“ Metro Vancouver is to be commended for encouraging its citizens to use fewer plastic water bottles by drinking tap water from safe, reusable containers. When people look at the true environmental and health costs of convenience, they often choose to forgo convenience when they can. Our non-profit has new research folks might be interested in about the toxic footprint of bottled water on our website at www.toxicfreecanada.ca Of note is that, despite having one of the best deposit recycling systems in Canada, 130 million PET plastic bottles end up in Metro Vancouver landfills each year! Buying few water bottles will reduce the amount going into landfills, and lower greenhouse gas emissions and toxins generated during manufacture and shipping.

“ This essay on bottled water by David Eaves is interesting, but flawed. I whole-heartedly agree with his promotion of increased deposits on beverage containers. Here in Manitoba, we lack a deposit system and as a result have some of the worst recycling rates in the country. By contrast, Alberta has just increased its charge and is heading towards a 95% recovery rate for beverage containers. I would like to just make a couple of corrections to the piece. Firstly, the target of the anti-bottled water movement has not generally been the sale of bottled water in the private sector. Rather the focus has been to stop selling bottled water in municipal or provincial facilities including schools, recreation centres and hospitals. These are facilities that should be promoting the best in health and safety and should be championing a publicly owned resource. It is contradictory that the institutions that are responsible for safe public drinking should be providing bottled water on their premises. Secondly, the rise in bottled water use is driven not merely by the convenience associated with bottles, but also by the decline in investment in public water infrastructure. The greater the presence of bottled water, the easier it is for officials to not maintain public fountains, for example. It is a real fear that increased dependence could lead to declining public investment in water more generally. Water is a right we all share. It is not one we should need pay for by the glass. Josh Brandon Manitoba Eco-Network, Water Caucus www.mbeconetwork.org/water

“ I agree with commentator Josh Brandon that this essay on bottled water is interesting but flawed. David Eves is correct in writing that people tend to buy bottled water out of convenience. It is more convenient to buy bottled water than to remember to bring a stainless steel container. But isn't it also more convenient to use plastic bags than to remember to bring canvass ones? It took me quite a while to remember to bring my canvass bags when shopping, as it took me a while to remember to bring my stainless steel container when I'm out and about. But I very seldom forget to now. Economics tends to be the prime influencer when it comes to behavioural changes. It's amazing what 5 cents will do. And certainly bottles tend to be returned if folks receive a deposit. Here's another thought which is in keeping with another problem that David Eves does not address when it comes to bottled water. Companies that sell us the convenience of bottled water dip into community aquifers for free. Yes, for free. Citizens in various communities across North America and the world have been battling with their local governments against this practice (http://www.insidethebottle.org/mapping-the-industry). There is a reason why privatized water is so cheap. What if these companies pay the full cost of of the water they access - and that price is reflected in the water and sugary pop and juice that they sell? That will affect people's purchasing decision more than anything else. We have to start accounting for the full cost of the products and packaging currently on the market.

“ Though I generally like Eaves' arguments, this one fell flat for me. Although he premises his argument on consumer convenience, he neglects to examine the full cost-benefit implications of such convenience. Both social and individual environmental/health costs are in play with bottled water, as other commentators have articulated. But what strikes me most is the profound state of ignorance that consumers enjoy when they buy bottled water. See http://envirolaw.com/2009/08/20/whats-in-bottled-water/#more-1596 for a concise summary of the legal protection afforded to tap water consumer versus bottled water consumers. Even the Canadian Food Inspection Agency admits that more needs to be done on bottled water standards.

“ I've always been a fountain drinker but except for the large parks and some university halls, they're near impossible to find by in downtown Montreal. What has become an irritation for me, when I'm parched and can't find a store or lack the change-took on a whole other meaning for me last week. I saw a homeless man, the same man I pass every day, who pushes his neatly packed cart and never asks anyone for anything. He was sitting by the side of the road, with his shoes off rocking back and forth. It was 38 degrees and it was obvious that he was not well. I had a five minute walk to my air conditioned home and cool water but what would he do? Where could he possibly get a drink? I know the area and there is nowhere, that does not involve a 25 minute hike up a mountain…or money. This man has pride and should not have had to wait for a stranger to notice that he was in desperate need. I agree with Josh Brandon that "water is a right we all share". Even with a Quebec refund of 5 cents on water bottles, it would, ironically, be this same water-less man and others like him who would be fishing out our discarded bottles from the trash. I think our government has create a broader plan for public water infrastructure. The motivation to drink from a public fountain and save $1.50, would be much stronger than getting a refund of 5 cents. I recall being well hydrated for the first 17 years of my life, before these little bottles took over.

“ First I would like to commend all the readers commenting before me. I found their comments relevant and of more use than this David Eaves column. Actually, the only thing I do agree with in the article is that it would perhaps be a good idea to increase the deposit amount on the bottles. One statement that really took me aback was: "but it doesn't come in a container you can take anywhere and then dispose of when you are done. For many people keeping track of a container is quite frankly a drag." Is it not 2009? Do we not have an enormous problem with the waste from the Western world overwhelming the planet? Is there not a giant plastic "island" floating in the pacific, too big for anyone to manage or destroy? We have molecules from plastics in our fat, breast-milk, & tissue. We have climate change. But t's not "convenient" to take on that onerous task of keeping track of a stainless steel water bottle?!? When I think about this statement though, I realize that David has perhaps stated what many others think & do. Perhaps it depends on the groups or neighbourhoods one frequents? I know that in our city's kindergartens, every student brings their own stainless steel water bottle every day, and rarely is their ever a problem with lost or forgotten ones. Their parents all seem to carry their own as well. I hope we don't have to wait for those little ones to grow up to get responsible citizens, at least with regards to water. We may not have that much time.

“ I'm always interested in debates over water use and bottling water. Perhaps it is because I come from Australia where the water supply is too quickly drying up. Although I agree that reducing the sale of bottled water is a priority for reducing waste, this is not my primary motivation to stop the sale of bottled water. Nor is it a question of water safety. My main concern in the water debate is the concentration of ownership. With an ever-dwindling supply of water available across the planet, reduced public ownership of water is my main fear. If the water bottling companies can access clean drinking supplies and buy up land where this water is most available, then as a public we are less in control of our most precious resource. It was not that long ago that Bolivia came up against this very real problem. The people of the country revolted against privatization of the water supply - and won! There are examples of companies in Australia buying up cheap farm land where water is available and then selling the bottled water back to consumers at $2 per bottle. If this buy-up is allowed en masse with little government regulation, then we stand to lose access to that resource altogether. In Canada the lack of access to clean drinking water is not yet felt by the majority of consumers, but only a little way to the south, several US states are facing permanent drought. We must be aware that the shortage of water and the ensuing crisis is near at hand. As a democratic country, Canada has the opportunity now to put in place regulation that will protect access to water for years to come; not doing so will invite the worst-case scenario where we all pay heavy costs to access that we all (above) agree is our right.