Consensus flow list

What a water flow says

A water flow says four things. Until this taxonomy the list had somewhere to put three.

What a water flow says For example Where it lives
Which molecule it is H₂O, CAS 7732-18-5 the substance
Which way it crossed the boundary withdrawal, or return the context
Which body it came from, or went to lake, river, ocean, aquifer the context — and only for emissions, before this
What kind of water it is sea water, groundwater, cooling water, brine the material

The last one is the new piece. Because the deduplication signs on every semantic field of a flow, a difference held in no field is a difference that disappears: EF 3.1’s Water use works as a pair — a positive factor when water is withdrawn, a negative one when it is returned — and when the two halves looked identical, one of them was merged away and the negative half went with it. In the case audited that inflated a water use result by roughly a factor of 434.

The kind of water is not the same question as the water body, and the two are not interchangeable. Water taken from a lake is lake water, from a lake. Water discharged to a lake is plain water, to a lake. For a withdrawal the two agree, which is why the withdrawal body can be read off the kind; for a discharge they are two separate facts, and nothing infers one from the other.

Kinds of water 17 in the taxonomy, each tied to a published vocabulary
Kinds carrying flows 16 the rest are groupings, or unreached by this build
Water flows 52 published on one of these kinds
Retired water flows 0 the plainest measure of this: the exercise began with water flows being merged into each other
Return 32 flows on this side of the boundary
Withdrawal 19 flows on this side of the boundary
Economic 1 flows on this side of the boundary

The taxonomy

17 kinds, as a small hierarchy. The names are not ours: each one is tied to a published environmental vocabulary, so that sea water in this list means what sea water means elsewhere and can be checked by anyone. Two authorities, split by what they can actually type — ENVO for what the water physically is, and AGROVOC for the accounting category no OBO ontology carries. Where both publish the class, both are cited: cooling water is named by each of them, which is corroboration rather than redundancy, and it is the find that decided this design — EF’s Water to Cooling is not a modelling quirk to tolerate inside a name but a published class with a definition and a parent.

A kind with no flow object mints nothing and never appears on an inventory row: it exists so that the kinds under it have the parent the vocabulary gives them. A kind with an object but no flow is one this build did not reach — several are used by the Swiss BAFU list, so which of them are empty depends on which sources went into the build.

Kind of water Cites Authority As Parent edge Reached by Withdrawals Returns CFs
Water water liquid water ENVO skos:exactMatch root EF 3.1, bafu algorithm addition, ecoinvent algorithm addition 1 7 627
Fresh water fresh_water fresh water ENVO skos:exactMatch asserted EF 3.1 1 209
Rainwater rainwater rainwater ENVO skos:exactMatch asserted EF 3.1 1 1 0
Surface water surface_water surface water ENVO skos:exactMatch asserted bafu algorithm addition 1 0
Lake water lake_water lake water ENVO skos:exactMatch ours EF 3.1 1 209
River water river_water river water ENVO skos:exactMatch ours EF 3.1 1 209
Groundwater groundwater groundwater ENVO skos:exactMatch shortened via underground water EF 3.1, bafu algorithm addition 2 209
Fossil groundwater fossil_groundwater bore hole water ENVO skos:closeMatch ours ecoinvent algorithm addition 1 0
Saline water grouping only saline_water saline water ENVO skos:exactMatch asserted 0
Sea water sea_water sea water ENVO skos:exactMatch asserted EF 3.1, bafu algorithm addition 2 0
Brine brine brine ENVO skos:exactMatch shortened via hypersaline water EF 3.1 1 0
Cooling water cooling_water cooling water, cooling water ENVO, AGROVOC skos:exactMatch, skos:exactMatch asserted EF 3.1, bafu algorithm addition 3 1 418
Turbine water turbine_water nothing published minted ours EF 3.1 1 1 418
Contaminated water contaminated_water contaminated water ENVO skos:exactMatch asserted bafu algorithm addition 1 0
Waste water waste_water waste water ENVO skos:exactMatch asserted bafu algorithm addition 3 0
Water vapour water_vapour water vapour ENVO skos:exactMatch root EF 3.1 1 18 0
Green water green_water green water AGROVOC skos:exactMatch root EF 3.1, ecoinvent algorithm addition 2 0

Where the taxonomy speaks for itself

Most of what is above is what ENVO already states, checked automatically against a stored copy of what the vocabularies actually publish rather than taken on trust. 4 of 17 kinds state something of their own — an edge the authority declines to assert, a citation that is a close match rather than an equivalence, or an identifier nobody else publishes. Each says which, and why, so that none of it passes as somebody else’s.

Kind of water What this scheme states for itself Why
Lake water
  • that it sits under Surface water

lake water is not under surface water in ENVO

One of the two edges that are ours. ENVO puts lake water under liquid water and astronomical body part, with surface water as a sibling; the LCA reading needs the containment and the external vocabulary declines to arbitrate, so the scheme asserts it and says so.

River water
  • that it sits under Surface water

river water is not under surface water in ENVO

The other edge that is ours. ENVO routes river water through stream water, which is a different claim from this one and equally not surface water.

Fossil groundwater
  • that it sits under Groundwater
  • that it only overlaps ENVO’s bore hole water, as skos:closeMatch

bore hole water is not under groundwater in ENVO

ecoinvent's `natural resource / fossil well`, which EF 3.1 cannot hold: its water resources are classified `Renewable material resources from water`, and fossil groundwater is the one kind that is not renewable. `closeMatch`, not `exactMatch`, and the first in the scheme: ENVO's `bore hole water` names how the water is reached rather than that it is fossil, so the two overlap without being the same class, and saying `exactMatch` would assert an equivalence ENVO does not carry. The edge is ours for the same reason -- ENVO puts bore hole water under liquid water, not under groundwater.

Turbine water
  • that it sits under Water
  • its identifier, because no authority carries the concept

no published class

The one node with no published class in either authority. Minted under vocab.brightway.one because blocking a published-score fix on an external release is not a trade worth making; an ENVO term request goes with it, and ours retires if ENVO adopts the term.

Three smaller decisions, recorded so they are not re-litigated. Brine is the one kind carrying no CAS number: EF 3.1 gives Water, salt, sole water’s 7732-18-5, and that is treated as an error and dropped, because brine is a mixture rather than the molecule. Green water is deliberately not filed under rainwater: physically it is rain that infiltrated the soil, but it exists as a separate flow for water-footprint accounting rather than physical reasons, and treating it as a kind of rain would blur that — so it sits outside the tree and cites AGROVOC rather than ENVO. And water vapour is its own branch, because ENVO treats it as a gas rather than a form of liquid water; the unit does not tell the two apart, since vapour is filed in both kg and m³.

The flows

Every flow published on one of these kinds. The filters are read together: Cooling water with Return is the return half of the cooling water pair, not everything that is either. A withdrawal and a return of the same kind are the two halves EF characterises with opposite signs — seeing both on one row is the whole point of recording the kind.

1 of 52 flows.

Flow Kind of water Direction Water body Context Unit Source CFs
Rainwater Rainwater Withdrawal Unknown Resource → Water → Unknown kg EF 3.1 0

Keyboard

?
Show or hide this map
Esc
Close

More as the sections are built.