Bottled water

In France the bottled water , often called improperly mineral Water, is divided into three categories:

the Water of table , Drinking water whose source is unspecified but which satisfies all the medical standards.
the spring water , which naturally satisfies the standards and which is bottled without any chemical treatment.
the mineral Water , which receives, in France, its title of the Académie of medicine for its therapeutic virtues. The mineral springs are often associated with thermal spas.

Increasing consumption

After the fashion of the aerated waters, the consumption of bottled water - supported by an important publicity - increased much, initially in Europe, then in the USA where the sales have triplet in 10 years, with an increase of 9,7% in 2006 (1/3 of the North-Americans drink some regularly, feeding a market of almost 11 billion dollars, only for this country).

Cost

Bottled water has a direct cost for the households; NewYork Times estimated for example (in August 2007) that an American north could spend to 1.400 dollars per annum for its bottled water, where it would have spent only 49 hundreds out of tap water. Indirect costs exist in term of time spent to transport the bottles. and for planet. Water is often regarded as a community property, and the access to water like an essential public service. In certain countries, the privatized market of water seems to be a source of corruption or expenditure nontransparent. One of the work axes of Swedish Water House (SWH) is the fight against corruption in the field of water. The Recycling or the reutiliation of the worn bottles has also costs, in particular related to induced transport.

ecological Print

In Europe and in the world water more the appraisals is Italian, French or comes from the islands Fiji (famous less polluted because from source distant of more than 2.400 kilometers of the continent nearest. This water, bottled can for example be delivered to residence by truck or dispach rider in many towns of France).
Si some famous brands imposed an agriculture without Pesticide S nor Nitrate S around their sources, it is also the case of cities which wanted to preserve the ground water feeding their drinking water network. The ecological print of the bottled water exported in the whole world is particularly high, because their transport (mainly by road) of the water bottles is much more expensive in energy, Pétrole (1,5 million barils/an are necessary to produce the bottles of figure consumed by the Americans) and produces much more Gaz with greenhouse effect (production, transport, incineration.) that when this water is delivered by the drinking water networks to the tap. The drinking water is a vital resource for the Man, and for this reason one of the conditions of the bearable Développement. It was in the center of the discussions of the Sommet of Johannesburg, and many international meetings, but the question of the ecological impact of the transport of bottled water emerged only more recently, with the suspiscion that the plastic packagings could contaminate the water of the bottles by certain chemicals and the question of the total environmental impacts of the congestion and especially of the transport and possible recycling of the bottles.
Les representatives of the international association of the bottled water (IBWA) asserts that they made efforts to facilitate the recycling of the bottles and that bottled water also helped certain American to do without sweetened fizzy drinks (also increasingly sold in bottles figure) and that many other products are packed in plastic.

Quality

Bottled water is checked many during the congestion, but very seldom after a few weeks or month of storage, and according to the marks and the countries, quality seems significantly to be able to vary.
Ainsi, while being based on scientific data, the Council of defense of the natural resources (NRDC) in the USA concluded that the current regulation did not guarantee the purity of bottled water, nor that it is surer than the tap water which knows also 28% of going beyond of standards or defect of information of the authorities.
Aux the USA (where the standards for bottled water vary depending on the states), the NRDC studied the Norme S and controls of FDA ( Food and Drug Administration ) and of each 50 state on the safety of the setting out of bottle, by comparing them with international standards, and the rules of EPA (Agence of environmental protection of the USA) concerning tap water of the water public networks. After 4 years of study of the industry of bottled water and after analysis by laboratories independent of more than 1.000 bottles of 103 types of water bottled in various areas and states (California, Florida, Illinois, New York, Texas.), the NRDC has in nearly 1/4 of the cases case highlighted of the contamination bacterial and chemical (toxic organic compounds, arsenic.) reaching or exceeding maximum Californian standards (harder than those of Texas or Florida). 17% of studied water (for a sample at least) contained more bacteria than the threshold recommended by the EU, certain states of the USA and the industrialists of the congestion in the USA themselves. The NRDC also found defects serious of information on labelling (certain bottles containing for example tap water). In a case a “ spring water ” whose label describes a lake and mountains, came from a puit located in industrial park near to a discharge of dangerous waste and was periodically polluted by chemicals, beyond the standards of the FDA). The NRDC also pays - sources industrial and governmental - that a quarter at least of the water bottled in the USA would come from the tap, some estimating that 40% would even come from it, sometimes after additional treatment, sometimes without. Lastly, according to this study, the standards and controls are in the USA - at the date of this study - much more laxists for the water bottled that for tap water, as well for the number of contaminants to be sought, the obligation to inform the consumer and the authorities, as for the frequency of the obligatory analyzes. Moreover, when bottled water was nonin conformity, they were not always " rappelées". On the whole, this study (which has for reasons of costs required only half of all the normally required pollutants and bacteria) found that 1/3 of examined water (34 out of 103, is 33%) violated a chemical or microbial quality standard or both at the same time. Approximately 1/5e of water contained in at least a sample of the synthetic organic chemicals (ex: Toluene or Xylene) or of the chemicals used to manufacture the plastic (ex: Phthalate, Adipate or Styrene) although generally under the thresholds of federal standards. A sample contained phthalate (carcinogenic potentially lixiviated of the plastic) ata rate twice higher than the standard for tap water, but two other samples did not contain any in a detectable way. Moreover, following the refusal of the industrialists, there is no standard for phthalates in bottled water. In 8 cases, the arsenic rates presented a possible hazard for health.

Alternatives

For certain uses, bottled water offers irreplaceable advantages.
Un favors recognized bottled water is its absence of chlorine taste, but with the systems of filtration (activated charcoal) can equip the hearths for less expensive. The same applies to the “ fountains to water ” rented or bought by companies and certain public services, which could often be replaced by tap water (treated if necessary). UNO and of many ONG invite the communities to develop strategies, for example within the framework of a Agenda 21 for the protection and a durable service of water, in particular in the zones of Périurbanisation.

See too

Random links: