 |
| Water War Redux |
|
| Written by Casson Rosenblatt | |
| Wednesday, 07 November 2007 | |
|
In July, I wrote about the sudden emergence of media stories discussing the environmental impact of the bottled water industry. The New York Times recently published two stories related to the issue: an interview on Nestle Waters and an article of Fiji Water. Essentially, these pieces allow the corporate execs to counter arguments against bottled water. The articles make good points about the changes bottled water companies are trying to make through lighter packaging, carbon offsets, etc., as environmental questions plague their industry. Nestle Waters (NESN) chief executive Kim E. Jeffery says: We use less packaging than sodas or other convenience beverages. Nestlé Waters is rolling out...a 12.5 gram plastic bottle that holds half a liter of water. It’s about 15 percent lighter than our current bottles, and we use 10 to 15 percent less energy to make it.There is even relative acceptance that tap water is the best choice; yet it is called "unrealistic" to think consumers will stop buying bottled water, and bottled water companies insist that the industry competes with other bottled beverages and not tap water. Jeffery claims: Bottled water wooed people away from soda and sports drinks, not taps. About 70 percent of the beverages people drink come in packages. All our research shows that if bottled water weren’t available, people would buy Gatorade, or fruit juice, or other sugared or diet beverages. Some 16 percent say they would drink tap water — but you can’t go into a deli and ask for a bottle of tap water.Glenn T. Prickett from Conservation International also address the need to accept that bottled water is here to stay: “Maybe it would be morally preferable to carry a bottle I filled at the tap, but bottled water is a consumer reality...So rather than operate in a moralistic framework, we’ll use the economy as it exists to make a difference.” While in certain situations the availability of tap is uncertain, many people often use bottled water as their de facto drink, even with the ready access of tap. The bottled water industry, no matter how the try to minimize their carbon footprint, won't stop selling more of its product. Consumers need to become conscious on their own of when grabbing a bottle is the better option, and when it isn't. Disclaimer: I don't own any stock in the above companies. I also try to use my Sigg for all my water needs.  Photo:Diego_3336, Creative Commons, Flickr Casson Rosenblatt 
Comments
(1)
...
written by Michelle Haimoff , November 12, 2007 Tag it:           | |
| Last Updated ( Sunday, 18 November 2007 ) | |
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
| Company Profiles |
| Individual Profiles |
| Movie Reviews |
| Culture-Celebrity |
| Opinions |
| Staff Recommendations |
| Resources |
 ThePanelist Latest Postings Alternative Energy Christian Investing Climate Women Neubert's Trades Social Culture Technology |
 |
Subscribe to this comment's feed
I recently finally got a Brita. At first, dealing with the filter seemed like a lot of work compared to buying bottles (I know, but it's all relative). I got used to it and now I'm trying to carry around refillable bottles with Brita water in them.
I'm sure none of these filtered and bottled waters are any different than bottom shelf tap water, but being an impressionable consumer that apparently equates bottled water with other bottled beverages instead of with water, I am now convinced that I have to do something to tap water before I drink it.