[google is very unhelpful, it’s broken now. I can’t find any posts explaining the specific thing I want to know]
Was asked this question by a friend.
When we say that producing one item of clothing uses x amount of water. She doesn’t see the harm because the water used to grow cotton doesn’t disappear “it’s part of the cycle”.
Pollution must be a factor right? There is a difference between drinking water, saltwater and contaminated water? (Surely they’re not using clean drinking water for production?)
Exasperated by the fact that production is usually performed in areas with poor regulation/infrastructure.
(Is it inherently damaging, or damaging because of how it’s performed?)
Is the water “used” because it becomes vapor? Is it used because the molecules are taken apart? Either way shouldn’t this technically be reversible?
[I am not very articulate, and I find it very difficult to organize my thoughts to words. This question ended up frustratingly inprecise!]
Edit: thanks for the good responses:)
In: Biology
You can think of it the same way to think of food. Say you have an apple, then you eat it. The material that made up the apple isn’t gone, your body is using some of it and it will expels the parts it can’t use, which will then be used by something else. But the apple as it existed before as usable food *is* gone. It’s the same with water; it still exists but it’s no longer in a usable state. Sure the water will continue through the cycle, but the process takes time. If the rate of fresh water usage is faster than the rate at which a fresh water source is replaced, you could be- to use an ironic phrase- left up a creek.
Latest Answers