Political events in Sacramento are usually laughable, but get a load of the latest misadventure involving Assemblyman Jose Solorio, “Assemblyman Jose Solorio (D-Anaheim), Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and other state legislators welcomed several Central Valley mayors and hundreds of California farm workers to the Capitol steps yesterday. The rally’s focus was to urge legislators to let voters decide on a water bond proposal.”
Farm workers? Oh sure, that will really motivate the voters to pass another bond and put our state further in debt. And check out what Solorio, who is a vegetarian, had to say at this staged event, “Did you know it takes 700 gallons of water to make a cheeseburger?” I suppose if that burger included an entire cow that might be remotely true, but give me a break! How much water does Solorio waste washing his humongous pompadour everyday?
Chisme has it that Schwarzenegger had to pick Solorio up so he could reach the microphone (see the picture above). Maybe if Solorio had eaten a few more burgers while growing up he might not have stunted his growth. And hasn’t anyone warned him that eating too many soybeans can have bad results for men as the soybeans are rich in estrogen, or female hormones?
“Governor Schwarzenegger and U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein proposed a $9.3 billion bond recently to finance water infrastructure projects and save Delta wildlife. If the Legislature approves, the bond measure will be on the November ballot.”
Even if we DO need to invest in our water infrastructure, it is hard to believe that voters will be willing to sink our state further into debt during the Bush recession. And it is even harder to believe that anyone thinks Solorio is a good spokesperson for anything.
Wasn’t Solorio on the Santa Ana City Council when the City administration ignored our decaying water and sewer pipelines? Now he suddenly cares about water infrastructure?
Why in the world is Schwarzenegger wasting his time on this guy? Doesn’t he know that Solorio is being opposed by a Republican this November? You can find out more about Solorio’s opponent, Cam Mangels, at this link. I will definitely be voting for Mangels. He may not have much of a chance, but at least he doesn’t run around making outlandish claims about using 700 gallons of water to make a burger.
Just as you can calculate the carbon footprint of a product, so can you calculate the water footprint. When talking about how much water it takes for a hamburger, consider what goes into making a hamburger. We know how much water it takes to grow an acre of wheat and we know how much wheat it take to make a bun. Cows eat about 60 pounds of grain a day. We can estimate how much water it cost to grow that grain. Cows drink 30–50 gallons of water each day. We can also find the water cost for the lettuce, tomato and cheese. Plus, there’s a water cost involved in the processing of the meat. And finally transportation. It takes 94 gallons of water to produce a gallon of crude oil.
Please see the “While Shopping” section of http://www.monolake.org/waterconservation/ for other stats.
So, please, Art, before you start ridiculing some statistic, research it a bit. The answers might surprise you.
Art,
Maybe it is time for you to go on a diet.
http://openthefuture.com/cheeseburger_CF.html
Gary,
According to Wiki Answers, which I found via Google.com, “Dairy cows that are lactating (producing milk) eat approximately 50 pounds of dry matter per day. Converting this to as fed weight of the feed depends on the moisture content of the feedstuffs used. Assuming 50% moisture it would be approximately 100 pounds of feed that a cow would eat per day. She would also consume roughly 50 gallons of water every day while she is lactating. ”
So if they are not lactating they don’t drink as much water. Solorio was referring to burgers, which are not produced, generally, from dairy cows until they are too old to lactate.
There is NO WAY that the meat found in one burger would have used up 700 gallons of water. Consider how many burgers you could make from just one cow! Even the spare parts would make for some tasty sausages and hot dogs. None of the animal is wasted.
I would bet you that it would take MORE water to grow enough rice and soybeans to fill up Solorio, as oppposed to just feeding him a nice steak dinner. Solorio does not, by the way, look like he has been dieting. Somehow he has managed to keep up his manteca quotient even without meat in his diet.
Art, you grabbed onto only one part of the process, the water that the cows drink, and ignored the rest. How do you know that it is the most water intensive part of the process? Again, please find out where the number comes from before you criticize it.
Gary,
Let me put this another way. If what Solorio said was true, how could anyone afford to sell a burger for a buck or two? That is simply inconceivable.
We live in a capitalist economy. People who sell meat and who turn said meat into burgers have to make a profit. Using up 700 gallons of water to make ONE burger would mean that burger would cost more than Solorio’s hair cuts! I have a feeling he spends $40 or so every time he trims that pompadour…
Mary,
I really don’t eat many burgers. I tend to eat chicken sandwiches more often than burgers.
That is not the point. The point is, how in the hell does Solorio maintain all those chins on just plain veggies alone? He must be eating blocks of cheese! How much water is THAT wasting!
Art,
$1 will buy you 750 gallons from the water district.
Gary,
Farmers pay the least for water. But dairy farmers and ranchers pay more – unless they are also growing crops.
Even if what you state is true, there are many other costs that go into that burger. They would include labor, transportation, the vegetables and sauces used in the burger, and the bun. That is why a good burger will set you back $4 to $8.
I think Solorio’s statement is ridiculous on its face – just like he has been throughout his undistinguished career in the Legislature.
BTW, have the ding-dongs in Sacramento figured out yet that they have to CUT spending to balance the state budget?
If you noticed, I said $1 will buy *you* 750 gallons from the water district. That’s the Santa Margarita Water District price, not the price for ranchers.
Here’s some related links:
http://www.scu.edu.au/news/media.php?item_id=1069&action=show_item says it costs 620 gallons
http://www.waterwise.org.uk/ says it costs 634 gallons
http://www.waterfootprint.org/?page=files/productgallery&product=beef
says it takes 464 gallons per quarter pound of beef
So there are a variety of answers out there, but I’m sure these answers are far larger than your initial guess, which I bet was less than 50 gallons.
The reason I’m sticking on this subject is that water is once again becoming a large issue. We need the facts out there so that the public is aware of what’s at stake. The media, including this blog, can help by publishing correct and useful information, which will help them decide on how to vote on such things as water bonds.
I don’t disagree with your numbers, Gary. But last I checked much of the water used to grow wheat, lettuce, tomatoes, etc. soaks in to replenish aquifers. And cows urinate a great deal.
Do your numbers take into account the amount of water that is returned to the system?
Hmm. Good questions. I doubt it. Perhaps you could discount the water soaking into the ground, because that could be the penalty for not having a perfect system. As far as urination, the cow still drinks the water and processes it, so I don’t think that should be discounted.