SAY WHAT? Prince Charles Says U.S. Beef Consumption Threatens the World's Water Supply: Does It?
Travis J. Quibbert
May 06, 2011 11:00:00
|
|
|||||
|
46 votes
|
|
16% | |||
|
203 votes
|
|
71% | |||
|
38 votes
|
|
13% | |||
Coming off the estimated $36 million dollar wedding of his eldest son, you'd think Prince Charles would have the good sense not to launch into any harangues about excess for a while.
Nope! There he was in Washington recently lecturing us on our water-supply-threatening beef lust.
The Prince of Wales, who reportedly flew in from the U.K. on a private jet, told the Future of Food conference at Georgetown University that "for every pound of beef produced in the industrial system, it takes two thousand gallons of water.
“That is a lot of water and there is plenty of evidence that the Earth cannot keep up with the demand.”
In 2009, the Prince of Wales, and 14 members of his staff, undertook a 16,000-mile round trip to South America to promote a campaign of environmental awareness ... on a giant Airbus he had converted into a luxury private plane.
Nope! There he was in Washington recently lecturing us on our water-supply-threatening beef lust.
The Prince of Wales, who reportedly flew in from the U.K. on a private jet, told the Future of Food conference at Georgetown University that "for every pound of beef produced in the industrial system, it takes two thousand gallons of water.
“That is a lot of water and there is plenty of evidence that the Earth cannot keep up with the demand.”
In 2009, the Prince of Wales, and 14 members of his staff, undertook a 16,000-mile round trip to South America to promote a campaign of environmental awareness ... on a giant Airbus he had converted into a luxury private plane.
More: http://weaselzippers.us/2011/05/05/prince-charles-...
More polls by Travis J. Quibbert
Top Opinion
See Votes by State
Loading map...
News & Politics
May 26, 2012 02:50:34
Hot Questions on SodaHead
-
Who's the Hottest Male Actor Over 50?
-
What Was the Best Season Finale?
-
Who's the Meanest Reality TV Judge?
- View more slideshows »
Outlaw homosexuality so the damn gay muslims go home. Spend money getting a damn Iceburge shipped to England and trade water for oil.
A Swedish study conducted in 2003 claimed that raising organic beef on grass rather than feed, reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 40% and consumed 85% less energy.
I just wish they would change over to more environmentally sensitive beef production methods compared to industrial scale grain fed beef as is the standard practice now.
While I may want to drive a car with better gas mileage and would like to reduce my carbon footprint it won't be by giving up on a good steak or even greasy cheeseburgers hypocrite that I am.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/env...
http://www.wendypriesnitz.com...
A Swedish study conducted in 2003 claimed that raising organic beef on grass rather than feed, reduced greenhouse gas emissions by 40% and consumed 85% less energy.
I just wish they would change over to more environmentally sensitive beef production methods compared to industrial scale grain fed beef as is the standard practice now.
While I may want to drive a car with better gas mileage and would like to reduce my carbon footprint it won't be by giving up on a good steak or even greasy cheeseburgers hypocrite that I am.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/env...
http://www.wendypriesnitz.com...
Why would it condense over the ocean. If you are distilling water, you are obviously going to capture the condensation, Not just let fly away. The cost of the distillation process can be expensive to start but does not have to be. Once the initial start up cost is taken care of the operation can be relatively inexpensive.
There are also many more ways to purify water than just distillation. Look at bigger cities for example. They turn raw sewage back into usable water all the time.
As for well water, The amount of time it takes to be replenished depends on the depth of the aquifer it comes from. Most wells can be ran dry and replenish within a days if not hours(My last house would replenish within about 2 hrs if I ran it dry). The only time it would take longer than say a year(assuming you found a way to run a VERY large aquifer completely dry and waited for it to fill all the way back up) is if you tapped into a confined aquifer. And if that's the case my only question is. What the hell were you doing drilling that deep?!?! Not to mention that all the water taken from it would remain here on the "surface" where it is easily accessible and usable for centuries. So it's really a win win situation.
snow, or in a wal-mart parking lot. it all either soaks in, evaporates, or turns into run off and ends up back in the ocean where the cycle starts over again. Besides, haven't you seen the news lately? Lack of water is exactly a problem in the US right now.
All this is going on right now!
/mississippi_tm5_91_93_542.jp... target="_blank">http://eartho...
snow, or in a wal-mart parking lot. it all either soaks in, evaporates, or turns into run off and ends up back in the ocean where the cycle starts over again. Besides, haven't you seen the news lately? Lack of water is exactly a problem in the US right now.
All this is going on right now!
Sharing our water supply with the countries that need it, like some third world nations in africa is a nice idea, but it would be a logistical nightmare. Sure, we could send bottled drinking water, But they don't have the money to pay for it. And we dont have the technology to send the amounts of water that would be needed to support their agricultural and industrial needs. It's not like by saving water here, we leave more to other nations. any water we don't use here simply stays here or runs back out to the ocean where the process starts all over.
BTW, the Al gore comment was a joke. His claims have more holes in them than swiss cheese. He just tries to fill them with politics. the water level increase he claimed was reported to be 17 times higher than the most extreme scientific data projected.
And while it is probably true that more rain falls into the sea than on land. That is irrelevant since there is still an excess of rain landing on land. Think of all the fresh water rivers leading into the ocean's. If there was a water crisis we would be using it instead of letting it run into the oceans. The "great lakes" (Lakes Superior, Michigan, Huron, Erie, and Ontario) are the the largest fresh water standing bodies of water in the united states, They contain roughly 1/5th of the earths fresh water. enough to cover the entire 48 contiguous states in over 9 feet of water. Over the past 100 years the water level has remained relatively constant only moving a few feet overall. Mainly due to relatively dry weather. Agriculture has had a a very small effect on the overall water level at the great lakes and other places across the country. Therefore I say that our beef consumption is not a risk to the ecosystem that chuck thinks it is. There is no scientific d...
And while it is probably true that more rain falls into the sea than on land. That is irrelevant since there is still an excess of rain landing on land. Think of all the fresh water rivers leading into the ocean's. If there was a water crisis we would be using it instead of letting it run into the oceans. The "great lakes" (Lakes Superior, Michigan, Huron, Erie, and Ontario) are the the largest fresh water standing bodies of water in the united states, They contain roughly 1/5th of the earths fresh water. enough to cover the entire 48 contiguous states in over 9 feet of water. Over the past 100 years the water level has remained relatively constant only moving a few feet overall. Mainly due to relatively dry weather. Agriculture has had a a very small effect on the overall water level at the great lakes and other places across the country. Therefore I say that our beef consumption is not a risk to the ecosystem that chuck thinks it is. There is no scientific data to say otherwise, only a politician trying to stir up attention so he can get in the news.
Not that it really relates to the beef issue, but why cant these people dig their own wells?
and if someone is to help them, surely the UK would be in a better position. Digging wells to supply water to all these places would be at an astronomical cost currently the US debt is more than 14x higher than that of the UK
we cant afford to supply water to these countries at the rate they need it. although it should be noted that we do drill wells in countries that need them most when we can. Both our government and various charities have been doing this for years.
The great lakes are split between Canada and the US their respective boarders are in the middle of the lakes somewhere. Except for of course lake Michigan which is entirely in the US. Overall they are mostly in the US.
Besides, we have more water than we need for drinking and the beef provides us with protein we need. we cant survive on water alone.
A friend I work with was a vegan (now just a vegetarian) the amount of supplements he had to eat to remain healthy are reason enough for me not to even think about it.
And I didn't climb all the way to the top of the food chain to eat nothing but vegetables.
the water landing in the ocean is really of no consequence, while it may be true that more falls in the ocean than on land, It makes no difference, as long as enough of it falls on our land we are in good shape. And it does so we are ok.
The water prices at my house have not increased at all since it was built over 20 yrs ago well water ftw. Bottled water prices are outrageous, but not because of a shortage. They are so high because stupid people are willing to pay it. (I've actually eaten at places in Europe where beer is cheaper than water!!!)
There is really nothing we can do to turn the desert into a milder climate. If I had a way to control the climate I would be the richest man in the world. While it would be nice if they did not have to deal with the arid climate. If they want to move away from that area and can not afford to that is a sad situation, but unfortunately no one else is in a position to pay for it for them. neither of our countries are in any condition to try and relocate the hundreds of thousands of people that are not able to get enough fresh water to thrive. Nor are we in any position to bring the water to them. They are really on their own on this one. No one else can do it for them. If they are going to live there, they are just going to have to adapt, just as the people that lived there before them have for thousands of years.
I see it like a homeless person living in Detroit, MI. They Have problems with them freezing to death every winter. But I offer this solution; If you are homeless start walking south, where the climate is warmer. It's not like you are going to be any worse off.