4 ms·

I almost always drink tap water but I would say it is better for people to drink bottled water than bottled sugar water. Should we ban sodas? Beer?

TeMPOraL 9y ago
It is, but the health issues are a completely separate discussion. As for distribution of sodas, beers and other beverages - given the pattern of their consumption, it makes more sense to have them in containers than to try and make everyone's home connected to "tap beer". Now, we can continue this topic into realms of packaging of foods and other items, and I'm going to say it up-front: I consider the modern amount of packaging on things to be a crime as well. E.g. pre-packaged meat in plastic containers vs. getting it wrapped in paper by a clerk at the meat stand. I understand that convenience has value, and I wouldn't personally even care about this if we had a working, efficient recycling infrastructure. As we don't, I do care.
- jdietrich 9y ago
  >I understand that convenience has value, and I wouldn't personally even care about this if we had a working, efficient recycling infrastructure. As we don't, I do care. It's practically impossible to recycle plastics economically. The best we can manage at the moment is down-cycling them into low-grade, low-value plastic products. There's an argument to be made for standardised and washable glass bottles with a deposit scheme, although that's unlikely to be popular. If we're stuck with disposable containers, Tetra-pak cartons are probably better over the whole lifecycle, although the calculations are extremely complex and we don't fully understand the environmental cost of a plastic bottle.
icantdrive55 9y ago
Soda--maybe. Beer--sadly used as a psychotropic remedy in many communities. Which brings to mind just how modern Psychiary has failed in so many cases.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
tambienben 9y ago
That's moving the goal posts.
jdietrich 9y ago
A $2 HDPE bottle will last for years; A $10 metal bottle is practically an heirloom piece. The "single-use" bottles that water is sold in can be re-used numerous times. There's an economic problem with the supply of water in public places. On a societal level, it would be vastly cheaper for local municipalities to provide faucets and drinking fountains. There'd be negligible economic cost to legislation requiring cafes and restaurants to refill water bottles free of charge or for a nominal fee. A series of misaligned incentives has created a multi-billion dollar industry out of an extremely inefficient way of distributing water. Foremost among them is the unpriced externalities of the resources used to produce, transport and dispose of water bottles. It's not a major issue in the broader scheme of things, but it's emblematic of a more fundamental failure in how we respond to environmental challenges.
- njarboe 9y ago
  High quality drinking fountains in public places used to be the norm, at least in the US. Out side almost every shared bathrooms (like at a school, park, large office, government building, grocery store, etc.) there was a drinking fountain. They always worked and would spout out a nice 4-6 inch high stream of water at high volume. The technology was well developed and the fountains would last forever. One simple valve is the only moving part. One could get a pleasurable, gulping drink when desired. When these fountains were removed and sometimes replaced as required by the ADA, the new fountains did not work as well. One needed two of them to have them at a low height and a high height. They seem to break often, so one could not count on getting water when one is thirsty. They usually have low water pressure or broken valves so the water comes out at a trickle. You cannot get the water your body wants without bending over awkwardly, your lips hitting the spout, and sucking on a pitiful trickle of water for minutes at a time. It is not the pleasurable experience that drinking water can be. No wonder people started looking for a bottle of water to buy when they were thirsty. I usually carry a bottle of tap water when I carry a pack, but it is more enjoyable to walk around without carrying one. When I do that and get thirsty, most of the time I buy some water, as the there are no working drinking fountains to be found.

TeMPOraL 9y ago

It is, but the health issues are a completely separate discussion. As for distribution of sodas, beers and other beverages - given the pattern of their consumption, it makes more sense to have them in containers than to try and make everyone's home connected to "tap beer". Now, we can continue this topic into realms of packaging of foods and other items, and I'm going to say it up-front: I consider the modern amount of packaging on things to be a crime as well. E.g. pre-packaged meat in plastic containers vs. getting it wrapped in paper by a clerk at the meat stand. I understand that convenience has value, and I wouldn't personally even care about this if we had a working, efficient recycling infrastructure. As we don't, I do care.

jdietrich 9y ago
>I understand that convenience has value, and I wouldn't personally even care about this if we had a working, efficient recycling infrastructure. As we don't, I do care. It's practically impossible to recycle plastics economically. The best we can manage at the moment is down-cycling them into low-grade, low-value plastic products. There's an argument to be made for standardised and washable glass bottles with a deposit scheme, although that's unlikely to be popular. If we're stuck with disposable containers, Tetra-pak cartons are probably better over the whole lifecycle, although the calculations are extremely complex and we don't fully understand the environmental cost of a plastic bottle.

icantdrive55 9y ago

Soda--maybe. Beer--sadly used as a psychotropic remedy in many communities. Which brings to mind just how modern Psychiary has failed in so many cases.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

tambienben 9y ago

That's moving the goal posts.

jdietrich 9y ago

A $2 HDPE bottle will last for years; A $10 metal bottle is practically an heirloom piece. The "single-use" bottles that water is sold in can be re-used numerous times. There's an economic problem with the supply of water in public places. On a societal level, it would be vastly cheaper for local municipalities to provide faucets and drinking fountains. There'd be negligible economic cost to legislation requiring cafes and restaurants to refill water bottles free of charge or for a nominal fee. A series of misaligned incentives has created a multi-billion dollar industry out of an extremely inefficient way of distributing water. Foremost among them is the unpriced externalities of the resources used to produce, transport and dispose of water bottles. It's not a major issue in the broader scheme of things, but it's emblematic of a more fundamental failure in how we respond to environmental challenges.

njarboe 9y ago
High quality drinking fountains in public places used to be the norm, at least in the US. Out side almost every shared bathrooms (like at a school, park, large office, government building, grocery store, etc.) there was a drinking fountain. They always worked and would spout out a nice 4-6 inch high stream of water at high volume. The technology was well developed and the fountains would last forever. One simple valve is the only moving part. One could get a pleasurable, gulping drink when desired. When these fountains were removed and sometimes replaced as required by the ADA, the new fountains did not work as well. One needed two of them to have them at a low height and a high height. They seem to break often, so one could not count on getting water when one is thirsty. They usually have low water pressure or broken valves so the water comes out at a trickle. You cannot get the water your body wants without bending over awkwardly, your lips hitting the spout, and sucking on a pitiful trickle of water for minutes at a time. It is not the pleasurable experience that drinking water can be. No wonder people started looking for a bottle of water to buy when they were thirsty. I usually carry a bottle of tap water when I carry a pack, but it is more enjoyable to walk around without carrying one. When I do that and get thirsty, most of the time I buy some water, as the there are no working drinking fountains to be found.