Comment on 'Water footprint of marine protein consumption—aquaculture's link to agriculture'

M. Troell, M. Metian, M. Beveridge, M.C.J. Verdegem, L. Deutsch

Research output: Contribution to journalEditorialAcademicpeer-review

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

In their article ‘Freshwater savings from marine protein consumption’ (2014 Environ. Res. Lett. 9 014005), Gephart and her colleagues analyzed how consumption of marine animal protein rather than terrestrial animal protein leads to reduced freshwater allocation. They concluded that future water savings from increased marine fish consumption would be possible. We find the approach interesting and, if they only considered marine capture fisheries, their analysis would be quite straightforward and show savings of freshwater. However, both capture fisheries and aquaculture are considered in the analysis, and the fact that marine aquaculture is assumed to have a zero freshwater usage, makes the analysis incomplete. Feed resources used in marine aquaculture contain agriculture compounds, which results in a freshwater footprint. To correct this shortcoming we complement the approach taken by Gephart and her colleagues by estimating the freshwater footprint (WF) for crops used for feeding marine aquaculture. We show that this is critically important when estimating the true freshwater footprint for marine aquaculture, and that it will be increasingly so in the future. We also further expand on aquaculture’s dependency on fish resources, as this was only briefly touched upon in the paper. We do so because changes in availability of fish resources will play an important role for feed development and thereby for the future freshwater footprint of marine aquaculture.
Original languageEnglish
Article number109001
Number of pages4
JournalEnvironmental Research Letters
Volume9
Issue number10
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2014

Fingerprint

Protein Footprinting
water footprint
Aquaculture
Fresh Water
Agriculture
Fish
Fisheries
Proteins
agriculture
protein
Water
Animals
footprint
aquaculture
Fishes
Crops
Availability
savings
resource
fish

Keywords

  • fish
  • impacts

Cite this

@article{b7c1a1bed6f7474d9fdae51b2975870a,
title = "Comment on 'Water footprint of marine protein consumption—aquaculture's link to agriculture'",
abstract = "In their article ‘Freshwater savings from marine protein consumption’ (2014 Environ. Res. Lett. 9 014005), Gephart and her colleagues analyzed how consumption of marine animal protein rather than terrestrial animal protein leads to reduced freshwater allocation. They concluded that future water savings from increased marine fish consumption would be possible. We find the approach interesting and, if they only considered marine capture fisheries, their analysis would be quite straightforward and show savings of freshwater. However, both capture fisheries and aquaculture are considered in the analysis, and the fact that marine aquaculture is assumed to have a zero freshwater usage, makes the analysis incomplete. Feed resources used in marine aquaculture contain agriculture compounds, which results in a freshwater footprint. To correct this shortcoming we complement the approach taken by Gephart and her colleagues by estimating the freshwater footprint (WF) for crops used for feeding marine aquaculture. We show that this is critically important when estimating the true freshwater footprint for marine aquaculture, and that it will be increasingly so in the future. We also further expand on aquaculture’s dependency on fish resources, as this was only briefly touched upon in the paper. We do so because changes in availability of fish resources will play an important role for feed development and thereby for the future freshwater footprint of marine aquaculture.",
keywords = "fish, impacts",
author = "M. Troell and M. Metian and M. Beveridge and M.C.J. Verdegem and L. Deutsch",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1088/1748-9326/9/10/109001",
language = "English",
volume = "9",
journal = "Environmental Research Letters",
issn = "1748-9318",
publisher = "IOP Publishing",
number = "10",

}

Comment on 'Water footprint of marine protein consumption—aquaculture's link to agriculture'. / Troell, M.; Metian, M.; Beveridge, M.; Verdegem, M.C.J.; Deutsch, L.

In: Environmental Research Letters, Vol. 9, No. 10, 109001, 2014.

Research output: Contribution to journalEditorialAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comment on 'Water footprint of marine protein consumption—aquaculture's link to agriculture'

AU - Troell, M.

AU - Metian, M.

AU - Beveridge, M.

AU - Verdegem, M.C.J.

AU - Deutsch, L.

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - In their article ‘Freshwater savings from marine protein consumption’ (2014 Environ. Res. Lett. 9 014005), Gephart and her colleagues analyzed how consumption of marine animal protein rather than terrestrial animal protein leads to reduced freshwater allocation. They concluded that future water savings from increased marine fish consumption would be possible. We find the approach interesting and, if they only considered marine capture fisheries, their analysis would be quite straightforward and show savings of freshwater. However, both capture fisheries and aquaculture are considered in the analysis, and the fact that marine aquaculture is assumed to have a zero freshwater usage, makes the analysis incomplete. Feed resources used in marine aquaculture contain agriculture compounds, which results in a freshwater footprint. To correct this shortcoming we complement the approach taken by Gephart and her colleagues by estimating the freshwater footprint (WF) for crops used for feeding marine aquaculture. We show that this is critically important when estimating the true freshwater footprint for marine aquaculture, and that it will be increasingly so in the future. We also further expand on aquaculture’s dependency on fish resources, as this was only briefly touched upon in the paper. We do so because changes in availability of fish resources will play an important role for feed development and thereby for the future freshwater footprint of marine aquaculture.

AB - In their article ‘Freshwater savings from marine protein consumption’ (2014 Environ. Res. Lett. 9 014005), Gephart and her colleagues analyzed how consumption of marine animal protein rather than terrestrial animal protein leads to reduced freshwater allocation. They concluded that future water savings from increased marine fish consumption would be possible. We find the approach interesting and, if they only considered marine capture fisheries, their analysis would be quite straightforward and show savings of freshwater. However, both capture fisheries and aquaculture are considered in the analysis, and the fact that marine aquaculture is assumed to have a zero freshwater usage, makes the analysis incomplete. Feed resources used in marine aquaculture contain agriculture compounds, which results in a freshwater footprint. To correct this shortcoming we complement the approach taken by Gephart and her colleagues by estimating the freshwater footprint (WF) for crops used for feeding marine aquaculture. We show that this is critically important when estimating the true freshwater footprint for marine aquaculture, and that it will be increasingly so in the future. We also further expand on aquaculture’s dependency on fish resources, as this was only briefly touched upon in the paper. We do so because changes in availability of fish resources will play an important role for feed development and thereby for the future freshwater footprint of marine aquaculture.

KW - fish

KW - impacts

U2 - 10.1088/1748-9326/9/10/109001

DO - 10.1088/1748-9326/9/10/109001

M3 - Editorial

VL - 9

JO - Environmental Research Letters

JF - Environmental Research Letters

SN - 1748-9318

IS - 10

M1 - 109001

ER -