Water Survey

I wanted to know what people know

On September 23 through 25, I officially surveyed five of my college-age compadres to understand their knowledge of plastic water bottle waste, tap water safety, and other water-related topics. I asked each of these individuals, none of whom knew one another or attended the same school, the same list of open-ended questions. The survey results yielded what I had anticipated: a wide spectrum of knowledge about safe water materials and products. All names have been changed to preserve anonymity from the public. 

For my initial question I asked, “What comes to mind when you think of ‘pro-safe water activism?’” Most interviewees showed embarrassment for not recognizing this phrase, perhaps from a campaign or political movement. I had, however, invented this wording to find what imagery they conceived when thinking about water issues. Daisy, currently living in Ann Arbor, MI, imagined the elimination of tap water chemicals harming human health. Holden, of St. Clair Shores, MI, instead envisioned shoreline cleanups and the decontamination of drinkable water. Osmosis Jones, of Chesterfield, MI, also imagined the cleaning water for health and environmental purposes. Hanni, of Boston, MA, admitted that the phrase prompted her to imagine giving bottled water to young African children.

When I asked the interviewees to compare their tap water use to their bottled water consumption, most interviewees responded with some criticism for bottled water but admitted to drinking some bottled water. Hanni claimed bottled water companies “scam” customers by consuming global resources like oil and overcharging for their products, but she drinks bottled water when someone else conveniently buys or gives her the bottle. Osmosis Jones also admitted to the convenience of buying bottled water, especially when he loses old bottles by forgetting to bring them home to refill. Paige, who is studying in Israel these days, said she thinks we should be refilling our plastic bottles more often with tap water. Daisy, countering Paige’s statement, brought up research that reusing plastics, especially if the material had been heated, could cause negative health effects. She also claimed that much bottled water is simply bottled tap water, with no additional purification. Daisy drinks mostly tap water.

Holden claimed that tap water is too often dangerous for human consumption. He, along with three others, expressed concerns for many U.S. regions’ inadequate environmental protections and standards. Daisy claimed that politics have caused regions’ incompliance with clean water standards or their inabilities to meet them. Holden and Osmosis Jones sited the issue of prescription drugs entering tap water supplies. They both explain their knowledge that the public lacks education about recycled water and cities’ constant recycling of the same water. As Osmosis Jones said, “Our tap water comes from other peoples’ poop water. Which is gross. So they treat it with chlorine, which is also gross.” Hanni also mentioned the chlorine and fluoride that municipalities pump into water to clean it. Four of these five interviewees had learned the same facts about how local tap water is reused and treated.

The interviewees differed, however, on the extents to which they recycled in their respective cities. Daisy, Hanni and Osmosis Jones spoke about recycling in convenient locations. Ann Arbor provides students with recycle bins and collects them each week. Hanni seeks locations on campus to recycle before she leaves, as her off-campus home has no recycling service. Osmosis Jones, without any recycling service in his new condominium complex, now recycles less than he had when he had a city recycling service. Holden, however, drives to facilities to recycle #5 plastics, which his city will not collect. All interviewees wanted to recycle plastics and other products, including glass, office paper, cardboard, cans, etc. Only one interviewee made extra efforts to recycle materials that no city recycling service was collecting.

While all of the interviewees did show concern for bottled water’s environmental effects, most did site health risks caused by tap, but not bottled, water. Holden, Osmosis Jones, and Daisy, when discussing the risks of ingesting water, only worried about contaminated, inadequately purified tap water. Hanni was the only interviewee who cited research that bottled water can cause health issues among consumers. Paige was the only one who did not believe tap or bottled water proposed health risks. Overall, the interviewees’ explanations of health risks were more vague or inaccurate than their responses about environmental issues.

When I asked the interviewees to compare their priorities for personal health and environmental protection against one another, most interviewees agreed that they prioritize health issues above environmental issues. Paige said she does not pay attention to these risks. Holden explained, however, that consumers may increasingly take environmental risks into considerations when making decisions about their health. A few years ago, he explained, the production of Albuterol inhalers was discontinued because of the dangerous chlorofluorocarbons in the medication’s propellant. Consumers began taking different medications altogether without causing a large outcry to continue using Albuterol. Though consumers prioritize health issues, they increasingly prioritize environmental preservation, as well.

Overall, the interviewees were either well-informed or completely carefree about both health and environmental risks associated water. Most were skeptical about tap water’s safety to the body while trusting bottled water more. They did, however, accurately site more information about bottled water’s harm to the environment. While the interviewees claimed they prioritized personal health over environmental protection, begging the anticipation that they would avoid the tap and choose bottled water instead, about half the interviewees still found means to self-filter their water and appease both concerns. When too inconvenienced to recycle or filter their own water, however, most of those interviewed would rather just drink bottled water.

Other great comments I couldn’t edit and keep the full value of

It's ridiculous to me that we're living in The Great Lakes State, but we won't life a finger or spend a penny to preserve our namesake.

I’ll fill in what I know. I know there was some BPAs leech into the water which is bad for you thing. Also, obviously, plastics consume oils or whatever in the making…

In our buildings, there are separate bins for trash, for bottles, and for paper. In Ann Arbor, given that the city makes it so easy, it does bother me when people don’t recycle.

Then there was the whole news sensationalism OMG PRESCRIPTION DRUGS IN YOUR WATER!? Honestly, though, I think its all a crock of crap.

While [landfills are] a bit sickening when I consider, I don’t think about them much.

As a selfish human being, I think about how what I do directly affects my health more so than the environment.

We are too wasteful in general and our consumerism only makes matters worse. Not only do companies need to cut down on unnecessary packaging, but we need to cut back on shopping.

[Problems about tap water include] contamination of reservoirs with E.Coli, etc. forcing boil orders or bans. Also, the adding of chemicals to the water either to clean the water (chlorine) or to use it as a mass vitamin dispenser (fluoride). Both of which can be hazardous to some of the population, especially in excess. (I don't know if this is still an actual problem, but it's definitely still a perceived one)

I HATE it when people don't recycle, especially when there's a bin right there.

I consume a toxin. I get sick maybe 3 weeks later. Yikes. I throw 7 water bottles out a week. I dont ever notice any effect from my actions alone, but they have a combined effect we tend to overlook I think.

As far as buying a product that helps me but might even harm the environment, it’s really a case-by-case judgment call. Is it wrinkle cream? If it is, does killing a blade of grass for every 10000 cases make it worth it? Maybe. Does killing a tree for every 10000 cases make it worth it? Maybe not. But lets say its a cancer drug. Now would it be worth it if it killed 10 trees for every case? Maybe. Its really a tough call.

More BPA, more bottled water

First, a special thank you to HoMedics for extending an invitation for me to attend their webinar on new home water purification systems. I look forward to learning more about your new technologies and bringing to the public a better piece of mind concerning tap water safety. Now...

Once again, why BPA research should be a priority

Researchers at the Yale School of Medicine have linked a chemical found in everyday plastics to problems with brain function and mood disorders in monkeys -- the first time the chemical has been connected to health problems in primates.

Previously, all BPA research had been conducted on mice. Refer to previous entries explaining why human subjects were inadequate for testing.

The study is the latest in an accumulation of research that has raises concerns about bisphenol A, or BPA, a compound that gives a shatterproof quality to polycarbonate plastic and has been found to leach from plastic into food and water. The Yale study comes as federal toxicologists yesterday reaffirmed an earlier draft report finding that there is "some concern" that bisphenol A can cause developmental problems in the brain and hormonal systems of infants and children.

And as we've gathered from other sources, issues span not only developmental (i.e. irregular puberty) issues, but also obesity, infertility, cancer, and possibly heart disease. 

"There remains considerable uncertainty whether the changes seen in the animal studies are directly applicable to humans, and whether they would result in clear adverse health effects," John R. Bucher, associate director of the National Toxicology Program, said in a statement. "But we have concluded that the possibility that BPA may affect human development cannot be dismissed."

Now that we've moved on to test subjects that can constitute as some of our specie's close cousins, we need to stop dismissing the idea that BPA could be harmless to us.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/03/AR2008090303397.html

I leave you with a fun fact about bottled water

From a 2006 report:

On a per capita basis, Italians actually have the highest rate of bottled water consumption, drinking 184 liters on average in 2004; this is more than two glasses of bottled water each day. In second and third place came Mexico and the United Arab Emirates, drinking 169 and 164 liters on average. Belgium (exluding Luxemboug) and France came up close too, drinking about 145 liters per person per year.

http://www.container-recycling.org/media/newsarticles/plastic/2006/5-WMW-DownDrain.htm

A reminder of why we should still drink tap water

Bringing it all together

This post will be bringing together new information with some snippets from past entries to reinforce why we choose to drink tap water. Some reports in the media have come out in the past couple weeks that may urge us back to the bottle. We stay strong and healthy by choosing tap, and here’s why.

Controversy about tap water

On September 13, just last week, the New York Times published “Clean Water Laws Neglected, at a Cost,” exposing the United States’ noncompliance with the Clean Water Act. This act, enacted in 1972, establishes regulations for states and companies to follow when affecting, through pollution, the chemical, physical, and biological

makeup of bodies of water surrounding them. The Times article reveals that regulators have ignored companies’ extreme violations of the Clean Water Act, therefore increasing the amount of dangerous pollutants in communities’ drinking water. Renegade journalist Charles Duhigg outlines how individuals’ exposure to illegal concentrations of many of these materials, including lead, nickel, copper, zinc, chlorine, and selenium, may contribute to higher occurrences of cancer, mental retardation, skin rashes, tooth decay, and stomach ulcers.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/13/us/13water.html?_r=1&hp

http://www.epa.gov/oecaagct/lcwa.html

EPA’s action for clean water

Lisa Jackson, the new administrator of the EPA and subject whom I often admire in this forum, has already addressed the issue of water safety. Since President Obama appointed Jackson to her position within the EPA, the regulating body for the Clean Water Act, Jackson has requested supplemental appropriations to the Clean Water State Revolving Fund. For the fund, Jackson has requested $2.4 billion from Congress’s appropriations for the 2010 fiscal year; this is $1.7 billion more than what the fund received in 2009. With these appropriations, Jackson claims the EPA will be enabled to direct cost-effective and environmentally positive efforts to repair and better manage clean water facilities in U.S. communities.

http://www.epa.gov/ocir/hearings/testimony/111_2009_2010/2009_0616_lpj.pdf

Studies have often, often found that tap water is no worse than bottled water

In 2005, ABC’s 20/20 recruited microbiologists to compare the materials, including bacteria, within tap water to those materials within bottled water. Finding no difference between New York City tap water and bottled water, these scientists recommended that individuals consume tap water, which can cost up to 500 times less money than bottled water.

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Health/Story?id=728070&page=1

Drinking tap water saves our environment, after all

As I’ve more recently posted, between 2005 and 2008, Americans increased their plastic water bottle consumption by 59 percent and pumped $5.9 billion into the bottled water industry. Of American consumers, up to 70 percent claim to drink bottled water. Beverage Marketing Corp. reports that these consumers drank 8.7 billion gallons of bottled water in 2008 and 8.8 billion in 2007. These figures respectively amount to 29 and 28.5 gallons per capita. Huge.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/12/AR2009081203074.html

This rate of bottled water consumption is harmful to the globe and our dwindling natural resources. Food & Water Watch also reports that bottled water manufacturers and distributors use over 17 million barrels of oil to produce the bottled water that Americans consume in one year. This amount of oil, which would be enough to fuel one million cars per year, is further wasted by consumers’ refusal to recycle these plastic bottles. Food & Water Watch claim that consumers throw about 86 percent of these bottles into the trash and, subsequently, into landfills.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/12/AR2009081203074.html

Pat Franklin, of the Container Recycling Institute, reports that Americans dispose over 60 million plastic bottles into U.S. landfills and incinerators each year. With over 3 thousand functioning landfills and over 10,000 municipal, stagnant landfills existing in the United States, Franklin expresses concern about these landfills’ pollutant-emissions and toxin-leaching into the earth and groundwater.  Landfill liners, he explains, only have the thickness of 1/10 in., which allows for the eventual leaching of the toxin leachate into the ground. Landfill liners, unsustainable after decades of chemical components decaying them and leaching into our earth and air, present a threat to public health and safety.

Health risks of plastics, the real tap alternative

Bottled water consumers’ health risks also occur during the act of drinking water. Franklin mentions that the United States EPA sets more water quality standards for tap water than the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) poses for bottled water. Since Franklin’s report, researchers have pinpointed and examined the toxin Bisphenol A (BPA), which appears in most plastic water bottles, leaches into water, and can cause severe health problems for consumers.

http://www.care2.com/greenliving/what-plastics-do-to-your-body.html

 http://www.container-recycling.org/media/newsarticles/plastic/2006/5-WMW-DownDrain.ht

BPA polycarbonate is used to make common plastic items, including Nalgene™ bottles, dishes, liners of metal cans, baby bottles, and bottled water plastic. The compound BPA is a lab-derived form of estrogen, used commonly to affect the hardness and durability of products it appears in BPA easily leaches into contained water, especially if the plastic container has been refilled, heated, or frozen. Researchers, like Claude Hughes and Frederick S. vom Saal of the University of Missouri-Columbia, have found that by providing unnatural amounts of estrogen to those drinking contaminated water, BPA can be linked to irregular puberty, obesity, infertility, and cancer in both males and females. In lab experiments, these researchers have found that BPA can cause animals’ early puberty and production of pre-cancerous cells. By constantly drinking from bottled water, consumers ingest harmful amounts of the BPA toxin.

http://www.ehponline.org/members/2005/7713/7713.html

http://www.care2.com/greenliving/what-plastics-do-to-your-body.html

Plastics fester bacteria, remember?

I have already written a full entry about this. Consumers also risk ingesting greater amounts of bacteria by drinking from plastic bottles, especially if these individuals refill and reuse their bottles. An Oregon laboratory tested used plastic water bottles for bacteria colony counts and discovered large rates of bacteria growth, even in bottles that had been scrubbed with soap. A bottle they washed the day before the test grew an average of 2,400 colonies, and one bottle they tested grew over 4,100 bacteria colonies on its surface. The researchers repeatedly found that the plastic surface allowed faster growth of bacteria than other surfaces, such as glass.

http://blog.sierratradingpost.com/in-outdoors-camping-gear-forest-trails/reused-plastic-water-bottles-loaded-with-bacteria/

And by national and state EPA standards, tap water contains fluorine to kill bacteria, and throughout the past decade researchers have periodically found greater amounts of fluorine in tap water than in bottled water. By drinking fluorine-filled tap water from a glass, consumers avoid the risk of ingesting the bacteria that can easily fester inside opened plastic water bottles.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/03/000322090356.htm

Tap water wastes money

American consumers are now reportedly spending less money to buy bottled water, which can be attributed, yes, to the nationwide recession. Nestle, the leading corporation for bottled water sales, has experienced a drop in sales this year for the first time in six years. In the beginning of 2009, profits dropped 2.9 percent across all Nestle bottled water brands: Poland Spring, Deer Park, S. Pellegrino and Perrier. These consumers presumably choose to drink tap water instead. Good call.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/12/AR2009081203074.html

Reporter Maura Judkis credits anti-plastic bottle campaigns for this turn in consumption. She sites the campaigns

“Take Back the Tap” and “TapIt” that motivate Americans to avoid bottled water and to be more ecologically conscious. These campaigns encourage consumers to invest in BPA-free metal water bottles and water filters for tap water. H₂Ox2, the online company I’ve often sited, provides a forum for bloggers to share research about plastics while selling alternative water container and filtering products. The site sells individual bottle filters for $8.70 and even larger water-capacity filters for $118. American consumers are creating a demand for tap water products, which they are willing to invest in to save money, save their health, or save the environment.

www.h2ox2.com/store/

People are getting informed and bringing it all back to common sense. Buy a filter for your tap water if you’re afraid that your tap water hasn’t be adequately purified. I believe these horrible stories about communities with inadequate regulators. This is why we need to lobby Congress to be pumping money into the EPA for programs like the Clean Water funds and Superfund. And we already see the EPA taking action on existing cases of unpurified tap water sources. The consequences of consuming non-tap water are overwhelming and worth the investment of buying a filter or addressing policy makers for more strict tap water regulations. Drink tap. Tap it. Tap that. Whatever. Tap water is key here.