How Much of Our Water Are Bottlers Taking?

In a recent op-ed on SFGate.com, chef Michael Chiarello, who owns Bottega restaurant in Napa Valley, pondered whether or not fancy bottled water should be part of the menu. He admits that he's been horrified to find that dinner tabs for six people can often include $50 in bottled water expenses. At his own restaurant, they've decided to forgo bottled water for a good purification system for tap. But he asks readers, "Do you think there's a place for an imported water menu in a restaurant?"

I'm not going to be shy about my answer — I think it's ludicrous to pay for bottled water. It's not just bad for your checkbook, it's bad for the environment. But here's an even more pertinent question: Should water bottlers disclose how much of our water they're taking?

I'm going on my fourth year of living in California, and for the entire first three years I was here, the news was all about California's big drought and growing water crisis. The governor has been trying to ram a $11 billion bond through the legislature to pay for massive water infrastructure allegedly to try to solve the problem (although there are other explanations for that plan). And yet, water bottlers are allowed to suck up the state's water, bottle and sell it for a handsome profit, and not tell us how much they're taking. So how exactly are we supposed to manage our water resources? Of course the state’s water issues go well beyond bottled water, but this seems like a no-brainer.

Luckily, there is a way for California legislature to take action. Assembly members Felipe Fuentes and Mary Hayashi along with Senator Ellen Corbett have put forth a bill, A.B. 301, that would require bottled water companies to report the amount of water they are bottling.  Sounds like a pretty reasonable law, right?

It's also a necessary one. Here's something to get you thinking: Last summer, Nestle scored a sweet deal in Sacramento. While city residents were facing water restrictions, the bottling company was given freedom to take as much of the municipal water as it wanted — and of course, Nestle doesn't have to disclose how much it's taking. And sure, Nestle's paying for the water — but paying peanuts. City Council member Kevin McCarty explained, "At current rates, they [Nestle] would pay the city about 65 cents per 100 cubic feet of water, or 750 gallons. That works out to a payment to the city of $186 for the 215,000 gallons of water taken on an average day. By the time that water is bottled and put on a grocer's shelf, the consumers would pay more than $2.1 million for those 215,000 gallons — a profit margin of roughly 10,000 percent!"

Clearly water bottlers are getting a free pass at the expense of the rest of us. It should be within the rights of Californians to know how much water companies are taking, especially when this water is coming from public sources. The state Senate and Assembly will vote on A.B. 301 within the next two weeks. Sign our petition asking California's lawmakers to hold bottled water companies accountable for how much H20 they pull from the state's water supply.

Photo credit: Klearchos Kapoutsis