2011-2012 DICKINSON COLLEGE STUDENT SENATE
Resolution Number:
Introduced on February 28, 2012
Author(s): Eller Mallchok ’15, Timothy Damon ’12, Margaret Price ‘14
Co-sponsor(s): Matt Michrina ‘12
A resolution to express Student Senate support for a Dickinson campus that reaps the
economic, social, and environmental benefits of not using bottled water.
WHEREAS
Dickinson College currently consumes 45,024 bottles of water per year;
WHEREAS
at the Dickinson sale price of $1.50 per bottle, this amounts to $67,536
spent each year;
WHEREAS
the Borough of Carlisle’s municipal water treatment facility was the first
in Pennsylvania, and only the eighth in the country, to receive the
Excellence in Water Treatment Award from the Partnership for Safe
Water;
WHEREAS
the standards for water quality are less stringent for privately bottled water
than for water provided by public utilities;
WHEREAS
using clean local tap water instead of bottled water would have numerous
social, economic, and environmental benefits (see Addendum B);
WHEREAS
coursework from ECON 222 Environmental Economics supports this
proposal (see Addendum C);
WHEREAS
over 700 students have signed a petition in support of ending the sale of
bottled water on the Dickinson College campus.
LET IT BE RESOLVED that the Dickinson College Student Senate:
1. Endorses the transition of Dickinson College from a campus that consumes
bottled water to one that uses clean local tap water instead (in a manner as
outlined in Addendum A).
First Reading on February 28, 2012
Addendum A
Clarification:
The purpose of this resolution is for the Student Senate to endorse the broad vision of the
College transitioning from bottled water entirely to clean local tap water – this is
EarthNow’s long term goal. This transition, however, must occur in stages. It must also
involve both material and cultural changes (as distinct types of changes).
The very first step was a cultural one: EarthNow ran a multi-semester education
campaign on campus to promote tap water instead of bottled water – this effort collected
more than 700 student signatures in support of making the transition. The culmination of
this growing awareness and support is for the Student Senate to formally endorse this
transition effort, thereby making further progress possible.
One such next step is a material one: that Dining Services will begin to allow its
purchasing contracts for bottled water to expire. This means that the College’s dining
venues will no longer sell bottled water once this is implemented. Additional material
steps could include adding infrastructure (e.g., filtered filling stations) to existing
buildings and future renovations/construction (e.g., the new residence hall, the Kline and
HUB projects, etc). These would be material changes that would promote further cultural
changes. In fact, details for adding any needed infrastructure could be conducted during
the remainder of this semester; any necessary installations could be made before the sale
of bottled water would end.
Ultimately, this transition will be mostly a cultural one. Students will still have access to
bottled water from outside the campus and can still choose to drink it. The goal is not to
eliminate all bottled water consumption, but to make Dickinson a place that promotes and
facilitates a way of living without it.
The Senate’s Environmental Liaison will continue to work with EarthNow as the process
moves forward, ensuring appropriate collaboration and representation.
Addendum B
The benefits of switching to clean local tap water over bottled water from afar:
Social Benefits:

Higher health standards

Water is available to students at significantly lower cost (more equitable)

Shows support for the Carlisle community
Economic Benefits:

The College saves money that can go to other things students want

Students themselves save money and can spend it on other things

Greatly improves resource efficiency
Environmental Benefits:

The College will produce less waste

Less pollution from manufacturing and trucking bottled water

Promotes utilization of local resources and clean water sources
Other College-Specific Benefits:

Boosts Dickinson’s reputation for sustainability (good for Admissions, everyone)

A step toward commitment of becoming “carbon neutral”

Etc.
Addendum C
Take Back the Tap: Improving Dickinson’s Economic, Social, and Environmental
Sustainability
A Proposal by Timothy Damon ‘12
ECON 222: Environmental Economics
Professor Sebastian Berger
February 23, 2012
Goal: To transition Dickinson from a campus that consumes bottled water to one that
uses clean local tap water instead, thereby providing a range of economic, social, and
environmental benefits for the College.
Rationale: This project has its roots in principles from ecological economics perspective.
All human activity transforms natural resources into waste products to provide economic
goods and services. Since natural resources are limited by quantity and rate of
availability, the human economy must consider the optimal scale for its activity, while
seeking to do so as equitably and efficiently as possible (in that order).
The case of bottled water: Bottled water requires the use of plastic made from nonrenewable oil stocks. Oil is essentially solar energy that was trapped (through
photosynthesis) as organic matter millions of years ago, thus its use has allowed human
activity to consume energy at a much faster rate than what the sun provides annually.
Consequently, making bottled water not only depletes an irreplaceable resource but is
also one of countless examples of humans living beyond their natural means (a lifestyle
that is rapidly burning through all the savings in our solar bank account). Studies have
also found that bottled water is not free from contamination (as many believe) and its
quality standards are actually less strict than those that regulate public water utility.
The case of Dickinson: Dickinson consumes over 45,000 bottles of water each year. In
addition to the bottles themselves, this activity consumes resources for shipping (more
oil) and generates pollution during both production and disposal – even recycling bottles
consumes more energy, which mostly comes from fossil fuel sources. Spending money
for bottled water is absurd when one considers that the College has locally available
water of nationally-recognized quality right here in Carlisle.
The benefits: Switching to clean local tap water will, inter alia, save money (for both the
College and students), reduce Dickinson’s environmental impact, conserve natural
resources, promote the local community, improve water quality, and boost the College’s
reputation for sustainability.
Conclusion: This project is entirely a matter of policy. While there are complementary
improvements that could be made to the physical infrastructure of the campus, taking
back the tap is primarily about awakening to the reality of the implications associated
with where we get our water. The clear choice is to move in the direction of greater
economic, social, and environmental sustainability.
(See graphics below)
Compare, if you will, the Bottled Water System Dickinson currently has with the Tap
Water System it could have. Which would you prefer?