3 ms·

I know that we live in an outrage culture that doesn't respect orders of magnitude, but "he who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense"[1]. They p

I know that we live in an outrage culture that doesn't respect orders of magnitude, but "he who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense"[1]. They propose to withdraw 0.5E6 gal/day. We have data for the state of Michigan (in 2004, but probably not too much different today)[2] If we're only talking about ground water, industrial is 89.1E6, irrigation is 197E6, and electric generation is 4.1E6 usage. Why is it OK for these uses of ground water, but not the much much higher value use of water that actual human beings drink? I suppose that not many people are dipping their flow meter into the power plant's water main and noticing the massive quantities of water that they use (and then return to the environment, just like Nestle). They do see the case of bottled water on the shelf though and get pissed off that some company is making money selling the fruits of a public resource. To put it in perspective, in all of Michigan, total water usage is 11E9 gal/day. Nestle wants to use 0.5E6 gal/day. The population of Michigan is about 10E6, so they propose to make a giant factory that uses the same amount of water as 500 people. Somehow a giant plant using the same amount of water as 500 people attracts 80,000 negative comments. Go figure. [1] http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/progress/ http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/progress/ [2] http://msue.anr.msu.edu/resources/water_withdrawals_and_water_use_in_michigan_wq62 http://msue.anr.msu.edu/resources/water_withdrawals_and_wate...

throw2016 9y ago
The issue is much more nuanced than that but nice job positioning protest, dissent and citizen concern ie basic democracy as 'outrage culture'. [1] The bigger debate is about exploitation of natural resources , negatively impacting the local community and environment [2] corporate capture, people in neighboring towns not able to access clean water, all things that the average citizen is negatively impacted by. Nestle, corporate shills and those paid to defend it defending it is logical. Individuals with no stake seeking to defend Nestle on the basis on volume extracted based entirely on Nestle's figures with no regulatory framework to independently verify actual extraction on the other hand is not. Your first link is a generic article on progress and sustainability. The second does not show how much water is extracted by Nestle and its impact on the local environment and is based on 'self reported' figures. Here are far more updated perspectives on the issue. [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2017-09-21/nestl-makes-billions-bottling-water-it-pays-nearly-nothing-for https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2017-09-21/nestl-mak... [2] https://www.pri.org/stories/2018-02-04/tiny-michigan-town-water-fight-nestle https://www.pri.org/stories/2018-02-04/tiny-michigan-town-wa...
craftyguy 9y ago
You're comparing water usage for necessary infrastructure to the completely unnecessary, and wasteful, usage of bottling it for consumption. With a few rare exceptions, tap water in the US is safe for consumption. There is no good reason why this industry should exsit at this scale.

throw2016 9y ago

The issue is much more nuanced than that but nice job positioning protest, dissent and citizen concern ie basic democracy as 'outrage culture'. [1] The bigger debate is about exploitation of natural resources , negatively impacting the local community and environment [2] corporate capture, people in neighboring towns not able to access clean water, all things that the average citizen is negatively impacted by. Nestle, corporate shills and those paid to defend it defending it is logical. Individuals with no stake seeking to defend Nestle on the basis on volume extracted based entirely on Nestle's figures with no regulatory framework to independently verify actual extraction on the other hand is not. Your first link is a generic article on progress and sustainability. The second does not show how much water is extracted by Nestle and its impact on the local environment and is based on 'self reported' figures. Here are far more updated perspectives on the issue. [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2017-09-21/nestl-makes-billions-bottling-water-it-pays-nearly-nothing-for https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2017-09-21/nestl-mak... [2] https://www.pri.org/stories/2018-02-04/tiny-michigan-town-water-fight-nestle https://www.pri.org/stories/2018-02-04/tiny-michigan-town-wa...

craftyguy 9y ago

You're comparing water usage for necessary infrastructure to the completely unnecessary, and wasteful, usage of bottling it for consumption. With a few rare exceptions, tap water in the US is safe for consumption. There is no good reason why this industry should exsit at this scale.