0.5 litre of water per kcal, this time assuming a reasonable mix of cereals, pulses, roots, fruit and vegetables. Under these circumstances, producing the food for one day costs 3600 litres of water. In developing countries, the average consumption is lower: about 2700 kcal per day per person, only 13% of which is of animal origin. Such diet costs 2050 litres of water per day. These numbers are averages over averages, because, first, total caloric intakes and meat fractions assumed vary between and within nations, and, second, the water requirements actually vary across production regions and production systems. The averages shown here mainly function to make a comparison between the water footprints of a meat-based versus a vegetarian diet. A vegetarian diet has a smaller fraction of animal origin (not zero, because of dairy products still consumed). For industrialised countries, this reduces the food-related water footprint by 36%. In the case of developing countries, the switch to vegetarian diet saves 15% of water. Consumers can reduce their water footprint through reducing the volume of their meat consumption. Alternatively, or in addition, consumers can reduce their water footprint by being more selective in the choice of which piece of meat they pick. Chickens are less water-intensive than cows and beef from one production system cannot be compared in terms of associated water impacts to beef from another production system. Source: Hoekstra, A.Y. (2010) The water footprint of animal products, In: D'Silva, J. and Webster, J. (eds.) The meat crisis: Developing more sustainable production and consumption, Earthscan, London, UK, pp. 22-33.
Since food consumption gives the most important contribution to the water footprints of people, even in industrialised countries, dietary habits greatly influence the associated water footprint. In industrialised countries the average calorie consumption today is 3400 kcal per day; roughly 30% of that comes from animal products. When we assume that the average daily portion of animal products is a reasonable mix of beef, pork, poultry, fish, eggs and dairy products, we can estimate that 1 kcal of animal product requires roughly 2.5 litres of water on average. Products from vegetable origin, on the other hand, require roughly 0.5 litre of water per kcal, this time assuming a reasonable mix of cereals, pulses, roots, fruit and vegetables. Under these circumstances, producing the food for one day costs 3600 litres of water. In developing countries, the average consumption is lower: about 2700 kcal per day per person, only 13% of which is of animal origin. Such diet costs 2050 litres of water per day. These numbers are averages over averages, because, first, total caloric intakes and meat fractions assumed vary between and within nations, and, second, the water requirements actually vary across production regions and production systems. The averages shown here mainly function to make a comparison between the water footprints of a meat-based versus a vegetarian diet. A vegetarian diet has a smaller fraction of animal origin (not zero, because of dairy products still consumed). For industrialised countries, this reduces the food-related water footprint by 36%. In the case of developing countries, the switch to vegetarian diet saves 15% of water. Consumers can reduce their water footprint through reducing the volume of their meat consumption. Alternatively, or in addition, consumers can reduce their water footprint by being more selective in the choice of which piece of meat they pick. Chickens are less water-intensive than cows and beef from one production system cannot be compared in terms of associated water impacts to beef from another production system. Source: Hoekstra, A.Y. (2010) The water footprint of animal products, In: D'Silva, J. and Webster, J. (eds.) The meat crisis: Developing more sustainable production and consumption, Earthscan, London, UK, pp. 22-33.
Since food consumption gives the most important contribution to the water footprints of people, even in industrialised countries, dietary habits greatly influence the associated water footprint. In industrialised countries the average calorie consumption today is 3400 kcal per day; roughly 30% of that comes from animal products. When we assume that the average daily portion of animal products is a reasonable mix of beef, pork, poultry, fish, eggs and dairy products, we can estimate that 1 kcal of animal product requires roughly 2.5 litres of water on average. Products from vegetable origin, on the other hand, require roughly 0.5 litre of water per kcal, this time assuming a reasonable mix of cereals, pulses, roots, fruit and vegetables. Under these circumstances, producing the food for one day costs 3600 litres of water. In developing countries, the average consumption is lower: about 2700 kcal per day per person, only 13% of which is of animal origin. Such diet costs 2050 litres of water per day. These numbers are averages over averages, because, first, total caloric intakes and meat fractions assumed vary between and within nations, and, second, the water requirements actually vary across production regions and production systems. The averages shown here mainly function to make a comparison between the water footprints of a meat-based versus a vegetarian diet. A vegetarian diet has a smaller fraction of animal origin (not zero, because of dairy products still consumed). For industrialised countries, this reduces the food-related water footprint by 36%. In the case of developing countries, the switch to vegetarian diet saves 15% of water. Consumers can reduce their water footprint through reducing the volume of their meat consumption. Alternatively, or in addition, consumers can reduce their water footprint by being more selective in the choice of which piece of meat they pick. Chickens are less water-intensive than cows and beef from one production system cannot be compared in terms of associated water impacts to beef from another production system. Source: Hoekstra, A.Y. (2010) The water footprint of animal products, In: D'Silva, J. and Webster, J. (eds.) The meat crisis: Developing more sustainable production and consumption, Earthscan, London, UK, pp. 22-33.
Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London, UK. Page 106-108.
Source: Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M. and Mekonnen, M.M. (2011) The Water Footprint Assessment Manual: Setting the Global Standard, Earthscan, London, UK. Page 109.
Calculate your own water footprint at www.waterfootprint.org
Feel free to go to the water footprint website, find much more info and freely download publications.
Calculate your own water footprint at www.waterfootprint.org