Where do people expect all the bottled water they buy comes from?
Michigan OKs Nestlé Water Extraction, Despite Public Comments Against It
61–70 of 140 posts
Re: Michigan OKs Nestlé Water Extraction, Despite Public Comments Against It
#62The Muskegon River (the main drainage for the area) has a discharge of 1,450 cubic feet per second at Evart, Michigan (where this facility is located). That is about 11,000 gallons per second, or about 937 million gallons per day. The facility proposes to pump about half a millon gallons per day. Tempest, meet teapot. https://waterdata.usgs.gov/mi/nwis/current/?type=flow
Bernie Madoff's $68.5 billion ponzi scheme was a MERE 0.09% of the world's $78.3 trillion GDP.
Re: Michigan OKs Nestlé Water Extraction, Despite Public Comments Against It
#63Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you seriously comparing pumping 1/2000 of the water that normally goes down the local river with the holocaust or slavery?
I don't think @banach did that. The point of the quote was to point out that laws aren't necessarily right. And this point you keep making about it only being a small % of the total water isn't very convincing. I'm sure you would mind if I embezzled 1/2000th of Michigan's GDP.
> I don't think @banach did that.
I think he clearly did do that.
> And this point you keep making about it only being a small % of the total water isn't very convincing.
I'm sorry you don't find arithmetic convincing, but there's not much I can do about that.
> I'm sure you would mind if I embezzled 1/2000th of Michigan's GDP.
Now you're wandering off into non sequitur.
Re: Michigan OKs Nestlé Water Extraction, Despite Public Comments Against It
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you seriously comparing pumping 1/2000 of the water that normally goes down the local river with the holocaust or slavery?
They were accurately pointing out that conflating legal with ethical is not just incorrect but dangerous. They were not comparing the activities.
> They were accurately pointing out that conflating legal with ethical is not just incorrect but dangerous.
Equating the legal system of Michigan with the legal system of Nazi Germany is ludicrously incorrect.
Re: Michigan OKs Nestlé Water Extraction, Despite Public Comments Against It
#65Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think @banach did that. The point of the quote was to point out that laws aren't necessarily right. And this point you keep making about it only being a small % of the total water isn't very convincing. I'm sure you would mind if I embezzled 1/2000th of Michigan's GDP.
> I don't think @banach did that. I think he clearly did do that. > And this point you keep making about it only being a small % of the total water isn't very convincing. I'm sorry you don't find arithmetic convincing, but there's not much I can do about that. > I'm sure you would mind if I embezzled 1/2000th of Michigan's GDP. Now you're wandering off into non sequitur.
This is arguing dishonestly, as you presumably understand the difference between using examples to illustrate a principle, and a direct comparison. Why not just address the point, instead of being “outraged” by his presentation?
Re: Michigan OKs Nestlé Water Extraction, Despite Public Comments Against It
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you seriously comparing pumping 1/2000 of the water that normally goes down the local river with the holocaust or slavery?
I don't think @banach did that. The point of the quote was to point out that laws aren't necessarily right. And this point you keep making about it only being a small % of the total water isn't very convincing. I'm sure you would mind if I embezzled 1/2000th of Michigan's GDP.
Embezzling is a poor comparison. This is Nestle getting legal permits to pull from a well.
A better comparison would be if you invoiced Michigan for 1/2000th of their GDP and the state and local governments paid it. In that case, I'm fine with it.
Re: Michigan OKs Nestlé Water Extraction, Despite Public Comments Against It
#67Money talks.
Source?
Re: Michigan OKs Nestlé Water Extraction, Despite Public Comments Against It
#68You’ll read a lot of comments on this, both good and bad. A lot of passionate arguments have been made on both sides. I have two things to add to it—and feel free to take them as you will. People I know in the area with wells had them go dry after the nestle plant opened. These were wells that had previously been high (for wells) throughout, just drying up. The plant also got special tax rebates and other incentives…
> People I know in the area with wells had them go dry after the nestle plant opened. These were wells that had previously been high (for wells) throughout, just drying up. That (if true) is a legitimate complaint and Nestle should make them whole. Edit: as someone else noted, this is less than one swimming pool's worth of water per day. If wells are going dry because of that, they were marginal at best.
> Edit: as someone else noted, this is less than one swimming pool's worth of water per day.
We're talking an olympic size swimming pool @660k gals each day, not the backyard type which is probably 1/6 the size [1].
Also rates matter. It's not how much is there, it's the depletion rate - recharge rate (families probably don't use nearly that much per day, so over time it would be many many olympic sized swimming pools).
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic-size_swimming_pool
Re: Michigan OKs Nestlé Water Extraction, Despite Public Comments Against It
#69You’ll read a lot of comments on this, both good and bad. A lot of passionate arguments have been made on both sides. I have two things to add to it—and feel free to take them as you will. People I know in the area with wells had them go dry after the nestle plant opened. These were wells that had previously been high (for wells) throughout, just drying up. The plant also got special tax rebates and other incentives…
> People I know in the area with wells had them go dry after the nestle plant opened. These were wells that had previously been high (for wells) throughout, just drying up. That (if true) is a legitimate complaint and Nestle should make them whole. Edit: as someone else noted, this is less than one swimming pool's worth of water per day. If wells are going dry because of that, they were marginal at best.
Swimming pools are huge and not often emptied. Homes usually pay ~$6,000 to fill a pool. 576,000 gallons / day is ~6000 people's daily usage.
Wells have specific recovery rates. I don't know whether the amount they're pumping will exceed that rate-- environmental studies should include that information.
Re: Michigan OKs Nestlé Water Extraction, Despite Public Comments Against It
#70Earlier quoted context omitted.
Isn't that apples and oranges, comparing the numbers like that? The river is connected to the water table, sure, but surely the issue is more complicated than that?
I don't see how it could be more complicated. Any groundwater that isn't pumped out and used is going to eventually go down the river, right? Otherwise the area would be underwater. Yeah, there are places where groundwater enters the aquifer from long distances away. Michigan is not one of those places. It gets plenty of precipitation.
“Eventually” is quite the weasel word in this context. Yes, eventually it will, for values of eventually which may exceed the average human lifespan.