Süt Hayvancılığında Çiğ Süt Üretiminin Su Ayak İzi

Year 2025, Volume: 20 Issue: 2, 89 - 100, 30.12.2025

Müslüme Sevba Çolak , Havva Eylem Polat , Ahmet Cengiz Yıldırım , Necati Denizhan Alptekin

https://doi.org/10.54975/isubuzfd.1819179

Abstract

Su ayak izi, bir ürün veya hizmetin yalnızca doğrudan su tüketimini değil, dolaylı tüketimini ve kullanılan su kaynağının türünü tanımlar. Su ayak izi mavi, yeşil ve gri su ayak izi olmak üzere üç bileşenden oluşur. Mavi su, bir ürünün üretiminde kullanılan yeraltı suyu veya yüzey suyu hacmi olarak tanımlanır. Yeşil su ayak izi, kullanılan yağmur suyu hacmiyken, gri su ayak izi kirlenmiş su kaynaklarının hacmidir. Su kaynaklarının kullanımı üç sektöre ayrılır: tarım, sanayi ve evsel kullanım. Türkiye'de tarım sektörü toplam su tüketiminin yaklaşık %74'ünü oluşturmaktadır. Küresel tarımsal su ayak izinin üçte birinin hayvansal üretiminden kaynaklandığı tahmin edilmektedir. Bu çalışmada, Ankara Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Haymana Araştırma ve Uygulama Çiftliğinde bir litre süt üretimi için harcanan su miktarı hesaplanmıştır. İşletmede bulunan hayvanların beslenmesi için ihtiyaç duyulan kaba ve kesif yem hammaddeleri kendi bünyelerinde üretilmekte olup, buğday, mısır (dane ve silajlık), arpa, yonca ve ayçiçeğinin mavi ve yeşil su ayak izleri hesaplanmıştır. Barınakta ve yardımcı tesislerde (sağım) temizlik için kullanılan su miktarı, hayvanların içtiği su miktarı ve bir süt sığırının günde ortalama 36 kg olarak belirlenen yem ihtiyacına karşılık gelen su ayak izi değerleri hesaplanmış olup günde 1 litre süt üretimi için harcanan su miktarı 1112,3 litre olarak bulunmuştur.

Keywords

ahır , çiğ süt , hayvancılık , su ayak izi

The Water Footprint of Raw Milk Production on A Dairy Farm

Abstract

The water footprint is defined as the total volume of water consumed in the production of a product or service, including both direct and indirect consumption. The water footprint is comprised of three distinct components: blue, green, and grey water footprints. Blue water is defined as the volume of groundwater or surface water utilised in the production of a given product. The green water footprint is defined as the volume of rainwater utilised, while the grey water footprint is the volume of polluted water sources. It is estimated that one-third of the global agricultural water footprint is attributable to animal production. In this study, the quantity of water utilised in the production of one litre of milk was determined at the Haymana Research and Application Farm, which is affiliated with the Faculty of Agriculture at Ankara University. The coarse and concentrated feed raw materials required for feeding the animals on the farm are produced on site, and the blue and green water footprints of wheat, maize (grain and silage), barley, alfalfa and sunflower have been calculated. The quantity of water utilised for cleaning purposes in the barn and auxiliary facilities (milking), the volume of water consumed by the animals, and the water footprint values corresponding to the feed requirement of an average dairy cow of 36 kg per day were calculated. The amount of water consumed for the production of 1 litre of milk per day was found to be 1112.3 litres.

Keywords

barn , livestock , raw milk , water footprint

References

• Aamoum, A. (2015). Water Footprint of Milk Production: Case Study of a Finnish Farm. Bachelor’s thesis in Natural Resources Degree Programme in Sustainable Coastal Management, Novia University of Applied Sciences Raseborg, 2015. Access date: 15.07.2025. https://www.theseus.fi/handle/10024/93406
• Anonymous (2009). 2030 Water Resources Group. Charting Our Water Future: Economic Frameworks to Inform Decision-Making. Access date: 09.07.2025.
• Anonymous (2016a). World Bank Group. High and dry: Climate change, water, and the economy. World Bank. Access date: 05.07.2025.
• Anonymous (2016b). United Nations. International Decade for Action, “Water for Sustainable Development”, 2018–2028. A/RES/71/222. Access date: 05.07.2025.
• Anonymous (2024). General Directorate of Agricultural Enterprises of the Republic of Turkey. 2024 Livestock Sector Report. Access date: 15.07.2025.
• Anonymous (2025a). Web Site: https://hacibayram.edu.tr/iso/ankara-hakkinda?lang=tr-TR. Access date: 31.07.2025.
• Anonymous (2025b). Web Site: https://www.agri.ankara.edu.tr/haymana-arastirma-ve-uygulama-ciftligi/. Access date: 25.07.2025.
• Anonymous (2025c). Web Site: https://haymana.com/hayvancilik. Access date: 05.08.2025.
• Bai, X., Ren, X., Khanna, N. Z., Zhou, N., & Hu, M. (2018). Comprehensive water footprint assessment of the dairy industry chain based on ISO 14046: A case study in China. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 132, 369-375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.07.021
• Bronts, S., Gerbens-Leenes, P. W., & Guzmán-Luna, P. (2023). The water, land and carbon footprint of conventional and organic dairy systems in the Netherlands and Spain. A case study into the consequences of ecological indicator selection and methodological choices. Energy Nexus, 11, 100217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nexus.2023.100217
• Chapagain, A. K., & Hoekstra, A. Y. (2004). Water footprints of nations. UNESCO-IHE, Delft, The Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470696224.CH5
• Feng, B., Zhuo, L., Xie, D., Mao, Y., Gao, J., Xie, P., & Wu, P. (2021). A quantitative review of water footprint accounting and simulation for crop production based on publications during 2002–2018. Ecological Indicators, 120, 106962. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106962
• Govoni, C., D’Odorico, P., Pinotti, L., & Rulli, M. C. (2023). Preserving global land and water resources through the replacement of livestock feed crops with agricultural by-products. Nature Food, 4(12), 1047-1057. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43016-023-00884-w
• Harris, F., Moss, C., Joy, E. J., Quinn, R., Scheelbeek, P. F., Dangour, A. D., & Green, R. (2020). The water footprint of diets: a global systematic review and meta-analysis. Advances in Nutrition, 11(2), 375-386. https://doi.org/10.1093/advances/nmz091
• Hoekstra A.Y., Chapagain A.K., Aldaya M.M., Mekonnen M.M. (2011). The Water Footprint Assessment Manual, Water Footprint Network. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781849775526
• Hogeboom, R., J. (2020). The water footprint concept and water's grand environmental challenges. One Earth, 2(3), 218-222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2020.02.010
• Kumar, S., & Goyal, M. K. (2025). Water policy review: Ensuring sustainable water management for India. Journal of Environmental Management, 388, 125823. . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2025.125823
• Lee, S. H., Choi, J. Y., Yoo, S. H., Kim, Y. D., & Shin, A. (2015). Estimation of water footprint for livestock products in Korea. Journal of the Korean Society of Agricultural Engineers, 57(2), 85-92. https://doi.org/10.5389/KSAE.2015.57.2.085
• Liu, X., Li, D., & Li, Y. (2004). Problems of environmental pollution and control measures in developing cow farming in China. Environmental Pollution, 2, 25-28.
• Lovarelli D., Bacenetti J., Fiala M. (2016). Water Footprint of crop productions: A review, Science of The Total Environment, 548–549, 236–251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.01.022
• Mekonnen, M. M., & Hoekstra, A. Y. (2012). A global assessment of the water footprint of farm animal products. Ecosystems, 15(3), 401-415. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10021-011-9517-8
• Muratoğlu, A. (2018). Dicle Havzasının Su Ayak İzinin Hesaplanması. 1st International Potable Water and Waste Water Symposium, (475-486). 06-07 December 2008, Afyonkarahisar, Turkey.
• Muratoğlu, A. (2020). Assessment of water footprint of production: A case study for Diyarbakır province. Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, 35(2), 845-858. https://doi.org/10.17341/gazimmfd.543933
• Owusu-Sekyere, E., M. Scheepers ve H. Jordaan. (2016). Water Footprint of Milk Produced and Processed in South Africa: Implications for Policy-Makers and Stakeholders along the Dairy Value Chain. Water, 8(8), 322. https://doi.org/10.3390/w8080322
• Palhares, J. C. P., De Souza, D. P., Carra, S. H. Z., & Drastig, K. (2025). How do production practices and climate change impact the water footprint of dairy farms?. Science of The Total Environment, 998, 180243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2025.180243
• Palhares, J. C. P., & Pezzopane, J. R. M. (2015). Water footprint accounting and scarcity indicators of conventional and organic dairy production systems. Journal of Cleaner Production, 93, 299-307. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.01.035
• Ran Y., Lannerstad M., Herrero M., Van Middelaar C.E., De Boer I.J.M. (2016). Assessing water resource use in livestock production: A review of methods, Livestock Science, 187, 68–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.livsci.2016.02.012
• Schewe, J., Heinke, J., Gerten, D., Haddeland, I., Arnell, N. W., Clark, D. B., Kabat, P. (2014). Multimodel assessment of water scarcity under climate change. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(9), 3245-3250. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1222460110
• Springmann, M., Clark, M., Mason-D’Croz, D., Wiebe, K., Bodirsky, B. L., Lassaletta, L., & Willett, W. (2018). Options for keeping the food system within environmental limits. Nature, 562(7728), 519-525. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0594-0
• Sun, Y., Liu, J., & Ma, Z. (2010). Evaluation of greenhouse gas emissions from scale dairy farm. Transactions of the Chinese Society of Agricultural Engineering, 26(6), 296-301. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1002-6819.2010.06.052
• Vanham, D., Mekonnen, M. M., & Hoekstra, A. Y. (2013). The water footprint of the EU for different diets. Ecological indicators, 32, 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2013.02.020
• Velarde-Guillén, J., Viera, M., & Gómez, C. (2023). Water footprint of small-scale dairy farms in the central coast of Peru. Tropical Animal Health and Production, 55(1), 25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11250-022-03437-8.
• Wang, F., Dou, Z., Ma, L., Ma, W., Sims, J. T., & Zhang, F. (2010). Nitrogen mass flow in China's animal production system and environmental implications. Journal of Environmental Quality, 39(5), 1537-1544. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq2010.0090