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

Liquid assets: how the business of bottled water went mad

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 86 posts

Re: Liquid assets: how the business of bottled water went mad

#61

Post by gumby »

maxerickson wrote: post #24
gumby wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Beware, Poland Spring (owned by Pepsi) in New England famously bored a well in a property they bought -- that had previously been a paint factory. Because of the success of food regulation in the USA it took a TV station to find this out.

Poland Spring is owned by Nestle. The previous use of the surface site doesn't necessarily make the aquifer unusable. It would be much more damning if their water was tested and found to have higher than normal levels of volatile organic compounds or whatever.

Thanks for catching the pepsi/Nestle error.

Yes, the paint factory was a superfund site. So this wasn't the "it's just tap water" story, it turned out to be an actual public health issue.

Re: Liquid assets: how the business of bottled water went mad

#62

Post by JumpCrisscross »

smallnamespace wrote: post #58
lukeqsee wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zürich is in Switzerland. I wouldn't recommend calling them German. :)

Culturally/linguistically German/Germanic? 'The official language of Zürich is (the Swiss variety of Standard) German...' [1] Northern Switzerland was founded by Germanic tribes, after all. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z%C3%BCrich [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_Switzerland#Germa...

We have multiple official languages, including an Italian derivative and French. Our history is as independently rich, tracing to the Holy Roman Empire, as that of the Germanic tribes.

Re: Liquid assets: how the business of bottled water went mad

#63

Post by jbuzbee »

david-given wrote: post #52
seanp2k2 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US, we switch water sources willy nilly because of capitalism and political maneuvering: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flint_water_crisis I definitely don't trust the municipal water sources + local plumbing my landlords provide to be of the highest quality. I'd like to measure what actually comes out of my taps but I'm not aware of a lab which would affordable do contaminant level testing for just a few sam…

Well, I come from the UK. We don't have the same political issues you do, but to make up for that, we have special problems. While British water is completely safe, there are still some issues... - ancient Victorian infrastructure means that there are leaks. They're terrified of contaminated water getting into the system, so they crank the pressure up, to ensure that any leaks happen outwards. This, of course, makes…

This dual-system is one of the things that drives me crazy when in the UK. Oftentimes you get a sink with two separate taps, one hot one cold. So if you want to rinse your hands with warm water, you turn them both on and quickly move your hands between the two. If you're too slow, you get scalded!

Re: Liquid assets: how the business of bottled water went mad

#64

Post by gh02t »

ars wrote: post #55

> He liked the can, too – more environmentally friendly than a plastic bottle Say what? Plastic bottles are much more environmentally friendly. Sigh, if people can't even agree on what is and isn't good for the environment there is zero chance of actually improving it. (Or maybe we've reached the max and the only things left to argue about is little irrelevant things.)

Yeah, I'm kind of wondering where that comes from... I guess because PET is a petroleum product? There's so much more to it than that though, it's silly to simplify things that far.

Re: Liquid assets: how the business of bottled water went mad

#65

Post by gh02t »

seanp2k2 wrote: post #41
50CNT wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It just gets more and more complex, doesn't it. Now we have to worry about remineralizing RO water. [Tap Water] | V [Water Softener]------------+ | | V V [Reverse Osmosis System] [Showering & Washing] | V [Remineralizer] | V [RO storage tank] | V [Drinking]

Yeah, I always wondered why there isn't simply one line running to the bathrooms + laundry room with softened water, and a separate line which goes through RO for everything else. Putting a RO + tank under the sink but the softener in the garage / basement seems backwards to me; I know nothing about plumbing but it would seem to make more sense to have a small softener under the bathroom sink just for the shower.

You put the softener at the inlet to the house because you don't want to have hard water flowing through the pipes in your house. Hard water precipitates minerals that ruin the piping, hence you put the softener at the main inlet.

Re: Liquid assets: how the business of bottled water went mad

#66

Post by david-given »

jbuzbee wrote: post #63
david-given wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I come from the UK. We don't have the same political issues you do, but to make up for that, we have special problems. While British water is completely safe, there are still some issues... - ancient Victorian infrastructure means that there are leaks. They're terrified of contaminated water getting into the system, so they crank the pressure up, to ensure that any leaks happen outwards. This, of course, makes…

This dual-system is one of the things that drives me crazy when in the UK. Oftentimes you get a sink with two separate taps, one hot one cold. So if you want to rinse your hands with warm water, you turn them both on and quickly move your hands between the two. If you're too slow, you get scalded!

Fun fact: mixer taps in the UK don't mix! There are two separate tubes, usually one inside the other, for carrying hot and cold water. So, what comes out of the tap is cold on the outside and hot on the inside, resulting in scalding your hands and freezing them at the same time!

...because you can't connect the hot water and cold water systems together (because of aforesaid risk of sucking contaminated water out of the hot system into the cold system).

Re: Liquid assets: how the business of bottled water went mad

#67

Post by jbuzbee »

david-given wrote: post #66
jbuzbee wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This dual-system is one of the things that drives me crazy when in the UK. Oftentimes you get a sink with two separate taps, one hot one cold. So if you want to rinse your hands with warm water, you turn them both on and quickly move your hands between the two. If you're too slow, you get scalded!

Fun fact: mixer taps in the UK don't mix! There are two separate tubes, usually one inside the other, for carrying hot and cold water. So, what comes out of the tap is cold on the outside and hot on the inside, resulting in scalding your hands and freezing them at the same time! ...because you can't connect the hot water and cold water systems together (because of aforesaid risk of sucking contaminated water out of t…

Agreed - These are even worse than the dual-taps. It looks like you can get warm water out, but as you said, when you put your hands under the tap you're getting independent streams of very hot and very cold water. Strange (and painful) sensation!

Re: Liquid assets: how the business of bottled water went mad

#68

Post by mrob »

teslabox wrote: post #2

The World Health Organization has a report titled "Health risks from drinking demineralised water". The main problem is that water without minerals upsets the osmotic balance and leads to lysing (rupture) of the cells lining the stomach. The WHO has moved stuff on their site, but I think this document is one source: http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/nutrientschap... Coffee grounds are a good filter for r…

>water without minerals upsets the osmotic balance and leads to lysing (rupture) of the cells lining the stomach

I've heard many people claim this but I've never seen any convincing evidence that it actually happens in vivo. Even if you pour it directly down the throat, ultra-pure water stops being ultra-pure as soon as it hits the stomach. There's no way it can touch any gastrointestinal cells before it's contaminated.

Your linked article even acknowledges this. "currently available data have not unambiguously demonstrated a direct negative effect of low mineral content water on the gastrointestinal mucous membrane." It also cites an animal study showing no damage: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8434446

Water can be an important source of dietary minerals, but the health impact of this depends on what else you're eating. I agree it makes sense to have minerals in drinking water, for the taste as well as the possible health benefits, but missing them is not actively dangerous.

Re: Liquid assets: how the business of bottled water went mad

#69

Post by smallnamespace »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #62
smallnamespace wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Culturally/linguistically German/Germanic? 'The official language of Zürich is (the Swiss variety of Standard) German...' [1] Northern Switzerland was founded by Germanic tribes, after all. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Z%C3%BCrich [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_Switzerland#Germa...

We have multiple official languages, including an Italian derivative and French. Our history is as independently rich, tracing to the Holy Roman Empire, as that of the Germanic tribes.

Yes, but 'German' or 'Germanic' is still the accepted English word to refer to the shared culture and history of all German-speaking areas, of which northern Switzerland and Zurich are definitely part.

The term is not restricted to only refer to modern Germany (which didn't even exist as a unified state until the late 19th century).

Re: Liquid assets: how the business of bottled water went mad

#70

Post by tedunangst »

gh02t wrote: post #64
ars wrote: post #55

> He liked the can, too – more environmentally friendly than a plastic bottle Say what? Plastic bottles are much more environmentally friendly. Sigh, if people can't even agree on what is and isn't good for the environment there is zero chance of actually improving it. (Or maybe we've reached the max and the only things left to argue about is little irrelevant things.)

Yeah, I'm kind of wondering where that comes from... I guess because PET is a petroleum product? There's so much more to it than that though, it's silly to simplify things that far.

Literally made from carbon!
Post reply on HN