Water, Drought and Animal Production 

The water crisis

Australia is the world's driest continent. But it seems problems with water shortage are just getting worse. Everyone knows that the drought this year is causing serious problems for farmers—and this is just a continuation of an ongoing and worsening situation. On 19 April 2007 Prime Minister John Howard told the ABC that irrigation water supplies to farmers in the Murray-Darling Basin would be cut off unless there was significant rain within 6 to 8 weeks. The Commission responsible for monitoring the water situation in the Murray-Darling Basin had said on 7 April 2007 that rainfall in much of the upper Murray catchment in the 12 months to the end of February 2007 was either very much below average or the lowest on record.[1]

This water shortage crisis for farmers had already been predicted in a comprehensive government report published in 2006. The State of the Environment report[2] said that the drought demonstrated that some of our water resources for irrigation-based industries was stressed and over-allocated and that individuals must reduce water consumption.

What has not been pointed out by the politicians or by those responsible for monitoring Australia's water supplies is that we can drastically reduce water consumption just by reducing the amount of animal products we consume.

Water consumption by livestock

Farmers who grow pasture to feed livestock use a significant amount of water for irrigation.

How much water do livestock producers actually use? Water use each year is about 2,200 gigalitres for dairy farming, about 1,000 gigalitre for livestock (water for drinking) and about 2,000 gigalitres for pasture used to feed livestock. This total consumption by livestock producers is about 5,200 gigalitres each year, which is roughly 43% of all the water consumed by agriculture.[3]

The problem is that this figure does not represent the true total consumption of water by livestock producers. What the figure does not include is the significant amount of "service water". This is water used to clean production units, to wash animals, to cool facilities (as in milk production units) and for waste disposal. This issue has been highlighted in a very important report recently produced by the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations and the comments in this summary are based on that report.[4]

Intensive livestock facilities use the greatest amount of "service water". For example, intensive piggeries can use 7 times the amount of drinking water consumed by the pigs just to flush the waste away. The following table gives you an idea of how much "service water" is used for different animals and shows the dramatic increase in "service water" consumption when animals are kept intensively compared to extensively.

Water consumption in product processing

Making products from livestock, such as milk, meat and leather, involve the consumption of significant amounts of water. Meat processing, for example, involves slaughtering, processing of offal and rendering of by-products into items like blood meal, all of which require large quantities of water.

Water usage rate in a red meat abattoir can be up to 15 litres per kilo of carcase. This may represent up to 30 gigalitres of water consumed each year in Australia by red meat abattoirs alone.[5]

Water consumption by poultry processing plants is likely to be even higher, as it has been estimated that processing each chicken consumes about 1600 litres of water. Multiplying this by the number of chickens produced for meat gives water consumed in Australia by chicken processing as over 100 gigalitres per year.

Total water consumption by livestock products

The total water consumption involved in making a product can be expressed as the "virtual water" associated with that product. Because animals consume feed crops (directly, or indirectly in processed feed) and drink water, and animal products require service water, livestock products in general have a higher virtual water content than crop products. As an example, a bullock grown for beef takes about 3 years before it can be slaughtered, when it produces about 200kg of boneless beef. During that time, it consumes about 1,300 kg of grains, 7,200 kg of pasture and hay etc, 24,000 litres of water for drinking and 7,000 litres of service water. The water cost for each kg of beef has been estimated at about 15,000 litres.[6] For chicken meat the water cost is about 4,000 litres per kg and for pork the water cost is about 5,000 litres per kg.

Translating this into products gives a water cost of about 2,400 litres for a hamburger - the table shows comparative water costs of some other products.

The obvious conclusion is that buying and eating (or using) animal-based products is much more costly in terms of water used than eating or using non-animal products.

Pollution of water by livestock production

Water polluted by livestock production, feed production and product processing detracts from the quality of water supplies and adds to depletion of water resources.

Livestock waste contains a lot of nutrients (nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium), as well as heavy metals, drug residues and disease-causing organisms such as bacteria. All of these can seriously threaten the environment.

Nitrogen concentration is highest in pig manure (76.2g per kg dry weight), with significant amounts in chicken (about 45g per kg) and cattle (about 33g per kg) manure. Phosphorus content is highest in chicken manure, followed by pig and cattle manure. Accumulation of nutrients in water resources can result in overgrowth of plants and algae, which dramatically reduces water quality.

Degradation of water sources may also occur when livestock waste contaminates water with organic compounds which stimulate the production of algae, which in turn decreases oxygen levels in the contaminated water. This may threaten the survival of aquatic animals in the water source.

Production of livestock involves the use of enormous amounts of pharmaceutical drugs. In 2001/02, 547 tonnes of drugs were used in food-producing animals, compared to only 15 tonnes in non-food producing animals.[7] The majority of these products are used in intensive pig and chicken operations as growth promoters. Much of these drugs are not degraded by the animals' bodies, but are excreted and end up in the environment. Evidence from the USA shows that groundwater, surface water and tapwater may contain drug residues. These drug residues may encourage the emergence of drug-resistant strains of micro-organisms, which constitute a great threat to human health.

The livestock sector is a major source of the increased use of mineral fertilisers, which are used to grow crops for animal fodder or for processed animal feed. Mineral fertilisers applied to agricultural lands are responsible for a high level of pollution of watercourses by nitrogen- and phosphorus-containing compounds. Another source of pollution from agricultural land comes from the use of large amounts of pesticides (such as insecticides and weed killers) in growing crops.

There is even a physical impact of livestock grazing on water flows and the normal cycle of water. This results from land trampling by hooves and by land degradation by over-grazing. This in turn reduces the ability of soils to hold water and increases water runoff.

Overall, it is clear that growing animals as human food, or to provide materials such as leather and wool, has a hidden water cost as a result of the degradation of water courses and the water-holding capacity of the land.

Conclusion - reduce your meat consumption and save water

Reading all of this, you will realise that food products from animals use a disproportionate amount of water compared to non-animal food products. As water becomes scarcer, it is likely in any case that animal-derived food products will become more costly, as the true cost of the water used in their preparation is taken into account. Before that happens, anyone wanting to make a serious contribution to reducing water consumption can do that simply by reducing the amount of animal products they consume.

As a separate issue, what is clear from the analyses referred to is that the Australian government needs to rethink its view of water use and calculate the true amount of water which is used in the production of meat and livestock. Collecting this data will demonstrate the true water cost of growing animals for food. It will give the government the opportunity to consider whether growing animals for food is a rational and sustainable strategy in a country where water is becoming a scarce commodity.

---