For those of us working in agriculture, we develop an appreciation for how much water is required to produce crops.  The average American citizen does not really think about water requirements for food or anything we use daily beyond what we directly consume or pour out of the faucet.
 
The real dangers in not having a good understanding of individual water requirements on a personal level are the impacts on water policy and management.  This is certainly true in a desert environment and particularly during times of drought and water shortages.  
 
Every day in the United States every person generally consumes about 100 gallons of water to support our basic needs for drinking, bathing, cooking, toiletries, etc.  (USGS, 2019; Kobir, 2024; and Philadelphia City Government, 2024).  The United States Geological Survey (USGS) estimates that the average American needs 80-100 gallons per day for basic use and consumption (indoor use).  The Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR) estimates that Arizonans consume an average of 146 gallons of water per day (ADWR, 2019 and 2024).
 
As discussed in recent articles in this newsletter (Silvertooth, 2024a and b) the water required to produce the food supporting an average Arizonan can range from 800 to 1,500 gallons per day, depending on a person’s diet.  Thus, we can use an estimate of 1,000 gallons consumed per day per person to support our basic food requirements (Anyabwile and Walker, 2019; Wheeler, 2022; Food Print, 2024; Michel, 2023; Smith, 2012).  
 
If this estimate of “virtual water” use is expanded to include clothing, appliances, vehicles, and other items in our common daily use, the average water footprint for Americans easily comes up to 2,000 gallons of water per day (ASPE, 2022).
 
Considering daily indoor use and diet, a person can develop estimates on their own personal daily water consumption and water footprint by use of one of the water footprint calculators available on-line (i.e., Water Footprint Calculator).
 
Some recent surveys have been conducted to measure the perceptions of American citizens regarding the water required to produce our food (ASPE, 2022 and Martin, 2021).  The results reveal a significant gap between the reality of the water required to produce a person’s food and other basic items regularly used to support daily life.  For example:

• Almost 90 million Americans believe it takes no water at all to make a pair of jeans.  In fact, a fresh pair of jeans requires around 2,600 gallons to make.
• It takes 713 gallons of water to make a new cotton t-shirt to pair with those jeans.  Americans think it just takes 136 gallons.
• Americans believe it takes 158 gallons of water to produce a smartphone, whereas it is more than 3,400.
• Men, on average, estimate higher water consumption than women,140 gallons vs. 60 gallons, but neither group estimated anywhere close to the American’s calculated water footprint of 2,000 gallons per day.
• Gen Z respondents, ages 18–24, had the closest estimate at 365 gallons; however, this is still more than 1,500 gallons lower than the actual amount.  The average estimate drops off steeply for Millennials, ages 25–40, at 36 gallons and American citizen estimates remain low throughout older generations as well.
• 77 percent of Boomers, ages 57 and up, stop to appreciate access to clean drinking water fairly often, with 48 percent of Gen Z respondents reporting they do the same.  This is based on a national survey but hopefully that is higher in places like Arizona.
• Homeowners estimate their daily water consumption at nearly 130 gallons, compared to renters who believe they use only 33 gallons of water each day.  Both are extremely low estimates.
• The actual water consumption for homeowners and renters, based on a national average, is 1,188 and 818 gallons, respectively.

One survey was conducted in the fall and respondents were asked to estimate how much water is required to produce some common food items consumed at Thanksgiving.  Some of those results include:

• One 16-pound holiday turkey takes 4,688 gallons vs. the citizen estimated 158 gallons.
• A pecan pie takes 1,068 gallons vs. the citizen estimated 135 gallons; and a pumpkin pie takes 458 gallons vs. the estimated 135 gallons. 
• The traditional green bean casserole – with fried onions on top! – takes 547 gallons of water to hit the holiday dinner table vs. the estimated 116 gallons.

With the importance of electronics in our world and daily operations, we can also consider the water requirements for microchip production.  When creating an integrated circuit on a 300mm wafer, approximately 2,200 gallons of water are required, including 1,500 gallons of ultrapure water.  Consequently, a single large semiconductor fabrication facility processing around 40,000 wafers monthly could consume up to 4.8 million gallons of water daily (approximately 15 acre-feet per day or about 4,000 acre-feet per year).  This is equivalent to the annual water use of a city of 60,000 residents (CWR, 2013).
 
Water is essential to support all life and it takes a lot of water to grow plants and support animals that everyone needs to live and survive.  The important point to consider is that we all use more water every day than is commonly realized.  
 
Some responses to this may be “Who cares what people think and what difference does it make?”  The problem is that water policy is determined largely by politicians who are often not fully informed, and they are driven by voters who are commonly ignorant of the facts.  This can be a real problem when politicians enact policies based on perceptions and feelings that affect agricultural water allocations.
 
As the saying goes, “Facts may be facts, but perceptions become people’s reality.”  That is certainly true, and perceptions often only change when confronted with harsh realities.  We all have a significant water footprint with everything consumed and the more people understand that the better water management decisions we can make. 
 

References:
 
Anyabwile, A. and S. Walker.  2019.  5 Ways to put food on a water diet.  World Resources Institute.  https://www.wri.org/insights/5-ways-put-food-water-diet
 
Arizona Department of Water Resources.  2019.  Water Your Facts.  Arizona Water Facts.  https://www.arizonawaterfacts.com/water-your-facts
 
Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR).  2024.  Conservation.  https://www.azwater.gov/conservation/public-resources
 
ASPE.  2022.  New research shows most Americans are unaware of their daily water consumption.  ASPE Pipeline.  https://aspe.org/pipeline/new-research-shows-most-americans-are-unaware-of-their-daily-water-consumption/#:~:text=Most%20believe%20they%20use%20less%20than%20100%20gallons,indirectly%20%28e.g.%2C%20the%20water%20required%20to%20produce%20food%29.
 
China Water Risk (CWR).  2013.  8 Things You Should Know About Water & Semiconductors China Water Risk, 11 July 2013.
 
Food Print.  2024.  The Water Footprint of Food.  https://foodprint.org/issues/the-water-footprint-of-food/
 
Kobir.  2024.  How many gallons of fresh water do we use per day.  https://medium.com/rocklinca/how-many-gallons-of-freshwater-do-we-use-per-day-7987edf6b1bb
 
Martin, L. 2021.  New Research Shows Most Americans are Unaware of Their Daily Water Consumption.  Business Wire.  https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20211021005669/en/New-Research-Shows-Most-Americans-are-Unaware-of-Their-Daily-Water-Consumption
 
Michel, D.  2023.  Water and Food: How, When, and Why Water Imperils Global Food Security.  Center for Strategic and International Studies.  https://www.csis.org/analysis/water-and-food-how-when-and-why-water-imperils-global-food-security
 
Philadelphia City Government.  2024.  Gallons Used Per Person Per Day.  https://water.phila.gov/pool/files/home-water-use-ig5.pdf
 
Silvertooth, J.  2024a.  Arizona Water Footprint.  University of Arizona Vegetable IPM Newsletter.  15 May 2024, University of Arizona No. 10
 
Silvertooth, J.  2024b.  Water Requirements for the Production of Common Food Products, University of Arizona Vegetable IPM Newsletter, 29 May 2024, No. 11
 
Smith, T.  2012.  World Water Day: How much water do you use in a day?  Climate Home News.  https://www.climatechangenews.com/2012/03/22/world-water-day-how-much-water-do-you-use-in-a-day/
 
United States Geological Survey. 2019.  How much water do I use at home each day? https://www.usgs.gov/special-topics/water-science-school/science/water-qa-how-much-water-do-i-use-home-each-day
 
Water Footprint Calculator. 2024.  https://watercalculator.org/water-footprint-of-food-guide/
 
Wheeler, M.  2022.  Did You Know’ Series: How Much Water Are We Actually Using?  Virginia Water Resources Research Center, Virginia Tech University.  https://www.vwrrc.vt.edu/2022/03/31/did-you-know-series-how-much-water-are-we-actually-using/
 

This study was conducted at the Yuma Valley Agricultural Center. The soil was a silty clay loam (7-56-37 sand-silt-clay, pH 7.2, O.M. 0.7%). Spinach ‘Meerkat’ was seeded, then sprinkler-irrigated to germinate seed Jan 13, 2025 on beds with 84 in. between bed centers and containing 30 lines of seed per bed.  All irrigation water was supplied by sprinkler irrigation.  Treatments were replicated four times in a randomized complete block design.  Replicate plots consisted of 15 ft lengths of bed separated by 3 ft lengths of nontreated bed.  Treatments were applied with a CO₂ backpack sprayer that delivered 50 gal/acre at 40 psi to flat-fan nozzles.

Downy mildew (caused by Peronospora farinosa f. sp. spinaciae)was first observed in plots on Mar 5 and final reading was taken on March 6 and March 7, 2025. Spray date for each treatments are listed in excel file with the results.

Disease severity was recorded by determining the percentage of infected leaves present within three 1-ft²areas within each of the four replicate plots per treatment.  The number of spinach leaves in a 1-ft²area of bed was approximately 144. The percentage were then changed to 1-10scale, with 1 being 10% infection and 10 being 100% infection.

The data (found in the accompanying Excel file) illustrate the degree of disease reduction obtained by applications of the various tested fungicides. Products that provided most effective control against the disease include Orondis ultra, Zampro, Stargus, Cevya, Eject .Please see table for other treatments with significant disease suppression/control.  No phytotoxicity was observed in any of the treatments in this trial.

AI is in the news all the time being touted as the most influential human innovation in history. Why? I’m not sure exactly as generally few specifics are given, but recently came across an article that gave me some insight as to what the experts are talking about. The piece focuses on a project by Google DeepMind¹: two AI robots playing soccer (Paul, A., 2024). There’s a couple of things that struck me most about the robots. The first was how human-like their behavior and actions were. They reminded me of a couple of 5-year-olds playing soccer. The second is the manner in which they learned. Unlike traditional programming methods where every action is meticulously coded, these robots were given the objective of scoring a goal and only provided instructions on how to stand up and kick a ball. The rest they taught themselves using deep reinforced learning (AI) methods. The news program 60 Minutes also reported on the AI soccer playing robots (Fig. 1). Check out the article here and the 60 Minutes segment in the video below. I think you’ll be impressed.

Fig. 1. 60 Minutes Segment: Google DeepMind demos AI training robots to play soccer / football. (Credit: 60 Minutes). References

References
Paul, A. (2024). Watch two tiny, AI-powered robots play soccer. Miami, Fla.: Popular Science. Available athttps://www.popsci.com/technology/deepmind-robot-soccer/.
____________________
[1] Reference to a product or company is for specific information only and does not endorse or recommend that product or company to the exclusion of others that may be suitable.

The SW Ag Summit is taking place in Yuma this week. We will have the Weed Control breakout session on Thursday, 22 February 2024 at 1:30 pm in room AS 115 of  the AWC campus. Here’s what are we going to cover:
Do you know what the IR-4 Project is? 
Established in 1963 by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and land-grant universities this project helps ensure that specialty crop farmers have legal access to safe and effective crop protection products and contributes to developing data necessary for the registration products for best pest management. Do we have this project in Yuma?
A Weed Scientist and Principal Biologist from IR-4 and NC State University will explain what this process of making more tools available to growers takes.
 
Additionally, we will have a representative from BASF chemical company who will present NEW WEED CONTROL TECHNOLOGIES as well as active ingredients developed by his company.
 
We all know with the loss of DCPA (Dacthal) herbicide our weed management tools were reduced. You asked the Veg IPM Team to look for ALTERNATIVES for Broccoli and Onion. We are doing some Trials at the UA Yuma Ag Center with products Such as Napropamide (Devrinol), which has the Devrinol DF XT dry formulation and the Devrinol 2-XT liquid. 
Which one is more aggressive? How does water incorporation affect it? How good is it on goosefoot, lambsquarter, knotweed?
Other treatments we are looking at on broccoli are Goal Tender, Prefar, Prowl, Treflan, Enversa, Rinskor.
For direct seeded onion we are testing Prefar, Etothron SC, Dual, a combination of PREFAR+PROWL PREEMERGERGENCE at low rates, Outlook+Prowl.
 
We would like to share our observations if you honor us coming to our session. Again, it is TOMORROW Thursday, 22 February 2024 at the Arizona Western College AS 115 room. This session will start at 1:30 pm.

Get your free copy of the Weed Seedling Identification Pocket Guide at the Yuma Agricultural Center.

Results of pheromone and sticky trap catches can be viewed here.

Corn earworm: CEW moth counts down in all traps over the last month; about average for December.

Beet armyworm: Moth trap counts decreased in all areas in the last 2 weeks but appear to remain active in some areas, and average for this time of the year.

Cabbage looper: Moths increased in the past 2 weeks, and average for this time of the season.

Diamondback moth: Adults increased in several locations last, particularly in the Yuma Valley most traps.  Below average for December.

Whitefly: Adult movement remains low in all areas, consistent with previous years 

Thrips: Thrips adult movement continues to decline, overall activity below average for December.

Aphids: Winged aphids still actively moving but declined movement in the last 2 weeks. About average for December.

Leafminers: Adult activity down in most locations, below average for this time of season.