Reply to Pfister and Hellweg: Water footprint accounting, impact assessment, and life-cycle assessment

  • Arjen Y. Hoekstra
  • , Winnie Gerbens-Leenes
  • , Theo H. van der Meer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

183 Downloads (Pure)

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 real terms.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)E114-E114
Number of pages1
JournalProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America
Volume106
Issue number40
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2009

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 9 - Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure
    SDG 9 Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure
  2. SDG 12 - Responsible Consumption and Production
    SDG 12 Responsible Consumption and Production

Keywords

  • IR-77185
  • METIS-259609

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Reply to Pfister and Hellweg: Water footprint accounting, impact assessment, and life-cycle assessment'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this