An Analysis of Bottled Water
Calvin Chan
SOCI 430 99A
December 2, 2009
The United Nations Development Programme stated in their Human Development
Report 1998 Overview that “today’s consumption is undermining the environmental resource
base” and that it is “exacerbating inequalities,” referring to the links between these forces and
the dynamics of consumption and poverty1. One product in particular that has emerged in this
generation, having prompted an alarming set of patterns and effects as a result of its
consumption, is bottled water. Though the actual practice of bottling water began during the
days of the Roman Empire, the commercial exploitation of this exercise – mainly in North
America and Europe – has increased exponentially and become highly profitable over the last
ten to fifteen years. The claim that “the bottled water industry has literally created its own
water culture2” is without hyperbole, and it alludes to the important issues related to the
patterns and effects resulting from the consumption of one of the world’s most unique natural
resources in contemporary times.
Statements printed directly on a one-litre bottle of Aquafina give simple yet powerful
insight into this notion. One illustrative example, printed on the bottle cap, is “manufactured
by independent bottlers under the authority of PepsiCo, Inc.” Competitors of Aquafina (Pepsi),
which include brands such as Dasani (Coca-Cola) and Perrier (Nestle), include many of the
world’s largest multinational corporations. Though such companies are usually the targets of
activism against big business, the billions of dollars that the bottled water industry makes
annually exemplify both the genuine purchasing patterns of today’s consumer as well as the
power of the modern corporation. Another statement printed on the label, “official water of
Major League Baseball,” further reinforces this latter point, highlighting the important roles of
both advertising and corporate sponsorship in today’s business climate. This idea is alluded to
by Shah, who comments that “businesses and advertising are major engines in promoting the
consumption of products so that they may survive. How much of what we consume is
influenced by their needs versus our needs?”
The description of how Aquafina water is produced is revealing, with the label stating
that “it originates from public water sources and is then purified through a rigorous, seven-step
purification process called HydRO-7,” a method of reverse osmosis. In other words, municipal
drinking water supplies, or tap water, are the sources of this particular product and many other
bottled waters3. The question of whether or not the practice of purification is worth the price –
the one-litre bottle of Aquafina cost $1.89 USD – begs to be asked. One argument raised by the
Canadian Dental Association is the “correlation between increased cavity decay and
consumption of bottled water.” Fluoride, which is often present in tap but not bottled water, is
important for the protection of teeth4, and is a benefit that is lost in the removal of particulate
matter from water during filtration. It should also be noted that tests on both tap and bottled
water have resulted in the determination of contaminants, with researchers concluding that “in
some cases, it appears bottled water is no less polluted than tap water 5.”
On the topic of health, looking back on Shah’s commentary, it is interesting to note that
the estimated cost to achieve universal access to water and sanitation in all developing
countries is $9 billion USD – a mere portion of the $15 billion USD American bottled water
industry, and only a miniscule fraction of the global soft drink industry of which it is a part6. The
danger is illustrated as follows: “acute diarrhoeal diseases are among the leading causes of
mortality in infants and young children in many developing countries; in most cases, death is
caused by dehydration7.” It is ironic, then, that an industry that provides paying customers with
a product that came from a free supply and is arguably of no higher quality than a free
resource, has generated overwhelming monetary reserves that would allow it to comfortably
provide that resource to the billions of people who have no access to it and need it most. As
Shah poses, “what is the impact on poorer nations?”
The discussion, then, turns to price. A simple comparison by volume shows that bottled
water can cost close to 7,000 times that of tap water8, not to mention the fact that it uses up to
2,000 times more energy to produce and deliver9. Both figures have to do with the fact that an
estimated $100 billion is spent annually worldwide on extracting, altering, packaging, and
shipping bottled water, illustrating that “over 90% of the cost of bottled water is in the bottle,
lid, and label.” Packaging and advertising “give consumers the perception that bottled water
comes from some pristine mountain spring or magical underground aquifer, assuring purity and
quality;” this, as has been shown, is not always the case. Rather, the costs incurred in both the
production and consumption of bottled water illustrate the inequalities outlined in the
aforementioned UN report, where it is stated that “the 20% of the world’s people in the
highest-income countries account for 86% of total private consumption expenditures.”
One final statement printed on the Aquafina bottle, if not the most clichéd, is “please
recycle.”
Ideally, this request would be fulfilled, but in Canada, the Windsor Utilities
Commission has found that nine out of every ten plastic water bottles are not recycled, but
rather end up in the landfill. The vast quantity of resultant waste represents what is cited in
Shah’s article as the inability of a society based on consumption to shift from polluting to
cleaner goods and production technologies, where he declares that “inherent in today’s global
economic system is the wasteful use of resources.” One suggested alternative is a point-of-use
system, such as an in-home Brita water filtration system, which is praised to be “by far the most
economical, the most convenient, and the most capable way of producing the healthiest, best
tasting water.” Such systems are able to achieve unit costs totalling only a fraction of bottled
water prices by utilizing public water sources. Further, the user can abstain from discarding a
bottle after a single use, a practice which has, unfortunately, become common.
As a final consideration, Shah asks the following as it relates to analyzing a consumer
item: “does the product enhance the quality of life for the purchaser? Is it a necessity or a
luxury item?” As we have seen, bottled water certainly moves beyond basic needs. Currently,
it is a key staple used by multinational corporations on an enormous scale. However, it is
arguable whether or not the product is any better or of a higher quality than that which runs
through public faucets. The success of bottled water in Western society is in stark contrast to
the situation facing developing countries, where the lack of clean drinking water is a vivid and
distressing circumstance. What is so interesting about the product is that it remains popular
despite the high costs of both production and waste. Clearly, the consumption of bottled water
has produced significant patterns and effects that have resulted in consequences that many
would characterize as desirable. Unfortunately, it is only one of many possible examples.
Works Cited
1
Shah, Anup. “Consumption and Consumerism.” Global Issues, 3 Sep 2008. Web. 2 Dec 2009.
<http://www.globalissues.org/issue/235/consumption-and-consumerism>.
2
Klessig, Lance. “Bottled Water Industry.” Academic Computing at Evergreen, 2004. Web. 2
Dec 2009. <http://academic.evergreen.edu/g/grossmaz/klessill/>.
3
Layton, Julia. “How Bottled Water Works.” TLC Cooking, 2009. Web. 2 Dec 2009. <http://
recipes.howstuffworks.com/bottled-water1.htm>.
4
CBC News. “Bottled Water.” CBC, 20 Aug 2008. Web. 2 Dec 2009. <http://www.cbc.ca/
news/background/consumers/bottled-water.html>.
5
The Associated Press. “Some bottled water just as contaminated as tap water: study.” CBC,
15 Oct 2009. Web. 2 Dec 2009. <http://www.cbc.ca/consumer/story/2008/10/14/bottledwater-contamination.html>.
6
Fishman, Charles. “Message in a Bottle.” Fast Company, 19 Dec 2007. Web. 2 Dec 2009.
<http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/117/features-message-in-a-bottle.html>.
7
Rehydration Project. “Why is Dehydration so Dangerous?” 19 Nov 2009. Web. 2 Dec 2009.
<http://rehydrate.org/dehydration/>.
8
Windsor Utilities Commission. “Tap vs. Bottled Water.” 2009. Web. 2 Dec 2009.
<http://www.wuc.on.ca/conservation/tap_vs_bottled.cfm>.
9
Bottled Water Blues. “Bottled Water Facts.” 2009. Web. 2 Dec 2009. <http://www.
bottledwaterblues.com/bottled_water_facts.php>.