Re[3]: FoEE: Meat atlas :: Remember, remember, the velvet November


node:	Re[3]: FoEE: Meat atlas
template:	4
parent:	Re[2]: FoEE: Meat atlas
owner:	dark matter
viewed by:
created:	17.01.2014 - 23:27:36

cwbe coordinatez:
101
7763757
63577
64106
7456362
7459718
7460085
7464852

ABSOLUT
KYBERIA

permissions
you:	r,
system:	public
net:	yes

tiez ma zaujimala metodika, ale nikde to nevidim
kazdopadne to zvierata vychciju a rastliny tiez vratia vsetku vodu do obehu
pride mi to nezaujimave a v podstate irelevantne cislo
su tam ine zaujimave veci a argumenty

000001010776375700063577000641060745636207459718074600850746485207465074

vratis, ale pravdepodobne len po urcitu hranicu..
Water is a renewable resource, but that does not mean that its availability is unlimited. In a certain period, precipitation is always limited to a certain amount. The same holds to the amount of water that recharges groundwater reserves and that flows through a river. Rainwater can be used in agricultural production and water in rivers and aquifers can be used for irrigation or industrial or domestic purposes. But in a certain period one cannot use more water than is available. A river can be emptied and in the long term one cannot take more water from lakes and groundwater reservoirs than the rate with which they are recharged. The water footprint measures the amount of water available in a certain period that is consumed (i.e. evaporated) or polluted. In this way, it provides a measure of the amount of available water appropriated by humans. The remainder is left for nature. The rainwater not used for agricultural production is left to sustain natural vegetation. The ground- and surface water flows not evaporated for human purposes or polluted is left to sustain healthy aquatic ecosystems.
http://www.waterfootprint.org/?page=files/FAQ_Technical_questions

00000101077637570006357700064106074563620745971807460085074648520746507407465858

The methods for water footprint accounting have been published in peer-reviewed scientific journals.
Shut up and show me your spreadsheet.

By ma zaujimalo, kolko ma footprint podla ich metodologie kilogram slonieho alebo bizonieho masa. Odtial by sa dalo odpichnut k dalsej rozumnejsej debate.

0000010107763757000635770006410607456362074597180746008507464852074650740746585807465872

Nakoniec som to nasiel - priklad s vypoctom pre kravy (posledny link na stranke http://www.waterfootprint.org/?page=files/Animal-products).

Je to bohuzial tak, ako som sa obaval, footprint je sucet footprintov komplet zradla a objem vypitej vody za cele obdobie zivota + nejaka service water pouzivana v infrastrukture pri chove (co v priklade podla nich cini cca 25% celkoveho objemu footprintu), potial je to aspon technicky korektne
potom sa ten footprint este prenasobi hodnotovym(penaznym) podielom na jednotku vahy, co ukazovatel posuva skor do ekonomickej roviny

Spat do ekosystemu - vsetko hore v potravinovej pyramide ma velke vodne footprinty, bylinozravce podstatne vacsie ako rastliny a masozravce priam giganticke.

Jednoduchy vypocet nam da, ze ak taky tiger zerie potravu na urovni hovadziny (bez service vody), tak pri spotrebe 6 kg po 20 rokov potom uvodny claim znie takto: "Vedeli ste, ze na kilogram tigrieho masa treba 2 miliony litrov vody?"
Znie to dostatocne senzacne a alarmujuco?

Realne ma imho zmysel uvazovat o znecistenom objeme vody, ktory sa vracia do obehu v inej kvalite, ako sa odobera a tiez s dennou konzumaciou vody, pokial je to v oblasti s potencialnym nedostatkom vody. Zvysok je propaganda.

000001010776375700063577000641060745636207459718074600850746485207465074074658580746587207466073

Jednoduchy vypocet nam da, ze ak taky tiger zerie potravu na urovni hovadziny
nezerie. teda ak nejde o tigra v zoo. tigrova potrava vo volnej prirode sa stravuje a zije radikalne odlisne od bylinozravcov chovanych na maso.

00000101077637570006357700064106074563620745971807460085074648520746507407465858074658720746607307466754

fair point, divo zijuce zvierata zeru ine veci a menej, na druhej strane vekovy priemer koristi je imho vacsi nez 3 roky hovadziny, tak sa to ciastocne vyrovna, tiez tygrich 5-6 kilo na den je strava tigra v zajati bez pohybu, aby nepribral, v prirode v pohybe zozerie viac

to nic nemeni na tom, ze originalny vypocet je vrcholne nerealisticky, lebo v sebe nema ziadnu velicinu zavadzajucu kolobeh vody a teda rata akesi teoreticke maxima, no a na masozravcoch z toho potom vychadzaju obrovske cisla

0000010107763757000635770006410607456362074597180746008507464852074650740746585807465872074660730746675407466782

na druhej strane vekovy priemer koristi je imho vacsi nez 3 roky hovadziny, tak sa to ciastocne vyrovna, tiez tygrich 5-6 kilo na den je strava tigra v zajati bez pohybu, aby nepribral, v prirode v pohybe zozerie viac
Na jednej strane pripustme ze tigre si vyberaju lahsie obete, tj take ktore aj tak nemaju velku perspektivu.
Na druhej strane bez tigrov alebo inych regulacnych mechanizmov by sa bylinozravce premnozili a znicili resp. vyrazne pozmenili tamojsi ekosystem, teda vlastne tigre setria vodu ;). Tie zvierata aj tak zomru; zviereata chovane na maso maju jediny ucel a trochu iny ako tie v prirode.
Ale ine je asi podstatne a toto bude aj jadrom argumentu: tiger a jeho obete tvoria ekosystem ktory by bez zasahov cloveka nejakym sposobom existoval, alebo by sa zmenil, whatever, nebolo by to vinou cloveka, udrziava sa sam.

Na druhej strane.. pises ze sa nezohladnuje kolobeh vody, ale vysusenie Aralskeho jazera je afaik priamym dosledkom pouzivania jeho pritokov na ine ucely a je to ekologicka katastrofa sposobena clovekom. Tam sa mal kolobeh vody zohladnit ako? Lenze to je udalost prilis velka pre ludsku predstavivost, takze chapem snahy vytvorit nejaku metriku blizsiu ludskym rozmerom, aj ked to bude metrika vzdy spochybnitelna a umela.

000001010776375700063577000641060745636207459718074600850746485207465074074658580746587207465998

zaujimave, spytam sa kolegynky, ktora Meat Atlas robila na to.