Bottled water debate hits a boiling point

[Karl]

AFP, 29 June 2008 –

A debate over water is boiling over in the United States and elsewhere amid growing environmental concerns about bottled water and questions about safety of tap water. The US Conference of Mayors in June passed a resolution calling for a phasing out of bottled water by municipalities and promotion of the importance of public water supplies. While largely symbolic, the vote highlighted a growing movement opposing regular use of bottled water because of its plastic waste and energy costs to transport drinking supplies.

Janet Larsen, director of research at the Earth Policy Institute, cites a "backlash against bottled water as more people are realizing what they get out of the bottles is not any better than what they get out of the faucet." The Pacific Institute, a California think tank on sustainability issues, contends that producing bottles for US water consumption required the equivalent of more than 17 million barrels of oil in 2006, not including the energy for transportation. The group says bottling water for Americans produces more than 2.5 million tons of carbon dioxide and consumes three liters of water for each liter of bottled water produced.

The debate in the US mirrors that taking place worldwide in places such as Paris; Liverpool, England; Florence, Italy; Vancouver, Canada. According to the EPI, the issue making waves among policymakers in locations including Denmark and New South Wales, Australia, among others. The backlash comes even amid surging sales of bottled water in the United States. Some of this is linked to concerns about contamination of public water supplies, although critics of the industry say marketing hype is a greater factor. Aficionados of Evian from France or Fiji from the South Pacific swear by the taste and health benefits of those waters, but others decry the high cost of energy for a product that may not be any better than local water.

A Natural Resources Defense Council concluded that "most of the tested waters were found to be of high quality (but) some brands were contaminated." The group said bottled waters "are subject to less rigorous testing and purity standards than those which apply to city tap water." In fact, says the group "about one-fourth of bottled water is actually bottled tap water" while government rules "allow bottlers to call their product 'spring water' even though it may be brought to the surface using a pumped well, and it may be treated with chemicals."

Article Link: http://www.wbcsd.org/includes/getTar...Det&id=MzA1MzY

Related: UK Sales of Bottled Water Face Environmental Backlash

[natureguy]

US doesn't have proper testing of the water their reserviors... Check the lastest incidence....HERE

[Karl]

Originally Posted by natureguy

US doesn't have proper testing of the water their reserviors...

Yes, that may be so. But is the solution to that (in the US and elsewhere) to increase the consumption of bottled water? According to the article in your link, the potable water supply may contain carinogens, but...

"Bottled water has recently been linked to cancer because of its plastic container. In the latest issue of Cancer Research, the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research, a report showed the link between a bisphenol A, a chemical that seeps into food from manufactured products, and breast cancer. The chemical, which is found in water bottles, causes healthy human breast cells to show genealogical characteristics of cancerous cells." (UK Sales of Bottled Water Face Environmental Backlash)

[natureguy]

By my link I didn't mean to promote bottled water by any means. I strictly feel / think that water should be not be commercialised. Citizens should pay for purification but than that's it.

Actually I have drank water from lots of areas in India as being a businessman, I have to travel lenght and breadth of the country. Never ever I have caught any disease. What do I do? Simple, I used boiled & filtered tap water and according to me, its okay.

[Karl]

Originally Posted by natureguy

By my link I didn't mean to promote bottled water by any means. I strictly feel / think that water should be not be commercialised. Citizens should pay for purification but than that's it.

Actually I have drank water from lots of areas in India as being a businessman, I have to travel lenght and breadth of the country. Never ever I have caught any disease. What do I do? Simple, I used boiled & filtered tap water and according to me, its okay.

This is essentially in agreement with a post from an earlier thread: Bottled v Filtered Tap Water

Originally Posted by emissionstatement

I'm currently looking at the differing carbon emissions between filtered tap water and that which comes in plastic bottles.

Obviously water scarcity is an issue, but given human consumption for drinking is a small part of water usage in this country, filtration of tap water is a far more sustainable and environmentally friendly water source.

Just wondering if anybody had any thoughts on this, know of any relevant studies etc.

There are many grounds for justification for using tap water (further treated where applicable). Apart from the significantly higher environmental footprint (at several stages of the product life-cycle) and the general wastefulness of bottled water, there are cited estimates that it costs (the consumer) 840 times the price of tap water.

Another major aspect is the plastic wastes. Based on my own observations of material washed up and deposited on the high-tide mark of tropical beaches - in recent years the plastic component of that appears to become almost exclusively dominated by discarded water bottles.

This does not mean that the availability of bottled water does not have a role; it is particularly useful for environmental researchers or professionals who may have to spend time in a remote area where other water is not readily available. But a major part of the problem is the extent to which it is used unnecessarily in many peoples' day-to-day activities.

[Karl]

Some further developments in the "bottled water debate"...

Market Watch - October 16, 2008

Dr. Stephen Edberg, a microbiology professor in the Department of Laboratory Medicine and Internal Medicine at the Yale University School of Medicine, and the director of the Clinical Microbiology Laboratory at the Yale-New Haven Hospital, has strongly refuted the Environmental Working Group's study on bottled water quality, declaring that the study's methodology was flawed and lacking in sound science.

Read Full Article: Yale Scientist Refutes Study on Bottled Water Issued By Environmental Working Group - MarketWatch

Addressing the study's findings which were released yesterday, Dr. Edberg said, "The Environmental Working Group's study on bottled water is troubling for both its lack of acknowledgement of scientifically based history and for failing to conduct controlled scientific experiments. Its conclusions unduly confuse consumers through faulty methodologies and unsubstantiated findings."

Dr. Edberg highlights two egregious examples, among the study's many flawed conclusions: Heterotropic Plate Count (HPC) as a measure of overall bacterial contamination: "HPC is a naturally occurring bacteria. In 1992, the US Environmental Protection Agency considered using an HPC in its new total coliform rule. It found no association between these naturally occurring bacteria and human health. While in 2002, the World Health Organization concluded that HPC were natural and did not result in an adverse health effect."

Related articles:
> ABC News: How Pure Is Bottled Water?
> MidwestBusiness.com: Research Says Some Bottled Water is Contaminated
> iTWire - Environmental group taps Sam's Choice and Acadia bottled water
> It’s Hip to Drink Tap: 7 Reasons to Give up the One-Time Use Bottle : Sustainablog

[Karl]

> Environment, economy weigh on bottled water sector | Special Coverage | Reuters

Reuters, By Emma Thomasson 29 October 2008

The world's top sellers of bottled water are trying to stop western consumers turning back to the tap by addressing environmental issues and trumpeting health benefits, while expanding aggressively in emerging markets.

Nestle, the world's biggest bottler of water with brands like Perrier and Poland Spring, said last week the economic slowdown and environmental concerns were hurting sales in western Europe and North America.

PepsiCo saw double-digit declines in the third quarter in its water brands, which include Propel and Aquafina, while Danone, with brands like Evian and Volvic, said demand had contracted in France, Spain and Britain.

Organisations like conservation group WWF have campaigned against bottled water, saying resources are wasted in bottling and transporting water which may be no safer or healthier than tap water while selling for up to a thousand times the price.

"It is a problem area for the whole industry," said Sarasin analyst Patrick Hasenboehler, citing downtrading risks as well as concerns over transport, packaging and water sourcing.

"When you have clean water at home it's one of the easiest ways to save money. For certain people it's become a bit trendy to drink tap water rather than bottled water."

[jonathan churchman-davies]

Originally Posted by Karl

This is essentially in agreement with a post from an earlier thread: Bottled v Filtered Tap Water

There are many grounds for justification for using tap water (further treated where applicable). Apart from the significantly higher environmental footprint (at several stages of the product life-cycle) and the general wastefulness of bottled water, there are cited estimates that it costs (the consumer) 840 times the price of tap water.

Another major aspect is the plastic wastes. Based on my own observations of material washed up and deposited on the high-tide mark of tropical beaches - in recent years the plastic component of that appears to become almost exclusively dominated by discarded water bottles.

This does not mean that the availability of bottled water does not have a role; it is particularly useful for environmental researchers or professionals who may have to spend time in a remote area where other water is not readily available. But a major part of the problem is the extent to which it is used unnecessarily in many peoples' day-to-day activities.

I did some work on this for a UK organisation called wewanttap.

The carbon footprint of bottled water is quite significant - half a gram or so per millilitre - depending on where it has been shipped from and the source of the primary energy used in electrcally powered injection blow moulding manufacturing of the bottle.

Regards

Jonathan Churchman-Davies
jchurchman.davies@gmail.com