Reply to Pfister and Hellweg: Water footprint accounting, impact assessment, and life-cycle assessment
- 6 October 2009
- journal article
- Published by National Academy of Sciences in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Vol. 106 (40) , E114
Abstract
In response to our article on the blue and green water footprint (WF) of bioenergy (1), others propose to multiply each blue WF component by a water-stress index and neglect green WFs, because impacts would be nil (2). They propose to redefine the WF from a volumetric measure to an index resulting from multiplying volumes by impact factors. Framing their argument within the logic of life-cycle assessment (LCA), they ignore the primary and established role of the WF in water-resources management (WRM). Redefining the WF does not make sense from a WRM perspective, which requires spatially and temporally explicit information on WFs in real volumes and impacts in …Keywords
This publication has 4 references indexed in Scilit:
- Water footprinting at the product brand level: case study and future challengesJournal of Cleaner Production, 2009
- The water “shoesize” vs. footprint of bioenergyProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2009
- The water footprint of bioenergyProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2009
- Assessing the Environmental Impacts of Freshwater Consumption in LCAEnvironmental Science & Technology, 2009