12
received particular attention (Rockström et al. 2009) are climate change, ocean
acidification, stratosphere ozone depletion, global phosphorus and nitrogen cycles,
rate of biodiversity loss, global freshwater use, land system change, aerosol loading, and chemical pollution. Food, energy, and water are related to nearly all of
these issues. Note that biophysical boundaries exist at all geographical scales ranging from local to planetary, and local and regional boundaries often have a global
impact. Understanding biophysical, or biogeophysical, boundaries is a challenging
scientific subject that includes many of the issues related to the production and
movement of food, energy, and water; their many interrelationships to each other
and to ecosystem services (Chap. 9). Establishing a margin of safety for a biophysical process is a normative exercise based on decisions about risk and uncertainty.
We noted above that FEW commodities are essential in both sufficient quantity
and quality. A significant aspect of footprint related to FEW commodities is their
form and qualities. For example, the footprints associated with meat production
are significantly different from those associated with grains. Similarly, the footprints associated with coal-based energy are very different from that associated
with natural gas-based or wind-based energy. And water obtained from a nearby
well has a very different footprint than water delivered in plastic bottles far from
its source. Throughout this book, we will focus on the energy and water footprints
of food, the land and water footprints of energy, and the land and energy footprints of water.
Examination of footprints also brings into focus inefficiency and waste in the
production, use, and discarding of FEW commodities. Later in the book, we will
explore the concept of Life Cycle Assessment as a methodological framework
for assessing the environmental impacts associated with a FEW systems (see
Sect. 13.2.1).
A concept closely related to that of planetary boundaries is that of carrying
capacity. Carrying capacity is the estimated maximum population of a species that
an environment can sustain indefinitely. The commonly asked question, “How many
people can the earth support?” is thus based on understanding planetary boundaries.
A book titled with this question by Joel Cohen (1996) demonstrates the difficulties
of providing a clear answer.
Food, energy, and water are responsible for the majority, and arguably, the vast
majority of humanity’s footprint on the earth. twenty-first-century humanity is
exceeding the Earth’s local, regional, and even global carrying capacities as measured by terrestrial photosynthetic productivity and usable land, replacement rates
of ocean fish, renewable fresh surface water availability, or the ability of the biosphere and oceans to absorb greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide.
The fundamental long-term sustainability of these consumption rates is in
doubt. Solving the sustainability problem will require some combination of
increased efficiencies of production, the redistribution of consumption from more
affluent consumers to less affluent consumers, and reduced per capita consumption
by larger consumers. Affluent city dwellers tend to outsource their FEW supplies
and wastes, and the associated externalities and footprints, to their rural neighbors.
P. Saundry and B. L. Ruddell
received particular attention (Rockström et al. 2009) are climate change, ocean
acidification, stratosphere ozone depletion, global phosphorus and nitrogen cycles,
rate of biodiversity loss, global freshwater use, land system change, aerosol loading, and chemical pollution. Food, energy, and water are related to nearly all of
these issues. Note that biophysical boundaries exist at all geographical scales ranging from local to planetary, and local and regional boundaries often have a global
impact. Understanding biophysical, or biogeophysical, boundaries is a challenging
scientific subject that includes many of the issues related to the production and
movement of food, energy, and water; their many interrelationships to each other
and to ecosystem services (Chap. 9). Establishing a margin of safety for a biophysical process is a normative exercise based on decisions about risk and uncertainty.
We noted above that FEW commodities are essential in both sufficient quantity
and quality. A significant aspect of footprint related to FEW commodities is their
form and qualities. For example, the footprints associated with meat production
are significantly different from those associated with grains. Similarly, the footprints associated with coal-based energy are very different from that associated
with natural gas-based or wind-based energy. And water obtained from a nearby
well has a very different footprint than water delivered in plastic bottles far from
its source. Throughout this book, we will focus on the energy and water footprints
of food, the land and water footprints of energy, and the land and energy footprints of water.
Examination of footprints also brings into focus inefficiency and waste in the
production, use, and discarding of FEW commodities. Later in the book, we will
explore the concept of Life Cycle Assessment as a methodological framework
for assessing the environmental impacts associated with a FEW systems (see
Sect. 13.2.1).
A concept closely related to that of planetary boundaries is that of carrying
capacity. Carrying capacity is the estimated maximum population of a species that
an environment can sustain indefinitely. The commonly asked question, “How many
people can the earth support?” is thus based on understanding planetary boundaries.
A book titled with this question by Joel Cohen (1996) demonstrates the difficulties
of providing a clear answer.
Food, energy, and water are responsible for the majority, and arguably, the vast
majority of humanity’s footprint on the earth. twenty-first-century humanity is
exceeding the Earth’s local, regional, and even global carrying capacities as measured by terrestrial photosynthetic productivity and usable land, replacement rates
of ocean fish, renewable fresh surface water availability, or the ability of the biosphere and oceans to absorb greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide.
The fundamental long-term sustainability of these consumption rates is in
doubt. Solving the sustainability problem will require some combination of
increased efficiencies of production, the redistribution of consumption from more
affluent consumers to less affluent consumers, and reduced per capita consumption
by larger consumers. Affluent city dwellers tend to outsource their FEW supplies
and wastes, and the associated externalities and footprints, to their rural neighbors.
P. Saundry and B. L. Ruddell