Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

California orders bottled water firm to stop drawing from natural springs

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 68 posts

Re: California orders bottled water firm to stop drawing from natural springs

#21

Post by dragonwriter »

Georgelemental wrote: post #12
lnxg33k1 wrote: post #7

We need to stop giving money to bottled water company, so to stop them giving the means and the reason to lobby against water being a human right, it is the job of a government to make sure that the infrastructure for clean water is present, and funded through taxes, to benefit any and all, and as always fuck nestle… and the other water companies

> Water being a human right Human need ≠ human right. By definition, a limited resource cannot be a natural right.

> Human need ≠ human right. By definition, a limited resource cannot be a natural right.

Rights aren’t natural, that’s a quasi-religious fiction invoked as a thought-terminating cliché to avoid debate over political ideology, and the bounds you state are simply the dogma of a particular political sect fond of the “natural rights” evasion.

Human rights are a matter determined by the conscience of humans, and (while not explicitly called out there), water seems to fall squarely within the broad international consensus on what constitutes “human rights” expressed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, especially Article 25.

Re: California orders bottled water firm to stop drawing from natural springs

#22

Post by troll_v_bridge »

nsonha wrote: post #19
xattt wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bottling water removes it from the local water cycle. If you are watering and showering, that water stays relatively local and ends up coming back into the local water system maintaining the local water table. If you are bottling water, you are effectively removing it from the local “water system” with no chance of it ever replenishing the source. Irrigation wells are not ideal either, and may be comparable in terms…

what is "local water"? The whole thing about water is that it flows. There isn't a magic property that bound water to a geographic localtion. Like when it rains, is it "local" cloud?

Helpful terms:

Water table https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_table

Watershed https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Watershed_management

Re: California orders bottled water firm to stop drawing from natural springs

#23

Post by Aerroon »

Georgelemental wrote: post #16
dietr1ch wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So how's the argument that water is technically limited is enough to start selling it for corporate profit?

In fact, I don't think corporations should be able to exploit a commons (like a stream) for profit without compensating the community.

They do compensate the community.

First, they make goods available: bottled water.

Second, they buy the land and/or water rights to use them.

Re: California orders bottled water firm to stop drawing from natural springs

#24

Post by Aerroon »

arwineap wrote: post #20
nsonha wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

what is "local water"? The whole thing about water is that it flows. There isn't a magic property that bound water to a geographic localtion. Like when it rains, is it "local" cloud?

Most Rivers flow through geographic locales, and generally their path is static There's not a whole lot of risk that the Seine will start flowing through the US The "local" clouds also usually follow a pattern, this is why my local mountains get snow replacing every year, which is the source of my local rivers However a bottling company could easily ship bottled water to a location that is likely never going to retur…

Where does that local water come from? Rain.

Where did the rain cloud get the water? It evaporated, likely from the ocean.

How did the water get into the ocean? It flowed down from lakes into rivers etc.

The local water table might fall, but the water itself is hardly local unless you're drilling for it.

Re: California orders bottled water firm to stop drawing from natural springs

#25

Post by citrin_ru »

xattt wrote: post #6
rudolph9 wrote: post #3

Do bottling water actually consume a significant amount water vs like an average size farm? I personally thing bottled water is generally pretty unnecessary and really wasteful to transport but I can’t help think the actual amount of water given people are drinking it not watering plants or showering with it is relatively small?

Bottling water removes it from the local water cycle. If you are watering and showering, that water stays relatively local and ends up coming back into the local water system maintaining the local water table. If you are bottling water, you are effectively removing it from the local “water system” with no chance of it ever replenishing the source. Irrigation wells are not ideal either, and may be comparable in terms…

Significant fraction of water spent to water plants evaporates and then falls as rain, usually far away, so it doesn’t stay in a local water system either.

Re: California orders bottled water firm to stop drawing from natural springs

#26

Post by ipaddr »

xattt wrote: post #6
rudolph9 wrote: post #3

Do bottling water actually consume a significant amount water vs like an average size farm? I personally thing bottled water is generally pretty unnecessary and really wasteful to transport but I can’t help think the actual amount of water given people are drinking it not watering plants or showering with it is relatively small?

Bottling water removes it from the local water cycle. If you are watering and showering, that water stays relatively local and ends up coming back into the local water system maintaining the local water table. If you are bottling water, you are effectively removing it from the local “water system” with no chance of it ever replenishing the source. Irrigation wells are not ideal either, and may be comparable in terms…

Do you realize your water comes from the ocean through rain. It replenishes itself everytime it rains. You are on an island in the ocean? In your case companies are using the allure of locale to sell more bottles by claiming the water is purer in your area because of the lack of industry.

Re: California orders bottled water firm to stop drawing from natural springs

#27

Post by Aerroon »

klyrs wrote: post #11
rudolph9 wrote: post #3

Do bottling water actually consume a significant amount water vs like an average size farm? I personally thing bottled water is generally pretty unnecessary and really wasteful to transport but I can’t help think the actual amount of water given people are drinking it not watering plants or showering with it is relatively small?

Many blame Nestlé as the root cause of the Flint water crisis: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/sep/29/nestle-pays-... The question isn't if farming is technically worse on a global scale, it's whether each individual aquifer can sustain its output.

That article is absurd.

It opens with a mother talking about how she uses bottled water to bathe her child, because the tap water is polluted.Then it goes on to say that residents don't like that Nestle gets to bottle water in the area while their tap water sucks.

I don't see how these two points are related.

This sounds like a problem of incompetent politicians and officials that can't maintain water infrastructure. If anything they should be thankful companies like Nestle exist so that there's at least some source of clean drinking water for them since the city seems incapable of providing it.

Re: California orders bottled water firm to stop drawing from natural springs

#28

Post by em-bee »

Georgelemental wrote: post #12
lnxg33k1 wrote: post #7

We need to stop giving money to bottled water company, so to stop them giving the means and the reason to lobby against water being a human right, it is the job of a government to make sure that the infrastructure for clean water is present, and funded through taxes, to benefit any and all, and as always fuck nestle… and the other water companies

> Water being a human right Human need ≠ human right. By definition, a limited resource cannot be a natural right.

what? on the contrary.

every human need must by necessity be a right. ignoring human needs is in itself a human rights violation. since water is needed to survive, unless you want to deny people the right to live, water must be a human right.

Re: California orders bottled water firm to stop drawing from natural springs

#29

Post by lnxg33k1 »

Georgelemental wrote: post #12
lnxg33k1 wrote: post #7

We need to stop giving money to bottled water company, so to stop them giving the means and the reason to lobby against water being a human right, it is the job of a government to make sure that the infrastructure for clean water is present, and funded through taxes, to benefit any and all, and as always fuck nestle… and the other water companies

> Water being a human right Human need ≠ human right. By definition, a limited resource cannot be a natural right.

I was talking about humans on earth, that ball floating around made of 71% water, whose salt doesn't boil

Re: California orders bottled water firm to stop drawing from natural springs

#30

Post by NoZebra120vClip »

Aerroon wrote: post #27
klyrs wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many blame Nestlé as the root cause of the Flint water crisis: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/sep/29/nestle-pays-... The question isn't if farming is technically worse on a global scale, it's whether each individual aquifer can sustain its output.

That article is absurd. It opens with a mother talking about how she uses bottled water to bathe her child, because the tap water is polluted.Then it goes on to say that residents don't like that Nestle gets to bottle water in the area while their tap water sucks. I don't see how these two points are related. This sounds like a problem of incompetent politicians and officials that can't maintain water infrastructure.…

Nestlé has been under constant boycott for 46 years, and couldn't seem to stop abusing mothers and their young children. Flint or not, I will never purchase or use a Nestlé product.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1977_Nestl%C3%A9_boycott

N.B. Nestlé sold their bottling operations in these USA, and no longer owns Arrowhead. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrowhead_Water

Post reply on HN