Comment by what 4 months ago How is a human consuming 27 gallons of water in an 8 hour work shift? 3 comments what Reply keeda 4 months ago This includes things like drinking, sanitation, etc. Derived the number from here: https://www.epa.gov/watersense/statistics-and-factsMostly lines up with this reference too, which focuses only on water usage at work: https://quench.culligan.com/blog/average-water-usage-per-per... DoctorOetker 4 months ago Since their example scales the water consumption with their electricity consumption one may conclude it was the fresh water consumed (evaporated) during production of the electricity. Gaseous H2O is an even more potent GHG than CO2. missingdays 4 months ago One burger for lunch is 660 gallons of water. So 27 is actually a very huge underestimation
keeda 4 months ago This includes things like drinking, sanitation, etc. Derived the number from here: https://www.epa.gov/watersense/statistics-and-factsMostly lines up with this reference too, which focuses only on water usage at work: https://quench.culligan.com/blog/average-water-usage-per-per...
DoctorOetker 4 months ago Since their example scales the water consumption with their electricity consumption one may conclude it was the fresh water consumed (evaporated) during production of the electricity. Gaseous H2O is an even more potent GHG than CO2.
missingdays 4 months ago One burger for lunch is 660 gallons of water. So 27 is actually a very huge underestimation
This includes things like drinking, sanitation, etc. Derived the number from here: https://www.epa.gov/watersense/statistics-and-facts
Mostly lines up with this reference too, which focuses only on water usage at work: https://quench.culligan.com/blog/average-water-usage-per-per...
Since their example scales the water consumption with their electricity consumption one may conclude it was the fresh water consumed (evaporated) during production of the electricity. Gaseous H2O is an even more potent GHG than CO2.
One burger for lunch is 660 gallons of water. So 27 is actually a very huge underestimation