I don’t know what’s immoral, but I do know that it’s a huge friggin’ waste of money.
Again, not if your water tastes like mine does. Hell, my aunt’s water tastes like rotten eggs, because there’s so much sulfar in it. You want to drink sulfar flavored water, be my guest.
Why, then, did you post in a thread that uses the word moral?
So’s a can of Coke. It’s much more expensive than a liter and even more so than a store brand soda.
I used to live on an island in Puget Sound with a system of septic tanks. It made me a huge fan of bottled water.
I am a hypocrite :-}
Personally I think that in most, but not all, circumstances bottled water is a con and a waste of resources, but I think the same about a lot of products.
I really object to paying $7.00 (£3.50) for a bottle of tap water in a restaurant.
I think there’s a good case to be made for what these groups are saying. Note that they are not trying to prohibit the bottling of water, only asking their own members and denominations to look at the issue and refrain from buying bottled water for themselves where it isn’t necessary. If the water in Daisani comes from third world sources that can’t really afford to give up their water, then there are certainly sound moral reasons for boycotting it, just like people boycott rainforest woods and products of sweatshop labor.
A bigger concern for these groups, however, seems to be the privatization of basic resources. It is not the same thing when large corporations sell water to a community as when the municipality does. Governments have a duty to provide clean water to their population. Most do this by selling it at a very low cost, generally through highly regulated utilities which are granted a protected monopoly in order to provide this service.
Private corporations like Coca-Cola are under no obligation to ensure that water is universally distributed at low cost. In a place such as the US, this is of negligible concern, since government already ensures that all people have access to water. In a third-world country, however, there is much greater risk. The availability of commercially bottled water relieves pressure on the local government to invest in providing clean water as a public utility. Since the availability of bottled water is, of course, income dependent, those most able to affect public policy are least dependent on public supply of water. Bottled water therefore effectively competes against publicly supplied water in countries where the public supply is not yet fully available or is at risk.
Furthermore, if people at all economic levels begin to see commercial bottling as the “natural” mode of water distribution, there will be less pressure on governments to ensure adequate public supply of water even from those who need it and from those in countries like the US who can influence third-world policies through aid and private spending.
None of this is to claim that Coca-Cola or other bottlers are necessarily acting immorally in following the market demand for bottled water–it’s just what corporations do. (Although the governments who sell them water or may be profiting immorally.) It is simply pointing out economic facts that can reasonably be said to have moral weight for people in making purchasing decisions.
I personally have no idea what actual effect bottled water has on the supply of clean water in the third world, but I certainly think these arguments are valid and cannot be dismissed casually.
I don’t think that’s what they are saying here. I didn’t see anywhere in the article where it says Dasani (or whomever) is bottling African water and selling it here. In fact, on the face of it, that seems to be a ridiculous concept. They are calling for a boycott of this water not because of where it comes from but instead because these companies are selling a natural resource the think should be “free” (read, provided by the government).
Fine, but in some third world countries, the governments do not do this. So the people there should go thirsty because it is “immoral” for corporations to meet this need?
No, it doesn’t. The government has obviously abdicated its reponsibility. The government officials are too busy lining their own pockets, fighting rebelts, etc., to provide basic services. Since there is no government action in this area, it is either have these companies provide water or people must depend on far inferior sources of water.
Again, it does not. You assume these governments are both capable and willing to provide water. They are not.
I certainly don’t think anyone is bottling water in Africa to sell here. What I wrote was very unclear; I apologize. I suspect that water in rural areas which depend on wells and groundwater for drinking and agriculture may be bottled to sell in nearby urban areas which don’t need it.
I’m sure there some areas where there is no source of potable water besides bottlers and no government willing or able to supply it as an alternative, but I doubt it is commonly that black and white. In many areas, (such as where I live in the US), there is ample clean well water available to anyone with a shovel, but only if it doesn’t get pumped out and sold to (in my case) Denver. Breweries and other industries most certainly do compete against local utilities as well as well-owners for access to water. If a bottling plant were set up in my area, it would drive the price of tap water through the roof, because the aquifer is only so big.
I also do not believe the world is divided into prosperous industrialized nations and corrupt failed states. You say:
and
Which governments are you talking about here? All third-world governments? Every government where people are in danger of not having access to enough water? (Does that include Colorado?) You don’t believe there is any place where the government is trying to supply water to as many of its people as possible, but has to balance the cost of doing so against other concerns, and where the availability of bottled water to those who can afford it might reduce the pressure to provide it to everyone? Do you have a cite that all countries with shortages of drinking water are corrupt dictatorships?
I’d also like to point out that you make a big assumption with:
Just how inferior is this particular source of water you’re talking about? A public well that has moderate levels of arsenic and is occasionally susceptible to bacterial contamination from run-off but that is free to all may save far more lives than purified bottled water that is only available to those with well-paying jobs. Which source is really superior?
Yeah…When I lived in Ithaca, there were areas where the water (presumably from a well?) was like that. I remember visiting one person’s house and thought, “I simply could not live in this place.” That would be way up on there on the list of things that make a place completely unacceptable.
I have no idea how any one could “prove” that bottled water is no cleaner than tap water. Tap water and bottled water are both variable in their properties based on the municipality providing the tap water, the source the municipality uses, the source the bottler uses, and the purification process the bottler uses.
With thousands of municipalities providing drinking water and dozens of bottled water producers in the United States, I have a serious doubt that Penn and Teller actually went into a detailed, exhaustive, and empirical study that would enable them to make any sort of claim about the relative cleanliness of bottled water in its entirety.
I’m also curious about the claim that bottled water is a “con.” How exactly is it a con?
Even if it isn’t cleaner, cleanliness in water is actually quite different from what most people identify as “taste” in water. Water can be chemically very clean and taste horrible, and it can likewise be relatively “dirty” and taste just fine. Personal preference also has to weigh in there, too.
If someone likes the taste of bottled water more, and they’re willing to pay a premium for it, I fail to see how any one is being conned. What’s the difference between Heinz’s Ketchup and a generic supermarket label ketchup? I’m willing to bet not much, I’ve never noticed much myself. But if someone is willing to pay the premium on the name brand ketchup, I don’t think they’re being conned, they’re paying a higher price for a preferred product.
Bottled water is also sold in singles in convenience stores where it is kept refrigerated. If you’re on the way home from the gym or something, that’s a convenience purchase, and just because it costs more than the water out of your tap at home doesn’t mean you’re being conned. It means you’re paying a little bit more for water that is sold in a convenient quantity with convenient packaging and at a pleasant temperature.
I don’t see how selling bottled water in the United States is exploiting the poor. If anything, I think it exploits the rich. Its a matter of convenience as Martin Hyde points out.
I also rarely ever buy plain bottled water. (I prefer it mixed into soft drinks, coffee or green tea.) I am also fortunate to live in an area where my tap water is drinkable. But in areas where it is not drinkable, while it would be nice if government could achieve the economies of scale that would ensure potable water, if the market can achieve those efficiencies at less cost, then let the market work its magic and the government can devote its limited resources to other priorities.
Many parts of the world do lack the infrastructure to ensure potable water. If ‘free’ water is available, it usually requires not so free fuel to boil and purify the water. I can see bottled water being cheaper in those circumstances.
If companies bottling the water are tapping into aquifers at the expense of other users without compensation, a case for immorality could be made, but I dont see that mentioned in the article. I am sure it occurs, but I think the negative publicity and relations would discourage the practice.
The socialist in me hopes that companies are not generating excessive profits from the sale of water, and would rather see private co-ops doing the sales than multinationals, but the libertarian in me supports the market. If they are more efficient that government, then it would be immoral to not allow them to sell water.
No, but it is immortal! 
What? Have you ever heard of a bottle spoiling on the shelf?!
If you’re expecting more than what they’re providing, then you would consider it a scam. I live in a place that is pretty much a desert. The tap water we get is probably fine to drink; it just doesn’t taste very good. I think a lot of it comes from out of the area. For awhile I was filtering it myself, which improved the taste. Then I read some news articles that suggested there was some concern over groundwater contamination from a nearby government facility. So I figured why go to the trouble of purchasing filters and filtering the tap water myself, AND take a chance on possible contamination, when I can just buy bottled water? It tastes better than tap water, is more convenient if I want to take water with me on trips, and I don’t have to wash glasses at home. Frankly, I don’t care if it’s just filtered tap water; I’m paying for the service of having the water filtered and put into bottles for me. And I don’t have to worry about the local contamination problem. If you think bottled water is somehow magic, then I can see being disappointed. I never expected it to be more than what it is.
Actually, most bottled water has expiration dates these days (usually on the order of two years from arrival at store, but still).
I just thought of a new aspect to this over the weekend…some of us, even in a large city in the US, do not live where there is safe tap water, due to having an old house with lead pipes. We have replaced our pipes with copper, but the intake pipe for the village water supply is lead. Not too much of a concern for the adults, but for mixing baby formula, bottled water is pretty important. I’m sure there are plenty of people who live around me who cannot afford to get all of their pipes replaced, and for them, the lead is a real danger. This makes me feel even more strongly that the ability to buy safe water at a reasonable price is a real service for people without other access to it.
Worst. Roommate. Ever.
How, exactly, would it “expire”?
I think it has to do with the breakdown of the plastic it is bottled in, not the water itself.