Make sure the bottle you're using doesn't contain BPA

Yes, Bisphenol A Does Enter the Body from Plastic Bottles

(From the Wallstreet Journal)

A study out from the Harvard School of Public Health doesn’t resolve the controversy around the health effects of bisphenol A, but it does demonstrate that drinking from hard plastic bottles with BPA increases the amount of the chemical in people’s bodies.

Some 77 Harvard students drank all cold beverages from stainless steel bottles for a week to get the BPA out of their bodies, theBoston Globe reports. Then they drank all cold beverages for a week from bottles made from BPA. Urine samples showed their BPA levels jumped during the second week. The study can be found on the Web site of the journal Environmental Health Perspectives.

Some experts believe exposure to BPA interferes with baby’s development, and there’s been some noise about the chemical’s impact on diabetes, heart disease and liver toxicity in adults. About a year ago, Nalgene said it would stop using BPA in its water bottles, and Wal-Mart said it would convert its entire stock of baby bottles to BPA-free products. More recently, the six largest manufacturers of baby bottles said they will end U.S. sales of bottles made with the BPA.

The FDA has said that BPA isn’t a health hazard at current exposure levels, though it’s gotten some heat over the methods it used to make that decision. The agency told the Globe yesterday that its new chief scientist, Jesse Goodman, will “take a fresh look at this important issue from a scientific and policy position.”

The American Chemistry Council told the Globe that the Harvard study shows that exposure to BPA from the bottles is “extremely low” and shows that “even exclusive use of polycarbonate bottles does not lead to unusually high levels of bisphenol A in the urine.”

Spring Water? Tap Water? Nestle Doesn't Seem to Notice the Difference

Here's a riddle: Take water from a source, pump it to the surface, put it through miles of pipelines, and truck it to a big city. What do you get?

If you're Nestle Waters, you get: pure mountain spring water.

Sounds like tap water to me! Read on...

Water-permit application by Nestle taps wellspring of conflict in community

May 1, 2009 - 8:17 PM

R. SCOTT RAPPOLD

THE GAZETTE

SALIDA • The name Nestle conjures images of chocolate.

But many in Chaffee County say there is nothing sweet about a proposal by the world's largest food and beverage company to draw spring water from along the Arkansas River, build a pipeline and truck the water to a plant in Denver for its Arrowhead brand of bottled water.

Tempers have flared and barbs have been traded at three marathon public hearings as county officials wrestle over whether to issue a land-use permit to Nestle Waters North America. The company owns the land and water rights near Nathrop and says it is investing $15 million in its effort to withdraw 65 million gallons a year. It has an agreement with Aurora for that city to release 200 acre-feet a year from an upper reservoir to compensate for the water Nestle would remove from the Arkansas basin.

At the heart of the debate is whether a community benefits when a company takes water from its springs to sell on grocery store shelves.

Some communities have fought such efforts - with mixed results - and the conflict in Salida could presage fights elsewhere in Colorado. Nestle has plans to tap springs in three or four more locations in the state.

"I think they could buy and dry our valley," said Vicki Klein, a board member of Chaffee Citizens for Sustainability, a group formed to fight the project. "Two hundred acre-feet might not be a huge amount initially, but where they can go from there is frightening.

"This thing is going to impact the county and the state more than I think people even think right now," Klein said.

Bruce Lauerman, natural resources manager for Nestle, said the company has been looking for springs to tap in Colorado since 2006 to save on the costs of shipping from California the water it sells here.

The water must be of a certain quality and not be fed by surface water,for the company to call it spring water.

"It's such a small - what I'll call a surgical - extraction of spring water from this aquifer," Lauerman said of the project.

Nestle says it will draw 10 percent of the springs' flow, and the impact to the Arkansas River "will not be measurable, even in low-flow conditions."

The company touts the benefits to the county: temporary construction jobs for the pipeline and related facilities; increased tax revenue for the county; removal of a dilapidated trout hatchery along the Arkansas; and preservation of the area as open space.

Opponents point to other concerns: 25 trucks a day going up and down Trout Creek Pass on U.S. 285; Nestle Waters' previous legal battles with small towns and citizen groups where it has wells and plants; and the effect the water loss could have on supplies during a drought.

At a hearing Wednesday, Terry Scanga, manager of the Upper Arkansas Water Conservancy District, said it could be "very injurious" to the Arkansas basin. Aurora doesn't take all the water it owns from the mountains, and in a drought that city could draw more to make up for what it releases for Nestle, he said.

"I think it's kind of ironic that an out-of-basin entity would be leasing water to another entity who will be taking it out of the basin," Scanga said.

The debate was heated Wednesday, leading county commissioners to limit comments to five minutes and threaten to remove anyone who cheered or booed.

It was many newcomers - retirees and others - who want to see the mountain splendor preserved, versus old-timers who say the county needs economic development.

"We have no need of them. They just don't benefit the community at all," said E.J. Sherry, who has lived in the area for a year and a half and said his face reddens and his blood pressure rises when he sees Lauerman.

It was people who believe bottled water is a waste of resources versus those who like having one in their car for drives.

"Water has spirituality. When we take water that is God-given and we put it in a bottle and sell it for profit, it's lost its spirituality," said Sharon Miller.

Countered lifelong resident Joe Cogan, 74, who lives adjacent to the project area: "I carry water bottles in my car so when I go to town I don't have to drink that stinking chlorinated water."

The newcomers, he said, "come here and they've been here two or three years or 10 years, and they think they should run the whole county."

Nestle operates 27 plants and more than 50 springs around the country.

Some of its legal difficulties with host communities, usually small, rural towns, include: a four-year legal battle with Fryeburg, Maine, to build a pumping station; a lawsuit by citizens in McCloud, Calif., who oppose a plan by the company to tap springs and build a bottling plant; and a public outcry in Enumclaw, Wash, about proposed wells and a bottling plant that led Nestle to abandon the plan.

The Chaffee County site would be its first spring in Colorado.

Nestle's Lauerman said the opposition "has very little to do with the specifics of the project itself, the viability of the project."

"It's more people with a distrust for corporations, people who are anti-growth no matter what the project is. It's people who have a philosophical bent against bottled water," he said.

Jeanine Zeman, spokeswoman for the opposition group, admits she doesn't like bottled water. She also believes Nestle has a poor record of working with communities where it sinks wells.

With the arguments impassioned on both sides, county commissioners are in no rush to make a decision. The hearing resumes Tuesday.

DETAILS

Nestle Waters North America owns the land and water rights near Nathrop and says it is investing $15 million in its effort to withdraw 65 million gallons a year. It also has plans to tap springs in three or four more locations in the state.

 

We Won! Governor Paterson Signs Executive Order to Phase Out State's Purchase of Bottled Water

After a month of campaigning with Think Outside the Bottle, we are proud to announce that our efforts paid off. What a great moment for democracy! Individuals really can make a difference. Thanks to all who volunteered and signed our petition.

For Immediate Release: May 5, 2009
Contact: Errol Cockfield | errol.cockfield@chamber.state.ny.us | 212.681.4640 | 518.474.8418

GOVERNOR PATERSON SIGNS EXECUTIVE ORDER TO PHASE OUT THE STATE’S PURCHASE OF BOTTLED WATER

Executive Order Will Improve Environment and Save Taxpayer Dollars

New York Becomes Second State in the Country to Eliminate Purchase and Use of Bottled Water

Governor David A. Paterson today signed an Executive Order to phase out New York State’s purchase and use of bottled water at State agency facilities. This announcement, made by the Governor at “Earth Day Lobby Day” inAlbany, marks another important step New York State is taking to improve the environment while simultaneously saving taxpayer dollars. Today’s actions make New York the second state in the country to eliminate the purchase and use of bottled water. 

The Executive Order will phase out the expenditure of State funds for the purchase of single serve bottles and larger, cooler-sized bottles for water consumed at State agency facilities. The measure requires each executive agency to develop and implement a plan to phase out expenditures for bottled water and provide alternative water sources such as ordinary tap water fountains and dispensers.

“Taxpayers have spent billions of dollars to ensure that we have clean drinking water supplies,” said Governor Paterson. “If we are going to make such significant investments, we should reap the benefits and use that water. Our efforts will serve as an example for local governments, businesses and residents to follow.”

Under the Executive Order, each agency plan is required to lay out the specific actions and policies that will be undertaken to achieve compliance with the Order; assess the capability of existing facilities to provide tap water for consumption in place of bottled water; identify reasonable improvements that can be made to ensure reasonable access to tap water for consumption; and describe the steps the agency will take to avoid new contractual commitments to purchase bottled water.

The Order also requires the Office of General Services to monitor agency compliance with the Order and identify agency constraints to compliance; identify options to make tap water available to patrons free of charge at food service establishments on State facilities as a choice in lieu of purchasing bottled water; and seek additional opportunities to transition from the use of bottled water to tap water at State facilities. 

Bottled water is wasteful and requires large amounts of energy to bottle and transport. Over 450 million gallons of oil are used to transport water from bottling plants to stores. In the United States, plastic water bottle manufacturing uses 17 million barrels of oil, producing over 2.5 million tons of carbon dioxide pollution. Eighty percent of these bottles, which are equal to four billion pounds, end up in garbage incinerators or landfills.

New York has an abundance of tap water for consumption. Three out of four people drink bottled water on a regular basis even though many bottled water products are often just filtered tap water. In addition, for each gallon of water that goes into a plastic bottle, two gallons of water are used to make the plastic bottles and to filter the water.

State Senator Antoine Thompson said: “While useful in some circumstances, bottled water is expensive and has several negative environmental impacts, including the pollution from vehicles used to transport the bottles, and the resources used to make the bottles. I congratulate the Governor on another green initiative and policy.”

Assemblyman Bob Sweeney, Chair of the Environmental Conservation Committee, said: “This will reduce large amounts of plastic container waste, conserve petroleum used in the manufacture of plastic water bottles, and reduce fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the bottling and transport of the bottled water. By switching from bottled water, State agencies can reduce their environmental impact while also saving tax-payers' dollars.”

Peter Lehner, Executive Director of the Natural Resources Defense Council, said: “A decade ago, NRDC released a comprehensive study revealing bottled water is no safer or more pure than municipal drinking water. In fact, New York State is home to some of the highest quality drinking water supplies in the nation. Governor Paterson’s announcement not only makes sense when it comes to public health – it will save taxpayers money and cut global warming emissions from the manufacture and transport of bottled water.”

Barbara Warren, Executive Director of the Citizens' Environmental Coalition, said: “Massive amounts of chemicals and petroleum are used to make unnecessary water bottles. This is a problem that did not exist even a few years ago. I applaud Governor Paterson for providing leadership on the important issue of reducing plastic waste.”

Dr. Urvashi Rangan, Director of the Technical Policy, Consumers Union (publishers of Consumer Reports) said: “A phase-out on the purchase of water bottles that includes a plan to ensure accessibility to clean tap water is the way to reduce unnecessary plastic waste and energy required to collect, bottle and transport water. We commend Governor Paterson's decision.”

For a copy of Executive Order No. 18, visit http://www.ny.gov/governor/executive_orders/exeorders/eo_18.html.

###

 

Additional news available at www.ny.gov/governor/press
High resolution images available at www.ny.gov/governor/mediaimages | password: paterson
New York State | Executive Chamber | press.office@chamber.state.ny.us | 212.681.4640 | 518.474.8418