Michigan OKs Nestlé Water Extraction, Despite Public Comments Against It • Hacker News Board

Re: Michigan OKs Nestlé Water Extraction, Despite Public Comments Against It

#121

Post by toomanybeersies » Thu, Apr 05, 2018, 4:43 AM UTC

username223 wrote: post #108

perceptor wrote: post #95

I feel like Nestle in particular draws heat for two reasons: 1) They are a global multinational and don't demonstrate much sympathy for local environmental issues 2) They are specifically bottling water , which seems wasteful as a practice in general, adds minimal value, etc. I can't speak knowledgeably about #1 -- Nestle's track record probably speaks for itself -- but I do wonder about #2. If a Anheuser Busch or Co…

Bottled water is just terrible. First, the fact that potable municipal water is so cheap that you can use a gallon of it to make your poop disappear is a miracle of modern civilization. Second, putting that same water in plastic bottles, driving it around the country, and selling it for $1-2/liter creates all sorts of environmental damage for absolutely no benefit. Please, people, celebrate the benefits of living in…

It seems to be a very American thing to drink bottled water when there's perfectly fine water in the tap (unless you live in Flint, MI).

I buy bottled water maybe once a fortnight, if that. The only time I buy it is if I'm out and about and don't have a ready supply of water. I buy the cheapest water I can get, which I'm fairly sure is bottled in the city straight from municipal supply.

I find the concept of buying water like San Pellegrino to be so absurd. There's all this perfectly fine water to drink here, and you ship it from the other side of the world? It's the highest form of wastefulness.

Re: Michigan OKs Nestlé Water Extraction, Despite Public Comments Against It

#122

Post by dang » Thu, Apr 05, 2018, 4:53 AM UTC

Turing_Machine wrote: post #101

domevent wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Eventually” is quite the weasel word in this context. Yes, eventually it will, for values of eventually which may exceed the average human lifespan.

> Yes, eventually it will, for values of eventually which may exceed the average human lifespan. Pure nonsense.

Please don't break the site guidelines like this, regardless of how nonsensical some other comment is.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Michigan OKs Nestlé Water Extraction, Despite Public Comments Against It

#123

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Apr 05, 2018, 4:56 AM UTC

portofcall wrote: post #118

Turing_Machine wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not "misinterpreting" anything, aggressively or otherwise. He is lumping all states together as "the state", giving an example of some unethical states, and arguing from that that no state is ethical, or pays any attention to ethical concerns. That argument is pure garbage.

You said He is arguing that the government of Michigan's laws are bad because the Nazis had bad laws. Which simply isn’t true. He actually said outright: If you use the state as a metric for ethics you'll end up disappointed. Now, you may think that’s garbage, but you’re not free to pretend that he said completely different things he didn’t actually say. Remember how you hate inaccuracy? Do you think that what you we…

[deleted]

Re: Michigan OKs Nestlé Water Extraction, Despite Public Comments Against It

#124

Post by dang » Thu, Apr 05, 2018, 5:06 AM UTC

castis wrote: post #32

ucaetano wrote: post #12

> Nestlé's request to the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality to pump 576,000 gallons of water each day For perspective, all of Michigan uses 9 billion gallons of water each day. Nestle will be using 0.006% of what the state uses. Looking just at groundwater, Michigan uses 690 million gallons of water per day. Nestle will be using 0.08% of what the state uses. This is irrelevant. And I'm glad the personal op…

Maybe their opinions were based on principle. I know you do not care, but your dismissal of 80k people you don't and will never know says volumes about you as a person.

Personal attacks are not allowed on HN, regardless of how wrong another commenter may be. We ban accounts that do this, so would you please not post like this again?

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Michigan OKs Nestlé Water Extraction, Despite Public Comments Against It

#125

Post by cameldrv » Thu, Apr 05, 2018, 6:01 AM UTC

I know that we live in an outrage culture that doesn't respect orders of magnitude, but "he who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense"[1].

They propose to withdraw 0.5E6 gal/day. We have data for the state of Michigan (in 2004, but probably not too much different today)[2] If we're only talking about ground water, industrial is 89.1E6, irrigation is 197E6, and electric generation is 4.1E6 usage. Why is it OK for these uses of ground water, but not the much much higher value use of water that actual human beings drink? I suppose that not many people are dipping their flow meter into the power plant's water main and noticing the massive quantities of water that they use (and then return to the environment, just like Nestle). They do see the case of bottled water on the shelf though and get pissed off that some company is making money selling the fruits of a public resource.

To put it in perspective, in all of Michigan, total water usage is 11E9 gal/day. Nestle wants to use 0.5E6 gal/day. The population of Michigan is about 10E6, so they propose to make a giant factory that uses the same amount of water as 500 people. Somehow a giant plant using the same amount of water as 500 people attracts 80,000 negative comments. Go figure.

[1] http://www-formal.stanford.edu/jmc/progress/

[2] http://msue.anr.msu.edu/resources/water_withdrawals_and_wate...

Re: Michigan OKs Nestlé Water Extraction, Despite Public Comments Against It

#126

Post by anigbrowl » Thu, Apr 05, 2018, 6:54 AM UTC

Turing_Machine wrote: post #42

anigbrowl wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's nice for Nestle, but ignores the fact that Flint is still having water quality problems and replacement of the lead-tainted pipes won't be complete until 2020. It's entirely reasonable that citizens would like their government to prioritize their wellbeing at the expense of regular procedure, considering that the Flint water crisis was a product of government error to start with.

This facility is over a hundred miles from Flint, and on a completely different watershed. In fact, the watershed drains into a completely different Great Lake (Lake Michigan rather than Lake Huron).

I thought I was clear that I consider it a political rather than a hydrological problem.

Re: Michigan OKs Nestlé Water Extraction, Despite Public Comments Against It

#127

Post by throw2016 » Thu, Apr 05, 2018, 8:14 AM UTC

cameldrv wrote: post #125

I know that we live in an outrage culture that doesn't respect orders of magnitude, but "he who refuses to do arithmetic is doomed to talk nonsense"[1]. They propose to withdraw 0.5E6 gal/day. We have data for the state of Michigan (in 2004, but probably not too much different today)[2] If we're only talking about ground water, industrial is 89.1E6, irrigation is 197E6, and electric generation is 4.1E6 usage. Why is…

The issue is much more nuanced than that but nice job positioning protest, dissent and citizen concern ie basic democracy as 'outrage culture'. [1]

The bigger debate is about exploitation of natural resources , negatively impacting the local community and environment [2] corporate capture, people in neighboring towns not able to access clean water, all things that the average citizen is negatively impacted by.

Nestle, corporate shills and those paid to defend it defending it is logical. Individuals with no stake seeking to defend Nestle on the basis on volume extracted based entirely on Nestle's figures with no regulatory framework to independently verify actual extraction on the other hand is not.

Your first link is a generic article on progress and sustainability. The second does not show how much water is extracted by Nestle and its impact on the local environment and is based on 'self reported' figures. Here are far more updated perspectives on the issue.

[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2017-09-21/nestl-mak...

[2] https://www.pri.org/stories/2018-02-04/tiny-michigan-town-wa...

Re: Michigan OKs Nestlé Water Extraction, Despite Public Comments Against It

#128

Post by maxerickson » Thu, Apr 05, 2018, 12:09 PM UTC

Turing_Machine wrote: post #111

maxerickson wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My city (in Michigan) charges large users of water 0.2 cents per gallon (~$2 per thousand, they charge small users more). That's for treated, metered tap water that they pump into a tower. So the cost includes distribution and such. Another town in Michigan charges something like 0.8 cents per gallon. Under the new permit, Nestle will be pumping about 210 million gallons a year. At the going rate for clean water in M…

The difference is that Nestle is drilling and maintaining its own well, purifying the water itself, and distributing the water itself. All of those costs are factored in to what your city charges for water (and it's breathtaking just how expensive a network of pipes to every single house is). I don't know what a fair price in Michigan for raw, untreated, drill-pump-and-distribute it yourself groundwater might be. I'd…

My goal was to sketch a ceiling.

Re: Michigan OKs Nestlé Water Extraction, Despite Public Comments Against It

#129

Post by knightofmars » Thu, Apr 05, 2018, 12:42 PM UTC

pasbesoin wrote: post #82

a2tech wrote: post #35

You’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…

I don't know specifically about this Nestle plant -- although they are shits for going after limited water resources in the Shasta watershed in California. But as to various forms of high-capacity wells in general, in neighboring Wisconsin, not only are other pre-existing wells at risk from this -- which the Republican state government continues to seek to reduce regulation of and control over, meaning planning and e…

I'm from Wisconsin as well and agree completely. The conservatives haven't been conservative in this state for many years. They're just Super PAC and special interest representatives running under the flag of the Republican party.

Re: Michigan OKs Nestlé Water Extraction, Despite Public Comments Against It

#130

Post by zzzeek » Thu, Apr 05, 2018, 12:50 PM UTC

Turing_Machine wrote: post #110

zzzeek wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> approving this well is a technical environmental decision, and shouldn't depend on how much people scream. That's completely incorrect because the state is run by politically elected leadership who ultimately answer to the people. If the people hated Nestle because its factories were painted green, they have the right to complain and ultimately vote for leadership that would disallow Nestle to paint their factories…

> If the people hated Nestle because its factories were painted green, they have the right to complain and ultimately vote for leadership that would disallow Nestle to paint their factories green. What if they didn't like Nestle hiring black people? You have the right to complain, yes. That doesn't mean you automatically get your way. Not even if everyone votes for it.

again, the Civil Rights Act was passed by a politically elected congress.

Not sure why everyone is so upset by my post that essentially is reiterating, "the people have a right to be heard and they ultimately elect how their town/state/country is run".