Weighing the pros and cons of bottled and tap water

Bottled water has become something of a lightning rod for environmental scorn, and for good reason in many cases. While many manufacturers do conduct activities to help lessen their environmental impact, the fact remains that the environmental — and social — costs are high.

On July 4, Elizabeth Royte, author of Bottlemania: How Water Went on Sale and Why We Bought It, was interviewed on the Science Friday edition of NPR’s “Talk of the Nation.” (To listen to the interview, click here.

Royte researched the history of bottled water in the United States and explored the environmental and social issues involved in the industry, including the privatization of water supplies around the country and around the globe. Certainly many people are aware of the petroleum and energy costs that go into manufacturing plastic water bottles and transporting the finished product to market. Some things the average consumer might not consider, however, are contaminants in the plastic water bottles themselves, advances made in bottle production to “lightweight” bottles and lessen costs, and how communities are affected by corporations buying up water sources.

Not everyone finds the water business evil, Royte pointed out in her interview. Even she finds it comparatively “not the worst thing in the world.” When asked whether she found people worried about losing their local water supplies, Royte responded that some people do and some don’t. While there are so-called water wars with angry people protesting and going to court, others welcome the jobs brought by the bottled water business and view it as a clean industry.

Royte does advocate tap water, explaining that the vast majority of community water supplies meet or exceed federal standards. She did note in her interview, however, that some 29 million Americans do not have municipal water that meets federal standards. Because many people are concerned about what’s in their water (and because the water industry has marketed their products in ways to make us be afraid of our water supply), Royte suggests two things:

1. Check your local Right to Know or Consumer Confidence report to see how clean your water is. These reports come in the mail every year, but you can also find them online for your community.
2. Optionally, you can collect a water sample from your tap and have it tested.

Once you know what is (or isn’t) in your water, you can then filter your water through either a carbon filter or a reverse osmosis filter, which removes industrial and agricultural contaminants.

For more information about Bottlemania and for extensive links to a variety of resources about water, visit Elizabeth Royte’s Bottlemania web site.

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

Will peak oil help rebuild communities?

Last week, Keith Johnson over at the Wall Street Journal’s environmental blog posited the question whether rising fuel costs will force Americans to become more like Europeans in their driving and public transportation habits. Jeff Rubin of the Canadian brokerage CIBC World Markets predicts 10 million fewer cars on American roads by 2012, with half of these cars coming from low income homes with access to public transportation. In another post, Johnson discussed a trend of people moving to save money on gas.

What interests me about these trends and predictions is seeing American society come full circle. I grew up in the ’70s and ’80s, and have long heard laments from Baby Boomers about how our suburban lifestyle has been the death of communities. How air conditioning and television has stopped us from knowing our neighbors. How strip malls and big box stores have killed downtowns across the country. How long commutes have eaten into our time together as families. It seems even as people took more and more advantage of comforts and cheap prices, it came at human, resource, and environmental costs.

Is there a silver lining in the decline of oil supplies and the rise of gas prices? Will communities begin to come back together? Will we be able to adjust our public trans infrastructure to support a changed lifestyle?

Far be it for me to be overly optimistic about all of this, but in the age of people text messaging their spouses — both in the same house — a bit of community can’t help but being a good thing. In fact, I reckon that coming together as a community, both locally and globally, will be the only way to make it through our coming environmental and energy challenges.

Now, if only I could get across my 7 x 7 mile city by public transportation in under an hour…

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

The outfield isn’t the only thing that is green

Some colleagues and I went to a San Francisco Giants game earlier this week on what was the hottest day in the city in more than 30 years. Our tickets had us seated right in the direct sun, and we, like many other fans, migrated up into the shady nosebleed sections as the game wore on.

I haven’t been to a sporting event in years, and therefore haven’t given a lot of thought to their environmental impact (I also don’t watch sports on TV, so I missed out on all the green hoopla surrounding the Superbowl, etc.). Looking at the emptying seats, I was struck by all the trash left behind and couldn’t help but wonder about (A) the workers who would have to clean up in the blazing heat, and (B) whether any of it would be recycled. Imagine cleaning up an entire stadium: how scrupulous would you be? Of course this train of thought led to others, such as all the energy used to run the concessions, all the water being flushed away after an afternoon of beer drinking, all the lighting that goes into a nighttime game.

By coincidence, I read a Newsweek article the very next day about the new Washington Nationals ballpark and other greenities in Major League Baseball. The $611 Nationals’ stadium is the first such building to be LEED certified, though the Minnesota Twins’ new stadium will have a higher level of LEED certification when it opens in 2010. Among the features of the Nationals’ stadium:

• High efficiency bulbs in the field lights
• 95% of the steel used in construction was recycled
• Toilets are low-flow
• Recycled 5,500 tons of construction waste
• Has a state-of-the art water filtration system
• Close to public transportation

Even more exciting, building the stadium to LEED standards resulted in just a 2% hike in construction costs, proving that building with a mind to the environment is very feasible.

The Natural Resources Defense Council has been lobbying sports teams and facilities to go green since 2002. Some successes to date include:

• A composting and recycling project by the Seattle Mariners at Safeco Field, which expects to recycle 25% of its waste this year (about 350 tons of glass, trash, and organic trash
• Solar panels on ball parks in Cleveland, San Francisco, and Colorado
• Bio-degradable corn-based cups at the Oakland A’s stadium
• A goal by the Pittsburgh Pirates to recycle 100% of bottles and cans used this year
• MLB will be using some of its $6 billion yearly revenue to pay for greening costs of the Marlins’ future stadium in Miami

Now that is something to cheer about.

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

When bloggers talk, Dell listens

Congrats to blogs Gizmodo, the Consumerist, and others who posted about Dell using a gigantic box to ship a thumb drive, complete with photos to show the size discrepancy and wasteful packaging. It didn’t take long for chatter around this topic to grow: some taking the opportunity to knock Dell, some defending Dell for using minimal packaging in their experiences, and some mentioning other companies who shipped products in equally ludicrous packaging.

Dell responded quickly, sending a team out to the vendor that shipped the offending box to fix the process. In a post on their blog, Dell discusses their immediate directive to use envelopes for small items like thumb drives as well as other initiatives to use more intelligent and size-appropriate packaging.

Dell also has a forum where people can rate, discuss, and brainstorm on environmentally friendly solutions.

It’s great to see people posting about this kind of thing, and to see companies responding. Greener One is one platform to share both positive and negative environmental info about products, and I’m always on the lookout for products to review here. Drop me a comment if you have any review requests!

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

Spreading the word about the Take Back the Filter campaign

People who are concerned about the environment are shunning bottled water and turning to the cheaper, friendlier — and often better regulated — alternative of tap water. Many people everywhere also choose to filter their tap water, either with a faucet mount or in a container such a Brita pitcher.

Brita is the leading pour-through filter in both the United States and Canada, is the top selling faucet mount filter in Canada, and is the second best selling faucet mount filter in the U.S. As you can imagine, replacing filters every two months leads to an incredible amount of filters being discarded in North America.

Brita, which was founded in Germany in 1966, has been dismantling and reusing cartridges in Europe since 1992. Brita has a take-back service in Germany, Great Britain, Ireland, France, and Switzerland. One in four filters is currently recycled in Germany alone.

The same is not true in North America, where the North American division of Brita has been owned by the Clorox Corporation since 2000. Clorox uses its Filter for Good campaign to sell filters as a way to cut down on bottled water waste, but does not have a take-back program for its filters. Clorox’s practice of not recycling its filters rather defeats the purpose of its own Filter for Good campaign! Enter the Take Back the Filter campaign, where you can:

• Sign a petition urging Clorox to start such a program in North America;
• Write a letter to Clorox execs;
• Get an address to send your used filters (the campaign is collecting them to deliver to Clorox); and, of course,
• Learn how you can spread the word about the campaign

Please take a minute to pop over to Take Back the Filter and show your support!

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

How can bottled water be green?

When I was a senior in high school, I had the bright idea to buy an underwater aquifer and just sit on it, waiting for the world’s freshwater supplies to dwindle and then cash in on my goldmine. I never did buy that aquifer, but I have watched the bottled water industry change over the past 17 years with interest since my first business idea.

Where I went to university in northwest Ohio, the tap water quality was so poor that pregnant women, young children, and the elderly were advised not to drink it. Thinking that if the water wasn’t good for them, it probably wasn’t the best for me, either, I bought a couple of gallons of water at the local grocery store. Each week, I would bring them back and refill them from a water purifier. The store sold bottled water, but it was nothing like today. There was little variety, the bottles were sold by the gallon, and the packaging was anything but sexy. I knew of only two “premium” waters — though I didn’t know that term back then. One was Perrier, which I thought a glamorous alternative to alcohol, and the other was Evian, which seemed sophisticated if frivolous with its ads of models in tubs filled with Evian, and not nearly as much fun as water with bubbles in it.

By the time I graduated from university and started working, the bottled water health craze had started. It seemed like everyone in the office was carrying their water bottles around, drinking ostentatiously throughout meetings, and making a great display of carrying them to a lunchtime aerobics class. Families I knew started to buy cases of bottled water in individual sized bottles from Sam’s Club and Costco.

Shortly thereafter, the marketing for bottled water really stepped up. The packaging grew sexier, and bottled water from all over the world poured onto American shelves: water from Fiji, Italy, Switzerland, Germany, Scandinavia. These bottles, mini works of art, also started showing up in television shows and in the movies, and restaurants meanwhile offered a variety of choices of bottled water on their menus. Bars also began to differentiate themselves by claiming their ice cubes were made from such-and-such brand of water, ensuring that cocktails wouldn’t have any tap water taste taint.

And sales of water, did they soar. Investing Happily claims that Americans spent $15 billion on bottled water last year. The Beverage Marketing Corporation reported 2007 sales at $11 billion (.doc). The same report shows consumption of bottled water jumping from 4.7 billion gallons in 2000 to 8.8 in 2007.

It goes without saying that all this consumption has a big impact on the environment (and one that could be decreased by drinking tap water, notwithstanding the quality of it in my old school town). Food and Water Watch, a non-profit consumer group that works to ensure the safety of food and water, offers up these facts as part of their Take Back the Tap campaign:

• Plastic bottle production in the United States annually requires about 17.6 million barrels of oil.
• Worldwide bottling of water uses about 2.7 million tons of plastic each year.
• About 86 percent of empty plastic water bottles in the United States land in the garbage instead of being recycled. That amounts to about two million tons of PET plastic bottles piling up in U.S. landfills each year.
• Many plastic bottles of all types and sizes will be incinerated, which releases toxic byproducts such as chlorine gas and ash laden with heavy metals.

So, I have to admit that I read the news about FIJI Water’s plans to reduce its environmental impact with some cynicism last week. Basically, they worked with the Carbon Disclosure Project’s Supply Chain Leadership Collaboration to determine their carbon footprint and identify areas where they can reduce emissions. They’ve pledged specific goals, are purchasing carbon offsets to become carbon negative, and are involved with a rainforest reforestation project in Fiji. These are positive steps, all, but it also seems to me that the bottled water industry in general is now faced with some serious defensive marketing as bottled water — once the darling of the beverage industry — is now under attack because of its environmental impact.

This story also made me wonder what other bottled water companies are doing, as FIJI is a relatively small player compared to the Top 10 bottled water brands in the U.S. It turns out that all of the Top 10 have some environmental information on their web sites. All claim to be fully recyclable. In addition, here are some other claims:

Aquafina (Owned by Pepsico)

• Partners with Keep America Beautiful and the National Recycling Coalition. The program Return the Warmth turned recycled Aquafina bottles into 100,000 fleece jackets for children in need.
• 1/2 liter bottle now uses 35% less plastic than it did in 2000.
• Uses a water recovery system in its production.
• Has production facilities in 40 locations in the U.S., reducing shipping distances.
• Makes “more and more” bottles in the plants themselves, not shipping empty bottles to plants for filling.

Dasani (Owned by Coca-Cola Corporation)

• Picked light blue as the color for its bottles because recyclers prefer it.
• States two different claims for reduction of plastic body weight this year (one page says they are reducing by 20% and another says 30%)
• Parent site Coca-Cola has large section on corporate responsibility, but it does not talk about Dasani specifically.

Poland Spring, Arrowhead, Deer Park, Ozarka, and Zephyrhills (All owned by Nestle):

• Each has identical info about environmental claims.
• Has the largest home and office delivery service in the U.S. (Side note: at a previous company, we had water service through Arrowhead. They brought us at least a case of free individual sized water bottles with every order, and these bottles went fast around the office, with people hoarding the bottles in their drawers!)
• Has partnered with the Nature Conservancy for a decade, conserving 426,000 acres of natural resources.
• Uses Project WET (Water Education Teachers) to teach kids about water conservation.
• Its Eco-Shape bottle uses about 30% less plastic than the average half liter bottle.
• Five of its plants are LEED certified, and all future plants will be built to LEED specifications.
• Creates almost all their bottles on site.

Sparkletts (Owned by DS Waters of America)

• A home and office water delivery service, primarily.
• 3 and 5 gallon bottles are cleaned and reused 40 to 50 times before being recycled into other plastic products.

Crystal Geyser (Owned by Crystal Geyser Alpine Spring Water/ CG Roxane, LLC):

• Sponsors World Environment Day in the San Francisco Bay Area.
• Partners with American Forests and has planted 50,000 trees per year since 2001.
• Has decreased plastic packaging by 25% since 1990, uses recycled materials in its trays and boxes, and uses 12.5 grams of PET per half liter bottle.
• Has implemented measures to improve the efficiency of water usage during the bottling process, sort materials such as cardboard, shrink film, PET, and wood from pallets, and is updating facilities to energy efficient machinery and lighting. Uses propane or batteries for forklifts, not diesel.
• Produces its bottles on site as 6 locations in the U.S.

Evian (Owned by Danone):

• Its Water Protection Institute works to educate others about wetlands conservation and sustainable management of water resources. WPA currently has projects in Argentia, Thailand, and Nepal.
• Evian worked with the French government in 1926 to establish a protection area around the Evian water source and to limit human activity in this area. Works on local initiatives to ensure quality and sustainability in the area and in the Evian water source and watershed.
• Has worked to reduce weight of bottles, but does not give specifics.
• Pioneered use of PET in bottles.
• Starting in 2008, 1 liter and 750 ml bottles will include 25% post-consumer recycled content.
• Recycles 98% of its plastic waste.
• Is ISO14001 certified, meeting requirements of an environmental management system.
• Replaced industrial water in its conveyor belts with a recyclable solution.
• Has instituted a program that has saved 920 million gallons of water in the past five years.
• Relies on rail and barge transport in Europe to reduce CO2 emissions.

Given that this is the Greener One blog, what’s the greener bottler? This is hard to say, given that the criteria differed from site to site, and none had hard data on emissions. Using a home or office delivery service is greener than buying the same amount of bottled water, but Evian, in my opinion, provided the most specifics about their environmental improvements, though the distance to market is a negative for the American market. Like the campaign says, though, the greenest is really to take back your tap.

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

Green office roundup

There’s been a lot of buzz about green office supplies in environmental news this week, and it is easy to see why. Consider these statistics from a 2002 Green Seal report (PDF):

• 1.6 million single-use pens are discarded each year in the United States.
• 24 trees are cut down to make a ton of (virgin) printing and office paper.
• A ton of paper made from 100 percent recycled paper, as compared to virgin paper, saves the equivalent of 4,100 kilowatt-hours of energy, 7,000 gallons of water, 60 pounds of air emissions, and 3 cubic yards of landfill space.
• By sending their printer and copying cartridges for remanufacturing, U.S. businesses could save $1.5 billion and at least 100,000 barrels of oil annually.

The report went on to say “two-thirds of U.S. businesses have policies on recycling, but only 40% have policies regarding the purchase of recycled materials.” Green Seal did not have more up-to-date information about purchasing on their web site, I would hope that the percent of companies with green purchasing policies has gone up. More and more companies are looking at ways to green up, not just to show their green cred to a more caring world, but also because green purchases can have a strong impact on the bottom line.

For example, the American Bar Association has asked law firms around the country to step it up with their “Law Firm Climate Challenge,” which recognizes firms for making commitments in a variety of areas that are practical for any business. In their Law Office Guide to Energy Efficiency, the following savings are calculated from a 30% reduction in energy use (which can be achieved through best practices and switching to more energy efficient products):

Office Space	20,000 square feet
Lease Term	5 years
Energy Savings	30%
Reduces Costs	$0.60/ sq. ft. annually
Savings	$12,000
Lease-Term Savings	$60,000
Energy Consumption Avoided	600,000 kWh
Greenhouse Gas Emissions Avoided	379 metric tons of CO2

Office Depot announced Office Depot Green this week, identifying products with recycled content or Green Seal approval. Consumers and purchasing managers will still need to do some digging if they want to find the greener products, however, as any product meeting minimum criteria is included in the green line. On a personal note, I was disappointed to see the lack of fanfare for the green line on Office Depot’s web site. The only link to buying green was a tiny text link on the bottom right.

Speaking of digging deeper, the Dogwood Alliance and Forest Ethics released their report card this week, grading Corporate Express, Office Depot, FedEx Kinkos, Office Max, and Staples on their paper practices in the categories of Chain of Custody, Endangered Forests, Forest Conservation, Sustainable Management – FSC Certification, and Post-Consumer Recycled Content. Details can be found in the report, but here’s how the grades stacked up:

Corporate Express: C+
Office Depot: B-
FedEx Kinkos: B+
Office Max: D+
Staples: B+

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::

Another reason to eat organically, seasonally, locally

A lot of people talk about eating organically, seasonally and locally these days. There are a myriad of reasons to do so: supporting your local community, reducing energy costs for getting foods to market, better taste, peace of mind.

An op-ed piece in today’s New York Times offers another reason: the death of songbirds, and the build-up of pesticides in our own blood. How many people have you heard say recently that they are trying to avoid products, especially toys, made in China because of lead content? Yet Americans happily gobble up out-of-season fruits and vegetables from Latin America all through the winter, and, indeed, through the rest of the year.

The problem? Toxins, including those restricted or banned in the United States. According to the piece:

Since the 1980s, pesticide use has increased fivefold in Latin America as countries have expanded their production of nontraditional crops to fuel the demand for fresh produce during winter in North America and Europe. Rice farmers in the region use monocrotophos, methamidophos and carbofuran, all agricultural chemicals that are rated Class I toxins by the World Health Organization, are highly toxic to birds, and are either restricted or banned in the United States. In countries like Guatemala, Honduras and Ecuador, researchers have found that farmers spray their crops heavily and repeatedly with a chemical cocktail of dangerous pesticides.

The article goes on to describe migratory songbirds as moder-day canaries in coal mines. As these birds spend the winter months in Latin America, they are exposed to high levels of toxins, and are dying by the thousands as well as suffering from neurological disorders.

And the human element? Well, the news isn’t good there either. Fruits and vegetables imported from Latin America are three times more likely to violate EPA standards for pesticide residues, and the CDC reports that most Americans have traces of pesticides in their blood. Think too of the people, animals, and water supplies affected in the countries where this produce is grown.

Now, I am lucky to live in California where eating seasonally and locally is easy and full of variety. However, I spent last year living in Central Europe where eating seasonally is a way of life. Summer was wonderful, with the markets overflowing with gorgeous fruits and vegetables. In the winter, we had lots of root vegetables, and fruits like apples. Sure, out-of-season produce was available, mostly imported from Africa, but it was very costly, had traveled thousands of miles, and frankly, just didn’t look that good. I’ll never forget my shock of seeing a tiny packet of green beans being sold for around $8. I really didn’t miss a thing by eating seasonally, and each season brought a new joy. Who knew I could get so excited about asparagus?

:: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: :: ::