According to this article published by Forbes. A dozen Eggs takes 636 Gallons of water. No mention of fuel. My chickens are on pure forage 40 weeks or so out of the year. They drink like a half gallon a day between them and I only need to fill their water during the dry season- this mean even taking into account the 12 weeks worth of 2/3 rations feed (the 1/3 still being forage) by my estimationI am, as a young entrepreneur, 1000x more efficient per unit of production than the professionals who make hundreds of thousands and are eligible for all sorts of loans and subsidies. Me
Does the 636 gallons include all of the water it takes to produce the eggs such as the rainfall on the forage and such? Or is it a strict estimate of how much the chickens drink? Because I think that if you include the rainfall to grow the forage then you might be closer to the 636 gallons of water even though alot of it would be free water.
If no one from the future comes to stop you is it really that bad of a decision?
Most things that I read where the quantity of water per unit of production is given, completely fail at explaining how they got the figure. It is presented in a manner that might lead the completely ignorant to conclude that this water has been completely removed from the hydrological cycle. If it's rain per egg, then this is just another example of someone who has a calculator but no idea what should be calculated.
A much better measure would be the amount of fossil fuel per egg.
If someone were to grow a turnip, I could go to the trouble of finding out how much sunlight fell on that patch of earth during the growth of that turnip. Then I could compare the total caloric value of the turnip to the total caloric value of all of that sunlight. A very small percentage would result, and the only thing it would prove is that I'm pretty handy with a calculator.
How do they get the deer to cross at the signs? Or to read this tiny ad?
A rocket mass heater is the most sustainable way to heat a conventional home