Questions and concerns Re: Blue water footprints reported in "Water footprint of meat analogs: Selected indicators according to life cycle assessment"

Raychel E. Santo, Brent F. Kim, Keeve E. Nachman

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debate

Abstract

The article "Water Footprint of Meat Analogs: Selected Indicators According to Life Cycle Assessment," Water 2019 11: 728 by Fresán et al. analyzes the water footprints (WFs) of 39 meat analogs and their associated eutrophication and ecotoxicity potential. We have several questions and concerns about the WFs presented in this study, which in some cases are an order of magnitude larger than those reported for similar products in other published works. Additionally, at least some of the WFs of other meat analogs and conventional meats-to which the authors compare their results-appear to misrepresent the cited literature. We encourage the authors to provide clarification on how the WF values for meat analogs are so much higher than those reported in other studies and to verify the comparison values reported from other sources.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number1270
JournalWater (Switzerland)
Volume12
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2020

Keywords

  • Life cycle assessment
  • Meat analog
  • Meat substitute
  • Water footprint

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biochemistry
  • Geography, Planning and Development
  • Aquatic Science
  • Water Science and Technology

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Questions and concerns Re: Blue water footprints reported in "Water footprint of meat analogs: Selected indicators according to life cycle assessment"'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this