01:39 Mar 10, 2000 |
German to English translations [PRO] | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| Selected response from: Christopher Hay Germany Local time: 09:37 | |||
Grading comment
|
Summary of answers provided | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
na | (real) energy cost |
| ||
na | "energy rucksack" |
| ||
na | "energy rucksack" |
|
(real) energy cost Explanation: In connection with ecology, the expression "oekologischer Rucksack" occurs on several websites. It means the hidden cost in energy expended to produce something. Compare the English text from www.npg.org/forums/tightening_conflict.htm: "Moreover, it should be noted that when farmers comprise only a small fraction of the population, and society undergoes a massive process of urbanization, the real energy cost of supplying food is shifted from agriculture to the post-harvest section of the food system. In general, 3 to 5 kcal are spent in processing, distribution, packaging and home preparation for each kcal spent in producing food at the farm level." Reference: http://www.hh.schule.de/globlern/infothek/projekte/osaft/ Reference: http://www.npg.org/forums/tightening_conflict.htm |
| |
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
"energy rucksack" Explanation: Oekologischer Rucksack refers not to energy, but to the materials that had to be translocated to produce a product or provide a service. The concept was developed by F. Schmidt-Bleek at the Wuppertal Institute in Germany. My "Glossary of Environmental Management and Sustainability" advertised on this site discusses the matter in more detail. The English term is "ecological rucksack". Energie-Rucksack plainly alludes to this concept, and thus, in order to retain the reference intended, is perhaps best termed "energy rucksack", as ugly as it sounds. On the other hand, if the audience has never heard of the ecological rucksack, this makes little sense. Then the more common term "indirect energy consumption" may be better. I would then suggest for the whole phrase: "emissions and direct and indirect energy consumption". |
| |
Grading comment
| ||
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
"energy rucksack" Explanation: Oekologischer Rucksack refers not to energy, but to the materials that had to be translocated to produce a product or provide a service. The concept was developed by F. Schmidt-Bleek at the Wuppertal Institute in Germany. My "Glossary of Environmental Management and Sustainability" advertised on this site discusses the matter in more detail. The English term is "ecological rucksack". Energie-Rucksack plainly alludes to this concept, and thus, in order to retain the reference intended, is perhaps best termed "energy rucksack", as ugly as it sounds. On the other hand, if the audience has never heard of the ecological rucksack, this makes little sense. Then the more common term "indirect energy consumption" may be better. I would then suggest for the whole phrase: "emissions and direct and indirect energy consumption". |
| |
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade) |
Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.
You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs (or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.