Content provided in partnership with
Message in a bottle: despite the hype, bottled water is neither cleaner nor greener than tap water
E: The Environmental Magazine, Sept-Oct, 2003 by Brian Howard
Much of the opposition to water bottlers has been directed at Nestle Waters North America, which taps around 75 different U.S. spring sites. A spokesperson for the corporation, Jane Lazgin, says most communities welcome the jobs and revenue brought by bottling operations. Even so, Nestle lost several bids to set up bottling plants in the Midwest due to intense opposition. Eventually, for its Ice Mountain brand, Nestle built a $100 million plant capable of bottling 260 million gallons of water a year from an aquifer in Michigan's rural Mecosta County, which is about 60 miles north of Grand Rapids. Nestle paid around $150 for permits and received substantial tax breaks.
- Most Popular Articles in News
- The Ten Best Laptop bags
- Tata plans cheapest-ever car for Indian market
- GLOBALIZATION AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF UNDERDEVELOPMENT OF THE THIRD WORLD
- Corn is good for you; Corn is not only a tasty treat, but also a cereal that ...
- THE 50 BEST STYLISH HANDBAGS TO CARRY
- More »
Local activists, mobilized by the newly formed Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation, protested the plant on the grounds that the facility would take too heavy a toll on the surrounding environment and quality of life. Although Nestle claims it conducted "exhaustive studies for nearly two years to ensure that the plant does not deplete water sources or harm the ecosystem," the activists pointed out that the state has no authority to limit the amount of water that is actually removed.
Three Native American tribes sued the state on the basis that rivers, and ultimately, the Great Lakes, would be affected. Michigan Citizens for Water Conservation and a few local residents also filed a lawsuit, claiming that the Mecosta operations violate state and federal water rights. The controversy became a hot topic during the 2002 gubernatorial election. As Grist reported, "Both major party candidates publicly and repeatedly expressed their resolve to modernize state water policy to block other multinational corporations from privatizing, bottling and selling hundreds of millions of gallons of Michigan's groundwater annually across state lines." A ruling on the case is expected soon, and is believed to have far-reaching ramifications.
In Florida, Nestle angered many people, including the group Save Our Springs, when it took over Crystal Spring, which is near Tampa. The company fenced out the public, which had enjoyed the water for generations. After five years of bottling operations, the spring level has dropped. Some officals are worried, since the spring feeds the source of Tampa's water. Nestle blames the change on dry spells and local development.
Local residents have also fought Nestle in rural northeast Texas, where they complain that a well across the street front the company's bottling site went dry five days after Nestle began operations. Nestle's Lazgin claims that well dried up because it was old and shallow, and that it was not on the same aquifer as the bottling plant. Critics counter that aquifer geology is a fairly subjective science. The Texas Supreme Court ruled in favor of Nestle under the state's "rule of capture." Save Our Springs President Terri Wolfe told The Northwestern, "The poor people whose wells run dry because of [bottlers] can't afford that water."
What's the Quencher?
