3 ms·
At the risk of continuing off-topic, the "outrage" over Nestle bottled water in this case was due to Nestle starting to draw large amounts of water at about 1/1
by mhalle 10y ago
At the risk of continuing off-topic, the "outrage" over Nestle bottled water in this case was due to Nestle starting to draw large amounts of water at about 1/100th the residential water cost from an region under mandatory water restrictions due to drought. Blame Nestle and/or the local government, but it does seem short-sighted and suboptimal.
In general, though, bottled water isn't consumed close to its generation point: it's packaged in plastic bottles and trucked away. There's an environmental cost. And many of the bottles that are consumed locally contain the same water people could have gotten straight from the tap, so the environmental cost is lower but more pointless.
- greenshackle2 10y agoI agree they should pay the full price, and that bottled water is wasteful, but 4 million litres per day is not a large amount. It's equivalent to the daily consumption of around 8000 people. Or equivalent to the water needed to irrigate a laughably small farm.
- russum 10y ago4,000,000 / 8,000 == 500 liters per day per person?
- huherto 10y agohttp://www.csgnetwork.com/waterusagecalc.html http://www.csgnetwork.com/waterusagecalc.html 600 Gallons per day * 3.7 = 2,271 liters per day. That is just water without counting the water used to grow the food we use. Meanwhile 4,000,000 liters can be benefit 4,000,000 people that drink 1 liter of bottled water a day. Drinking water is as efficient use of water as it is possible. I rather drink from the faucet if possible but lots of people prefer bottle water.
- joelwilliamson 10y agoThere is no drought in Southern Ontario. They are drawing well water, not residential water. A farmer could draw that much water and pay absolutely nothing.