With our free press under threat and federal funding for public media gone, your support matters more than ever. Help keep the LAist newsroom strong, become a monthly member or increase your support today .
This is an archival story that predates current editorial management.
This archival content was written, edited, and published prior to LAist's acquisition by its current owner, Southern California Public Radio ("SCPR"). Content, such as language choice and subject matter, in archival articles therefore may not align with SCPR's current editorial standards. To learn more about those standards and why we make this distinction, please click here.
Nestlé CEO Wants To 'Increase' Water Bottling During Drought
No more water (Photo by Jessica Dunajski via the Creative Commons on Flickr)
()
Bottling water from a drought-stricken California may sound like a bad idea to most people, but the CEO of Nestlé Water has no interest in stopping bottled water production in our arid state and would actually pump more water if he could. Maybe celebrities aren't the only ones who are inviting drought-shaming these days.When asked by KPCC if he would consider moving the company's bottling operations elsewhere—as Starbucks recently announced it would—CEO Tim Brown responded, "Absolutely not. In fact if I could increase it, I would."
Brown argues that if Néstle—the second largest bottler in California—moved their production out of state, other companies would simply take their place and they are merely responding to consumer demand. Nestlé recently came under scrutiny for permit issues regarding their routine of drawing spring water from San Bernardino National Forest.
And while in a recent op-ed in the San Bernardino Sun Brown insists that bottled water is not contributing to California's drought, some water experts argue that bottling water still requires 30 to 50 percent more water than turning on the tap.
Jay Famiglietti, the top water scientist at NASA's Jet Propulsion Lab, told KPCC that he's concerned companies like Nestlé could be using and bottling thousands of acre-feet of water in the state:
Support for LAist comes from
An acre-foot [nearly 326,000 gallons] is enough water to supply an entire family for a year. So, in this time when we're being asked to flush our toilets less and less, we have to ask the question: Is this really an environmentally, ethically correct thing to be doing right now?
Another major concern for bottled water production is a lack of oversight for how the business affects the state's limited water supplies. According to the California Department of Public Healththere are 108 bottled water plants in the state—five of which belong to Nestlé for their brands Arrowhead, Pure Life, Poland Spring, and Deer Park. And while the department regulates the plants and gathers data on water quality and the sources in use, there is no state agency that monitors how much water is used and how that affects local water tables.
Famiglietti does admit that Nestlé has a strong record for environmental stewardship, and Brown insists that his company is focused on improving water efficiency through better technology.
However, continuing to siphon water from a state in the middle of a major drought crisis and boasting of a desire to pump out more may not be the wisest move for the company.
Famiglietti also encourages taking a deeper look at our overall relationship with water:
I think that we also have, with the greater water crisis here that we face in California, a human behavior problem. We need to change our behavior with respect to water and our understanding of how much water we actually have available to us, not only in California, but around the country.
At LAist, we believe in journalism without censorship and the right of a free press to speak truth to those in power. Our hard-hitting watchdog reporting on local government, climate, and the ongoing housing and homelessness crisis is trustworthy, independent and freely accessible to everyone thanks to the support of readers like you.
But the game has changed: Congress voted to eliminate funding for public media across the country. Here at LAist that means a loss of $1.7 million in our budget every year. We want to assure you that despite growing threats to free press and free speech, LAist will remain a voice you know and trust. Speaking frankly, the amount of reader support we receive will help determine how strong of a newsroom we are going forward to cover the important news in our community.
We’re asking you to stand up for independent reporting that will not be silenced. With more individuals like you supporting this public service, we can continue to provide essential coverage for Southern Californians that you can’t find anywhere else. Become a monthly member today to help sustain this mission.
Thank you for your generous support and belief in the value of independent news.
Chip in now to fund your local journalism
(
LAist
)
Trending on LAist
-
Immigration raids have caused some U.S. citizens to carry their passports to the store, to school or to work. But what documents to have on you depends on your citizenship. -
The historic properties have been sitting vacant for decades and were put on the market as-is, with prices ranging from $750,000 to $1.75 million. -
Users of the century old Long Beach wooden boardwalk give these suggestions to safely enjoy it. -
The Newport Beach City Council approved a new artificial surf park that will replace part of an aging golf course. -
The utility, whose equipment is believed to have sparked the Eaton Fire, says payouts could come as quickly as four months after people submit a claim. But accepting the money means you'll have to forego any lawsuits. -
The City Council will vote Tuesday on a proposal to study raising the pay for construction workers on apartments with at least 10 units and up to 85 feet high.
Best of LAist