Jump to content

Bottled water is unnecessary, expensive and damaging to the environment - Discuss


Recommended Posts

I've never understood why we need bottled water in this country and refuse to buy the stuff, not because of environmental concerns I hasten to add, but because I think it's stupid to pay for something I already pay the local water board for on an annual basis, and don't think bottled water tastes any different or for that matter any better than the stuff that comes out of the tap. Your turn ladies and gents.


Edited because of my rubbish spelling!!!

I nearly always drink tap water (although it is in bottles - but mainly from when I've run out in town and need a drink).


I always ask for tap water in restaurants too and have only been refused twice - once in a Lebanese restaurant on the Edgeware road and once in an Indian restaurant in Camberwell (can't remember its name).


If I did drink bottled water I'd be out of pocket because I drink over 2 litres a day!

if you get teh chamnce, re-read American psyco and the bit where they see how many brands of bottled water they can name


I like fizzy water, but brand aside, it doesnt matter what .


Still wates comes via the tap, thro' an inline filter and out of the fridge dispenser


to buy still water is deluded

The cloudiness is usually millions of tiny bubbles depending on the pressure of the water coming out the tap.

The PeckhamRoseHousehold has never had bottled water except when our block had a water outage.

So now we keep one spare for emergencies only, along with champagne for the same reason. And that's bubbly too.

;)

I am always amazed at seeing people down Rye Lane who don't look like they earn a lot of money doing the most ridiculous money-wasting things with what little they clearly do have: things like carrying 4 liter bottles of water, whilst smoking and eating their fast food. But then that's democracy..


I'm thirsty now. Where's the bolly.

when you consider that large parts of the world have to trek to a well every day, our indulgence in bottled water is beyond lampooning


And then we complain about congestion charge or whatever else is "imposed" on us...


I don't mind the cloudiness as such but on a hit day that tap has to run for a bit to get the cool stuff - or if I'm good and remember to chill some in the fridge


I have and ocassionaly do buy bottle water - but I'm not going to make any defence of it - it's just laziness. Expensive laziness too. If you see me drinking it when I have an alternative feel free to call me on it


edited after reading PeckhamRose's post: indeed PR, indeed - and more power to them. It's when people complain about how they don't have any money for anything else that I get annoyed. .... What was it about not being able to afford proper chicken that some people mentioned a while back??

I think my main argument is why can't you just purchase an empty bottle? Surely that's all we really buy the bottled water for? That and when sometimes when you're out and about and happen to be in need of some refreshment...

I realise that a woman in, say, Chad, may have to walk fifty miles to a well and return with a 50Kg pot of water balanced on her head - twice a day - but I still don't see the relevance. In the UK it's just a commodity like everything else.


Personally I think anyone who bulk-buys water in a supermarket and takes it home to take-up room in their fridge must be bonkers, but it's their money.

And even if you are a lazy good-for-nothing, 50p for a bottle water every day (if you must) is still 50p better spent than on a can of Quattro or some other tooth-rot.

Bottled water is sourced from different natural locations and has different mineral contents that the body utilises. I buy it all the time and recycle the bottles. At least it doesnt have all of that chemical crap that companies like Thames water puts in to kill off the bugs that have grown since leaving peoples sinks and toilets. nuffsaid.

BJL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Why is it worse than buying cola or other soft

> drinks, wine or beer?


It isn't.

Personally I think it's a minor miracle that teenagers choose to drink water instead of Um Bongo.

um bongo,um bongo,de drink it in de congo.


nothing wrong with buying bottled water as an alternative to a can of coke/fanta etc, but as for buying litres of the stuff to drink at home, well each to their own,your money etc. besides the price of the stuff over here is outrageous, nip over to the continent where its a more prevelant habit to buy bottled water and see the difference in the price, it can be as cheap as 50-60 cents for a 4-5 lt bottle

Um Bongo is positively saintly compared to that powdered orange stuff I had growing up - was it Birds Appeel or something? Now that was ghastly


Karter - it's a bit scary - but more than that it's weird that story isn't it? I mean... how? why? etc etc

Exactly sean, thats precisely why its healthier to drink spring bottled water (what was coke thinking doing that?), the turkish deli down by the roundabout sells very reasonably priced greek or turkish spring water, a free plug for those cool guys, what a pun.:))

Sean, I've had Fanta in Ireland and the colour scares the bejeezus out of me.


*Bob*, the point being made about far flung water last night, in this case Fiji, was that a pump was shoved down to a nice water source, mostly paid for with UN aid, and the Fiji authorities decided to shove a bottling plant above it and export the water, forcing the locals do carry on getting their water from a dirty river.


Said water gets bought by stupid people in more money than sense restaurants for twenty odd quid a bottle.


I've always thought bottled water was stupid and have never indulged. Not out of moral reasons, it's just an absurd concept. I seem to recall that when it first arrived on these shores it was the butt (no pun intended) of many jokes, then sometime around 1987 this country had a surgical irony bypass.


Or something.

But it's not just whether or not bottled water tastes better or worse, or even if you feel that it is better for you than tap water. The title of the thread also asks wheth/drink miles that it takes to get water here - not so much the Volvics, but water from Canada!! And we've all seen the empty plastic bottles strewn all over the place - goodness knows how long they need to biodegrade.

I saw the crappy Panorama Fiji expose (or at least I saw the 'trailer' the Beeb helpfully scheduled in its six o' clock news). I haven't seen much Fijian water myself though. Well done, Beeb! Relevance factor: 0.0000002% of the population.


I can't see how it can be 'stupid' buying bottled water, full-stop. I usually fill-up a bottle of filtered tap water on those rare occasions I do manage to leave the house. But if I haven't, or I've run out, I buy a small bottle of bottled water. It beats going home to re-fill, pulling into Sainsbury's just to use their lav, or knocking on a stranger's door and asking them to fill 'er up.

That doesn't just apply to water though does it. I'm sure there's a whole lot more fizzy pop sold than water.

Of course in terms of air miles and nicking the locals' water, the big fizzy pop manufacturers have a lot to answer for too.

karter Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Bottled water is sourced from different natural

> locations and has different mineral contents that

> the body utilises. I buy it all the time and

> recycle the bottles. At least it doesnt have all

> of that chemical crap that companies like Thames

> water puts in to kill off the bugs that have grown

> since leaving peoples sinks and toilets.

> nuffsaid.



If bottled water does not contain chemicals to destroy infestation then how come it is safe to drink?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • why do we think we have the right for the elected local council to be transparent?
    • Granted Shoreditch is still London, but given that the council & organisers main argument for the festival is that it is a local event, for local people (to use your metaphor), there's surprisingly little to back this up. As Blah Blah informatively points out, this is now just a commercial venture with no local connection. Our park is regarded by them as an asset that they've paid to use & abuse. There's never been any details provided of where the attendees are from, but it's still trotted out as a benefit to the local community.  There's never been any details provided of any increase in sales for local businesses, but it's still trotted out as a benefit to the local community.  There's promises of "opportunities" for local people & traders to work at the festival, but, again, no figures to back this up. And lastly, the fee for the whole thing goes 100% to running the Events dept, and the dozens of free events that no-one seems able to identify, and, yes, you guessed it - no details provided for by the council. So again, no tangible benefit for the residents of the area.
    • I mean I hold no portfolio to defend Gala,  but I suspect that is their office.  I am a company director,  my home address is also not registered with Companies House. Also guys this is Peckham not Royston Vasey.  Shoreditch is a mere 20 mins away by train, it's not an offshore bolt hole in Luxembourg.
    • While it is good that GALA have withdrawn their application for a second weekend, local people and councillors will likely have the same fight on their hands for next year's event. In reading the consultation report, I noted the Council were putting the GALA event in the same light as all the other events that use the park, like the Circus, the Fair and even the FOPR fete. ALL of those events use the common, not the park, and cause nothing like the level of noise and/or disruption of the GALA event. Even the two day Irish Festival (for those that remember that one) was never as noisy as GALA. So there is some disingenuity and hypocrisy from the Council on this, something I wll point out in my response to the report. The other point to note was that in past years branches were cut back for the fencing. Last year the council promised no trees would be cut after pushback, but they seem to now be reverting to a position of 'only in agreement with the council's arbourist'. Is this more hypocrisy from 'green' Southwark who seem to once again be ok with defacing trees for a fence that is up for just days? The people who now own GALA don't live in this area. GALA as an event began in Brockwell Park. It then lost its place there to bigger events (that pesumably could pay Lambeth Council more). One of the then company directors lived on the Rye Hill Estate next to the park and that is likely how Peckham Rye came to be the new choice for the event. That person is no longer involved. Today's GALA company is not the same as the 'We Are the Fair' company that held that first event, not the same in scope, aim or culture. And therein lies the problem. It's not a local community led enterprise, but a commercial one, underwritten by a venture capital company. The same company co-run the Rally Event each year in Southwark Park, which btw is licensed as a one day event only. That does seem to be truer to the original 'We Are the Fair' vision, but how much of that is down to GALA as opoosed to 'Bird on the Wire' (the other group organising it) is hard to say.  For local people, it's three days of not being able to open windows, As someone said above, if a resident set up a PA in their back garden and subjected the neighbours to 10 hours of hard dance music every day for three days, the Council would take action. Do not underestimate how distressing that is for many local residents, many of whom are elderly, frail, young, vulnerable. They deserve more respect than is being shown by those who think it's no big deal. And just to be clear, GALA and the council do not consider there to be a breach of db level if the level is corrected within 15 minutes of the breach. In other words, while db levels are set as part of the noise management plan, there is an acknowledgement that a breach is ok if corrected within 15 minutes. That is just not good enough. Local councillors objected to the proposed extension. 75% of those that responded to the consultation locally did not want GALA 26 to take place at all. For me personally, any goodwill that had been built up through the various consultations over recent years was erased with that application for a second weekend, and especially given that when asked if there were plans for that in post 2025 event feedback meetings (following rumours), GALA lied and said there were no plans to expand. I have come to the conclusion that all the effort to appease on some things is merely an exercise in show, to get past the council's threshold for the events licence. They couldn't give a hoot in reality for local people, and people that genuinely care about parkland, don't litter it with noisy festivals either.   
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...