Diet, nutrition and the prevention of chronic diseases : report of a Joint WHO/FAO Expert Consultation

This study quantifies the green, blue and grey water footprint of global crop production in a spatially-explicit way for the period 1996–2005. The assessment improves upon earlier research by taking a high-resolution approach, estimating the water footprint of 126 crops at a 5 by 5 arc minute grid. We have used a grid-based dynamic water balance model to calculate crop water use over time, with a time step of one day. The model takes into account the daily soil water balance and climatic conditions for each grid cell. In addition, the water pollution associated with the use of nitrogen fertilizer in crop production is estimated for each grid cell. The crop evapotranspiration of additional 20 minor crops is calculated with the CROPWAT model. In addition, we have calculated the water footprint of more than two hundred derived crop products, including various flours, beverages, fibres and biofuels. We have used the water footprint assessment framework as in the guideline of the Water Footprint Network. 

Considering the water footprints of primary crops, we see that the global average water footprint per ton of crop increases from sugar crops (roughly 200 m3 ton−1), vegetables (300 m3 ton−1), roots and tubers (400 m3 ton−1), fruits (1000 m3 ton−1), cereals (1600 m3 ton−1), oil crops (2400 m3 ton−1) to pulses (4000 m3 ton−1). The water footprint varies, however, across different crops per crop category and per production region as well. Besides, if one considers the water footprint per kcal, the picture changes as well. When considered per ton of product, commodities with relatively large water footprints are: coffee, tea, cocoa, tobacco, spices, nuts, rubber and fibres. The analysis of water footprints of different biofuels shows that bio-ethanol has a lower water footprint (in m3 GJ−1) than biodiesel, which supports earlier analyses. The crop used matters significantly as well: the global average water footprint of bio-ethanol based on sugar beet amounts to 51 m3 GJ−1, while this is 121 m3 GJ−1 for maize. 

The global water footprint related to crop production in the period 1996–2005 was 7404 billion cubic meters per year (78 % green, 12 % blue, 10 % grey). A large total water footprint was calculated for wheat (1087 Gm3 yr−1), rice (992 Gm3 yr−1) and maize (770 Gm3 yr−1). Wheat and rice have the largest blue water footprints, together accounting for 45 % of the global blue water footprint. At country level, the total water footprint was largest for India (1047 Gm3 yr−1), China (967 Gm3 yr−1) and the USA (826 Gm3 yr−1). A relatively large total blue water footprint as a result of crop production is observed in the Indus river basin (117 Gm3 yr−1) and the Ganges river basin (108 Gm3 yr−1). The two basins together account for 25 % of the blue water footprint related to global crop production. Globally, rain-fed agriculture has a water footprint of 5173 Gm3 yr−1 (91 % green, 9 % grey); irrigated agriculture has a water footprint of 2230 Gm3 yr−1 (48 % green, 40 % blue, 12 % grey).

/pdf/the-green-blue-and-grey-water-footprint-of-crops-and-derived-1hm4oxmx8v.pdf

The green, blue and grey water footprint of crops and derived crop products

Energy outputs from ethanol produced using corn, switchgrass, and wood biomass were each less than the respective fossil energy inputs. The same was true for producing biodiesel using soybeans and sunflower, however, the energy cost for producing soybean biodiesel was only slightly negative compared with ethanol production. Findings in terms of energy outputs compared with the energy inputs were: • Ethanol production using corn grain required 29% more fossil energy than the ethanol fuel produced. • Ethanol production using switchgrass required 50% more fossil energy than the ethanol fuel produced. • Ethanol production using wood biomass required 57% more fossil energy than the ethanol fuel produced. • Biodiesel production using soybean required 27% more fossil energy than the biodiesel fuel produced (Note, the energy yield from soy oil per hectare is far lower than the ethanol yield from corn). • Biodiesel production using sunflower required 118% more fossil energy than the biodiesel fuel produced.

/pdf/ethanol-production-using-corn-switchgrass-and-wood-biodiesel-h250xd24nk.pdf

Ethanol Production Using Corn, Switchgrass, and Wood; Biodiesel Production Using Soybean and Sunflower

The industrial agriculture system consumes fossil fuel, water, and topsoil at unsustainable rates. It contributes to numerous forms of environmental degradation, including air and water pollution, soil depletion, diminishing biodiversity, and fish die-offs. Meat production contributes disproportionately to these problems, in part because feeding grain to livestock to produce meat—instead of feeding it directly to humans—involves a large energy loss, making animal agriculture more resource intensive than other forms of food production. The proliferation of factory-style animal agriculture creates environmental and public health concerns, including pollution from the high concentration of animal wastes and the extensive use of antibiotics, which may compromise their effectiveness in medical use. At the consumption end, animal fat is implicated in many of the chronic degenerative diseases that afflict industrial and newly industrializing societies, particularly cardiovascular disease and some cancers. In terms of human health, both affluent and poor countries could benefit from policies that more equitably distribute high-protein foods. The pesticides used heavily in industrial agriculture are associated with elevated cancer risks for workers and consumers and are coming under greater scrutiny for their links to endocrine disruption and reproductive dysfunction. In this article we outline the environmental and human health problems associated with current food production practices and discuss how these systems could be made more sustainable. Key words: diet, environment, health, industrial agriculture, sustainability, sustainable agriculture. Environ Health Perspect 110:445‐456 (2002). [Online 20 March 2002] http://ehpnet1.niehs.nih.gov/docs/2002/110p445-456horrigan/abstract.html

How Sustainable Agriculture Can Address the Environmental and Human Health Harms of Industrial Agriculture

Soil erosion is one of the most serious environmental and public health problems facing human society. Humans obtain more than 99.7% of their food (calories) from the land and less than 0.3% from the oceans and other aquatic ecosystems. Each year about 10 million ha of cropland are lost due to soil erosion, thus reducing the cropland available for food production. The loss of cropland is a serious problem because the World Health Organization reports that more than 3.7 billion people are malnourished in the world. Overall soil is being lost from land areas 10 to 40 times faster than the rate of soil renewal imperiling future human food security and environmental quality.

http://saveoursoils.com/userfiles/downloads/1368007451-Soil%20Erosion-David%20Pimentel.pdf

Soil Erosion: A Food and Environmental Threat

This paper analyzes consumption of water by individuals agriculture and energy production by assessing the status of water resources. Furthermore it examines the relationship between water availability and biodiversity. The availability and quality of fresh water has become a major international problem. Limited water resources and inefficient water use combined with a rapidly growing population endanger the worlds finite fresh water supply. In many parts of the world per capita freshwater resources available for food production and for other human needs are declining and are becoming scarce in the arid regions. In fact agricultural productions account for approximately 87% of the worlds freshwater consumption. Moreover most of human activities adversely affect the quality of freshwater resources. Chemical and pathogen pollution of water supplies not only diminishes the quality of water but causes human health problems. Given these scenarios the freshwater problem can be prevented by 1) encouraging conservation and increasing efficiency of irrigation water by eliminating freshwater subsidies and encouraging developments in irrigation technologies; 2) giving farmers incentives to conserve water and soil resources; 3) controlling soil erosion; 4) protecting forests and other biological resources; and 4) preventing water pollution.

https://www.jstor.org/stable/info/1313020

Erika Preiss

Papers

Water Resources: Agriculture, the Environment, and Society