Student Eye Opener

Cheers to Dewey Crowley for his eye-opening article in the Bowdoin College paper The Bowdoin Orient. His piece on bottled water should be mandatory reading for anyone who wants the skinny on bottled water.

He notes:

“We hear a lot of complaints against the bottled water industry. However, we rarely hear about the thousands of cases of water sent from Polar Beverages to help victims of Katrina, the hundreds of cases sent to UMass Amherst when their public water supply was contaminated and the numerous cases donated to Bowdoin’s Relay For Life.”

Very true. Crowley also points out some less recognized benefits that bottled water companies have on communities. He explains:

“Poland Springs has invested in Maine in good and bad economic times. As mentioned earlier, they employ 800 Maine residents with good job benefits and have invested almost half a billion dollars of capital in Maine since 1992. They pay $40 million annually in payroll and $65 million to Maine vendors.”

The piece offers many other insights. Check it out!

Is Beer Next?

In my prior post on bottled water bans on campus I asked:  If greens can get water banned, what next?  Students over 21 might be upset to learn that some people are even going after beer!  One news story says beer containers are also suspect!  It suggests that trace levels of the chemical Bisphenol A (BPA) can leach out of the container and make you sick (beyond the possible hangover for over indulging!).

In reality, the risks associated with trace levels of BPA from food containers are slim to none, according to the Food and Drug Administration and several scientific panels.  In fact, trace levels BPA found in containers pose a much lower risk of “endocrine disruption” than does a tablespoon of soy milk—i.e., not much at all.  In any case, single serving plastic water bottles are made from plastics that do not contain BPA, so claims suggesting exposure through those products are really off the mark.

Academic Nanny State

Both universities and elementary schools are going after bottled water, as if that were the greatest threat facing students today! At the grade and high school levels, officials are removing bottled water from vending machines and cafeterias, leading students toward drinks with calories. Of course these are fine in moderation, but why deny a healthy option like water? Students supposedly would drink from water fountains, which as I point out on enjoybottledwater.org are not always sanitary or appetizing.

A school in Madison, Connecticut is learning the hard way. It has recently been revealed that the water coming from one school’s water fountains has contained excess levels of uranium for a couple years. While the public health impacts are probably pretty low, people don’t want their children drinking that water. The unfortunate problem with drinking water fountains in Madison schools offers yet another example of the importance of bottled water. Tap water is generally very safe. But there are times when people would rather drink bottled water, such as in this case.

But soon many schools will deny that option! Currently, in Ontario Canada, many schools are looking into total bans on bottled water and maybe even other drinks in plastic bottles. I sure hope they are making sure their tap water is a good quality. Many school officials there complain that it comes out a rusty brown.

This week there are stories in the press regarding efforts in Missouri’s Washington University to remove bottled water as an option for students. Ironically, much of the increase in bottled water in the past several years has simply replaced drinking of caffeine and/or sugar-containing drinks. Denying the option to buy bottled water is likely to increase consumption other bottled drinks, which may add onto extra pounds that students gain during college. It will also make it more difficult for students engaged in sports to stay hydrated.

Similar university bans on bottled water are being pushed or implemented at Brandeis University; Cornell University; Brown University (RI); University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; Oklahoma State University; Southwestern; Clark University (AR); the University of Texas-Southwestern; the State University of New York in Buffalo; University of California, San Diego; University of New Mexico and many more!

Denying consumers the opportunity to choose a healthy beverage on campuses or anywhere else is simply foolish and a bit frightening. After all if they continue to succeed in banning water, what will they go after next?

Pur Hype

The company producing Pur Filters is touting the fact that its filters can remove trace pharmaceuticals and even some (but they don’t guarantee it will get all) of the cryptosporidium parasite sometimes found in tap water. Similarly, a company called Freshwaters is promoting the Watergeeks Filtered Sports Bottle. Both ad campaigns capitalize on the green’s campaign against bottled water, which as CEI points out on www.enjoybottledwater.org, is based on misinformation.

Nonetheless, now that the greens have managed to scare and misinform people about bottled water, the market is responding. It shows how the marketplace is well equipped to meet consumer demands, even if they are ill-informed. While there is no evidence that the trace chemicals found in tap or bottled water pose a serious problem, the key is consumer should have options–free of taxes and regulations.

Legislators are denying consumers choice when it comes to bottled water, imposing taxes and regualtions because of green hype. Contrary to the environmentalist claims, CEI demonstrates on www.enjoybottledwater.org that bottled water has a better safety record than tap water. In fact, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Environmental Protection Agency both recommend bottled water for people with compromised immune systems because it is more reliable than tap water. Moreover, bottled water containers are extremely energy efficient to produce, lightweight for transport, and they represent a sanitary vehicle for storing emergency water supplies.

It is not clear that refillable containers with filters–such as the aluminum ones that are becoming popular–are more energy efficient over their lifecycle because they require much more energy to produce and likely must be reused many times before produce net energy savings. In addition, and filters must be kept clean and disposed. The simply fact is, every product has its trade offs. Consumers should have choices free of arbitrary taxes and regulations.