Those who are angry that Nestl茅 is extracting and bottling millions of litres of sa国际传媒鈥檚 fresh water are perhaps caught up in a minor issue while much bigger issues are overlooked.
The Swiss-based food-and-beverage company bottles 265 million litres of water each year, which it takes from an aquifer near Hope. Under sa国际传媒鈥檚 new groundwater rules, to go into effect in 2016, those extracting groundwater for industrial use will be required to pay fees to use the water. It doesn鈥檛 change much 鈥� under the new rules, Nestl茅 will pay $596 a year to extract its water.
And that has people mad, especially during a drought. More than 200,000 people from across the country 鈥� half of them from sa国际传媒 鈥� signed a petition that was presented to Environment Minister Mary Polak鈥檚 office. The outcry has not landed on deaf ears 鈥� Premier Christy Clark said the government will rethink the new groundwater rate structure, as the petition and other outcries show the public thinks bottled-water companies should pay more.
Be careful, warns former sa国际传媒 Liberal MLA Judi Tyabji, who argues that to charge a 鈥渇air price鈥� would commodify sa国际传媒鈥檚 groundwater, which would risk triggering a clause in the North American Free Trade Agreement 鈥渢hat says if a government is selling water, and it鈥檚 being exported to the U.S., then we can鈥檛 reduce the volume.鈥�
But that鈥檚 not an issue, say a variety of legal and trade experts. Water was not discussed during the NAFTA negotiations with the U.S. and Mexico. And bulk water exports 鈥� anything in containers over 20 litres 鈥� are banned by both the federal and provincial governments. Legal attempts to contest that ban have not been successful.
So the spectre of pipelines and tankers carrying our fresh water south are largely unfounded. And the amount withdrawn by Nestl茅 in a year is about how much treated water the Greater Victoria region uses in two days, much of it for golf courses and landscaping.
Nestl茅 says it uses less than one per cent of the capacity of the aquifer from which it draws its water, and the Canadian Bottled Water Association says its industry extracts 0.01 per cent of the available groundwater in sa国际传媒
Still, the sentiment that bottling companies should pay more is valid (and the industry is not opposed to paying higher fees). A fee that merely covers the cost of processing a permit is insufficient 鈥� the fees should help finance a broad inventory of the province鈥檚 water supply, a look at how much there is and how it is being protected.
So while Nestl茅 and other water-bottling companies are not sucking sa国际传媒 dry, nor are they likely any threat to the water supply, there are still environmental concerns.
Why bottled water anyway? In North America, most people have access to a decent water supply. Greater Victoria鈥檚 water supply is of excellent quality. Yet you can pay as much as 10,000 times as much for bottled water as you pay for tap water.
It鈥檚 an unnecessary expense, and one that has the potential to harm the environment. The amount of water needed to manufacture a plastic water bottle is three times what the container holds, according to a website called HealthResearchFunding.org.
Plastic water bottles can be recycled, but the rate of return is low in many places, and the containers are a major source of pollution all over the world.
We should be less concerned about the water being taken from the ground for bottling and more concerned about the bottles.
