bottled water should be banned essay

Should Bottled Water Be Banned? Essay

Plastics is one of the products that are leading in polluting the environment. Some of the goods made of plastic include plastic water bottles. Bottled water is the most consumed drink and beverage across the world. This is since the product is easily accessible and cheap. They are bought in large numbers and end up being irregularly disposed of, thus polluting the environment. Plastics are detrimental to the environment; they affect the soil, water, air and eventually lead to climate change and global warming. Although plastic bottled water is a better alternative to sugary drinks, plastic bottles are a threat to the environment, hence they should be banned.

Banning bottled water would be the right decision that would help reduce waste and protect the environment. The main component in water bottles is plastic. Plastics are a product of fossil fuels; when they are burned, they produce persistent organic pollutants (POP) (“Should Bottled Water Be Banned” 1). This is the polluting component of plastics. Although they are burnt, they still remain persistent in the air for a long time. When this happens, it forms its own clouds or merges with the existing ones forming polluted air. They are rich in toxic chemicals. Air pollution, one of the factors contributing to climate change, is caused by harmful emissions as a result of human activities. Factories and industrial facilities manufacturing plastic products are the major contributors to air pollution.

Banning bottled water is a correct decision since plastics are harmful to our health when ingested or inhaled. Plastics are made of petroleum products that also contribute to air pollution. Regulating emissions from these agents will therefore ensure that air pollution is reduced not only in the community but globally (“Should Bottled Water Be Banned” 2). Most communities lack proper waste disposal mechanisms; one of the harmful ways of disposing of wastes is burning – this often leads to air pollution.

Plastics are a threat to aquatic life. Aquatics such as fish are at a danger of being extinct because of plastics being disposed of in lakes, oceans, and seas. When consumed by fish and other aquatic creatures, the plastics block the breathing system of the animals and they end up suffocating. On the other hand, since ocean currents and air affect the climate, when they are polluted, they cannot form enough precipitation to form clouds that would eventually lead to rains. Unfortunately, some of the aquatic life such as fish find themselves on our tables as food; hence, we are jeopardizing our health when we use bottled water. Besides, they are a threat to aquatic life as when they are consumed by aquatics, they cause complications and may lead to death. When plastics are burnt, they pollute the air. When this occurs, they cause the greenhouse effect which is associated with climate change and global warming. Plastics adversely affect the soil since they cannot be decomposed and utilized as nutrients in the soil.

A ban on bottled water would protect the local water supplies from exploitation. Bottling plants are the cause of dried-up wells and wetlands or a depletion of the streamflow in the areas they are set up (“Should Bottled Water Be Banned” 2). Deposits of plastics in oceans interrupt the flow of oceanic currents. Due to destructive human activities such as the use of plastics, global climate has been fluctuating, and climate patterns have been difficult to predict. Recent research indicates that the conveyor belt has been affected as well. The oceanic conveyor belt is a system that facilitates the movement of oceanic currents. Unfortunately, climate change is threatening to change the pattern of how the circulation of oceanic currents occurs. One of the consequences of its interference in the flow of ocean currents is that it could either slow or stop the conveyor belt entirely. One of the effects of climate change on the oceanic conveyor belt is that it leads to a rise in global temperatures.

Although the use of bottled water may be cheap to purchase, it is costly to maintain and dispose of. One of the consequences of the use of plastic bottles is climate change. Due to harsh climatic conditions, such as droughts, governments have been forced to initiate food distribution programs that are costly (“Should Bottled Water Be Banned” 3). Climate change and global warming also have detrimental impacts on agriculture, which is one of the leading income-generating sectors in most countries. There has been a change in climate all over the world with some parts of it experiencing extreme climatic conditions such as high temperatures or lack of rainfall. These environmental issues affect the quality of life. Recently, it has become hard to predict the climate in most parts of the world, as weather patterns have changed.

In summary, it is evident that bottled water does more harm than good to both humans and the environment, and hence they should be banned. They are harmful in the following ways: First, plastics do not decompose easily. This means that when they are burnt, they stay in the air longer, and since they contain pollutants, they contaminate the air. Due to plastics’ inability to be decomposed, they pose a threat to both the vegetation and insects, animals, and microorganisms in the soil. It has also been scientifically proven that it interferes with the flow of oceanic currents which leads to a rise in global temperatures. Some of the impacts of climate change on a diverse population include food shortages, aridity, acid rain, high temperatures, lack of rainfall.

“Should Bottled Water Be Banned? – Top 4 Pros and Cons.” ProCon , 2018. Web.

• Environmental Impact of Bottled Water
• Bottled Water Industry and Aquafina
• Parent Purchase Bottled Water
• Carbon Dividends Analysis
• Microplastic Soil Contamination in the Context of Environmental Safety
• The Skepticism of Consumers Towards Green Products
• Forests Are the Earth's Lungs
• Coral Reefs Protection: Academic Sources Analysis
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2022, February 22). Should Bottled Water Be Banned? https://ivypanda.com/essays/should-bottled-water-be-banned/

"Should Bottled Water Be Banned?" IvyPanda , 22 Feb. 2022, ivypanda.com/essays/should-bottled-water-be-banned/.

IvyPanda . (2022) 'Should Bottled Water Be Banned'. 22 February.

IvyPanda . 2022. "Should Bottled Water Be Banned?" February 22, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/should-bottled-water-be-banned/.

1. IvyPanda . "Should Bottled Water Be Banned?" February 22, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/should-bottled-water-be-banned/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Should Bottled Water Be Banned?" February 22, 2022. https://ivypanda.com/essays/should-bottled-water-be-banned/.

Home — Essay Samples — Environment — Water Quality — Should Bottled Water Be Banned

Should Bottled Water Be Banned

• Categories: Natural Resources Water Quality

About this sample

Words: 680 |

Published: Aug 31, 2023

Words: 680 | Page: 1 | 4 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Prof. Kifaru

Verified writer

• Expert in: Environment

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

4 pages / 1731 words

1 pages / 429 words

1 pages / 490 words

3 pages / 1502 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Water Quality

A poor drainage system can have far-reaching consequences on urban areas, affecting the quality of life, infrastructure, and overall well-being of residents. This essay explores the challenges posed by inadequate drainage [...]

The interplay of soil and water within the ecosystem forms the cornerstone of life on Earth. These two fundamental elements, seemingly humble in their origins, are the vital underpinnings that sustain all living organisms and [...]

The delicate balance of marine ecosystems is under siege as ocean acidification poses a grave threat to their health and vitality. This essay dives into the intricate web of challenges presented by ocean acidification and [...]

The subject of water consumption is a critical and multifaceted topic that holds significant importance in today's world. With growing concerns about water scarcity, environmental sustainability, and the health of our [...]

Access to safe, clean water opens up a world of possibilities for community development. Without water, the most basic element of life, all other development efforts cannot be imagined. Sanitation and hygiene, working together [...]

The importance of wastewater treatment cannot be overstated in today's world. As populations grow and urbanization continues, the generation of wastewater has surged, posing serious environmental and public health challenges. [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Should Bottled Water Be Banned: Pros and Cons

Should Bottled Water Be Banned?

#1 banning plastic bottles is a step closer to a healthy environment.

It is common knowledge that plastic bottles contribute to our carbon footprints. Plastic water bottles leach harmful chemicals into the water and the environment, making them a menace for both the ecosystem and our own health.

#2 Banning Bottled Water would Protect Natural Water Sources

Up to 64% of bottled water is sourced from municipal water, also known as tap water, which can drain the supply meant for public use. Additionally, some bottled water companies are not transparent with their water sources, and destroy natural resources to supply their water bottles. A ban on bottled water would protect these supplies.

#3 Banning Bottled Water Opens Opportunities to Innovate Alternative Materials

The ban on bottled water is mostly limited to banning plastic water bottles. Other sustainable and eco-friendly materials are welcome for use as alternatives to plastic. In select cities across the US, private establishments have already enacted plastic water bottle bans, which opened opportunities for materials like stainless steel and aluminum to be commonplace.

#1 Banning Removes a Healthy Drink Option

Since 2016, bottled water outsold soda as the preferred drink of choice for the majority of consumers. The sales of water continue to skyrocket since then, taking a lead over unhealthy, sugary drinks. Removing bottles of water as a choice would veer people towards soda bottles instead, which would not solve the problem, and increase rates of diabetes and obesity.

#2 Banning Bottled Water is Not the Only Way

Some experts believe that banning bottled water is just a band aid solution to the ever-growing plastic problem. Certainly enough, plastic containers aren't limited to your ordinary water bottle. Plastic comes in various forms from food to single-use containers, and banning one or the other would not solve the problem. There are other ways to remedy plastic pollution.

#3 Other Drinks will Still Continue to Contribute to Global Warming

Out of the 20,000 plastic bottles sold every second, more than 10,000 of them contained drinking water. However, even if you remove drinking water out of that statistic, you would be left with bottles of sports drinks, sodas, juices, and other beverages consumers can opt for over water. This contributes to plastic waste concerns just the same.

Alternatives to Bottled Water

Refillable Water Bottles

One of the best alternatives to plastic containers is to use reusable ones. Most reusable bottle materials are made from stainless steel or plastic, but silicone and glass bottles also exist. These are meant to be multi-use, where you use the bottle infinitely until it can no longer safely contain your beverage.

However, most people tend to use more than one reusable bottle at a time depending on their aesthetic or affinity for certain tumbler designs. It is also inconvenient to bring your bottle around, and refilling it with water from unknown sources is not safe.

Glass Bottles

Glass bottles don't leach chemicals into your water, and they are endlessly recyclable as well. The problem is that glass shatters easily, and can be dangerous for small children to drink from. Glass bottles make for good alternatives to plastic ones, but must be handled with proper care.

• Aluminum Bottles

For a bottle that ticks all the boxes: portable, safe, recyclable, sustainable, and sanitary, aluminum bottles are the way to go. Aluminum is endlessly recyclable, but unlike glass, will not shatter upon impact. Aluminum is also lightweight and portable, which can top plastic materials in safety and sustainability. They are also reusable.

My Own Water produces our own line of aluminum bottles. We understand the plastic problem, and we aim to provide our customers with a guilt-free and sustainable choice. Our aluminum bottles are recycled, which uses up only 5% of the energy to process raw aluminum. Make the better choice, and go for aluminum bottled water!

Management Over Restrictions

From a privileged perspective, it seems easy to ban bottled water due to their negative environmental impacts . However, this decision is not fair to those areas where bottled water is the only potable water source, and the most practical emergency water supply.

Thick back to those times when a bottle of water was your only safe and practical option to drink: like in roadside carnivals or restaurants where the safety of their tap water and other drinks is dubious. In some landlocked areas, bottled water may be the only drink option for the people living there.

Bottled water is not all bad, but the more damaging aspect is how we manage our plastic waste. In the US, only 30%, or less, of plastic water bottles are recycled yearly, leaving 70% or so plastic water bottles littering the environment. The problem lies with the way we process this waste, which has room for improvement.

What we can personally do is make the choice for better alternatives like using a reusable bottle, or aluminum bottles instead of plastic. This way, we maintain the convenience of plastic without harming the environment.

Recent Article

To request more information or to get an estimate, simply fill out the contact form below.

Get In Touch With Us

• Bottle Sizes
• Bulk Bottles
• Custom Labels
• Label Templates
• Our Process
• Water Quality
• Our Commitment

© 2021 Crystal Beverage Company

Pros and Cons of Bottled Water: Should It Be Banned?

Green Coast is supported by its readers. We may earn an affiliate commission at no extra cost to you if you buy through a link on this page . Learn more .

Bottled water usage has skyrocket in recent years. Should bottled water be banned? Here we evaluate the number of pros and cons of bottled water. 

Water is an essential component of every living thing. Our bodies need constant supply of water for of it to operate normally. One way to stay hydrated is to have quick access to readily available source of water.

Having access to eco-friendly water consumption is one of the many advantages of going green .

What happens when you are in travel or away from other water sources? A majority of us turn to bottled water. But is bottled water a good option? Well.  In this article, we will focus on some of the pros and cons of bottled water.

Why the bottled water debate is important

Besides being the most significant component of our bodies, water helps us in numerous other functions.  If we were to write about the importance of water, we would fill an entire book with ten thousand things. But here, our primary focus is to explore whether bottled water is good or not.

Should bottled water be banned?  It is a question that keeps popping up when searching for bottled water. While there are many companies and big brands that are leaping big in this sector, a few industries are advocating for banning of bottled water.

Whether you should continue buying bottled water or not is a choice that you will be able to make after you read this article to the end.

Besides the unmatched convenience of bottled water, there some other advantages of bottled water that we will explore in a few.

However, bottled water also has a bunch of disadvantages ranging from environmental (like polyethylene terephthalate embedded in the bottles) to financial implications that cannot be ignored.

How to Curb Your Bottled Water Consumption

Regardless of the advantages or disadvantages of consuming bottled water, I think everyone should eliminate or reduce consumption. We are at historic levels of bottled water purchasing.

I’m a huge fan of eliminating my bottled water consumption to nearly zero. Why? Reducing bottled water consumption saves you time and money.  Plus, you eliminate significant waste management needs by using reusable water bottles. Here is the definition of the 3R’s of waste management .

Save money and avoid bottled water by obtaining a traveling water jug. No matter the occasion always use an eco-friendly reusable water bottle. I recommend the below products to bring with you on any travel, day trip or even at work.

To answer the question of why we should keep water bottles or not, we need to explore some of its pros and cons. So, here are some of the advantages and disadvantages of bottled water:

Pros of Bottled Water

Let’s evaluate some of the advantages of using bottled water.

One of the biggest advantages of bottled water is that it is very convenient. When you are out in the field or on holiday in a hot summer day, you can grab a bottle of water to quench your thirst from the nearest store. If you walk into any supermarket or a nearby grocery shop, you can find different brands of bottled water on sale. Bottled water is without a doubt readily available as well as portable.

It thus comes in handy when you are traveling long distance trips since it can keep you hydrated while on the move. Bottled water is usually purified and filtered to remove any harmful contents.

So, in a majority of instances, bottled water is a clean and safe option. Bottled water banning would, therefore, inconvenience people who are on travel or those who cannot access other ready to drink water options.

Bottles are recyclable

Another advantage of bottled water is that you can put the water bottle into a different use after you finish your water. The water bottles can serve you later if you want to store anything that is in liquid form. Even though water bottles are recyclable, a lot of it still ends up in trash cans.

It increases environmental hazards and results in increased cost of waste management. People should, therefore, be mobilized to stop throwing away empty cans aimlessly.

They should instead reuse them or give them to the recycling companies. Recyclable is very different than compostable.

Offers a variety of tasty water

Different companies that provide bottled water offer an array of flavors to their customers. Flavored water provides you with a chance to take water that best suits your taste buds.

If you love mint or other fruit essences such as pineapple, orange, coconut or cucumber flavor, you can find it in bottled water. Bottled water offers you a variety of choices.

See Related : Best Reusable K Cup Options to Consider

Now, let’s look at some of the disadvantages of bottled water:

Cons of Bottled water

Let’s evaluate some of the disadvantages of using bottled water.

Environmental issues

Bottles are harmful to the environment. While bottles used can be recycled, a few people still dispose of the cans carelessly after use. It consequently ends up in the wrong places like in drainage systems or even in water bodies.

Such waste hence causes drainage blockages or can pollute the water bodies that serve us in different ways. If the empty cans are disposed of in the trash cans, they may mix up with other wastes which are then transferred to the landfills.

When the landfill is burnt up, it may cause air pollution which can ruin the ozone layer and cause global warming. It is thus vital to throw away the empty cans responsibly, reuse them or take them to a recycling company.

Pollution also occurs when the factories that make the bottles emit greenhouse gases during the manufacturing process. These GHG gases also contribute greatly to global warming.

Using a reusable water bottle is sustainable and proven. It’s that simple.

Economic Implications

While you spend a dollar to buy bottled water, it may seem so little. But, if you compare bottled water vs. tap water, bottled water is by far more expensive compared to tap water and other ready to drink water options. A bottle of mineral water in most countries cost more than an equivalent or higher amount of tap water.

Bottled water processing is a long process. Though it creates job opportunities, it can be quite an expensive process from purifying to advertising the bottled water. Purchasing bottled water is an expensive option compared to tap water.

See Related : Are Plastic Straws Recyclable

Health-related issues

Bottles are made of plastic. Plastic containers contain a chemical called BPA and many others.  Research shows that these chemicals can seep into the water that is in the bottle, especially when exposed to heat or direct sunlight. The compounds can cause different deadly diseases including cancer.

Water can also be contaminated if it is left open which can result in different bacterial illnesses. If you must take bottled water, avoid storing it in high temperatures conditions and don’t leave it open for longer.

Its source and process of bottling is not well-known

Different brands keep cropping out every other day that offers mineral bottled water. But how sure are you that the source of the water and the process of bottling it are safe for you?  Some water companies don’t tell their sources of water which means it could be from anywhere.

How sure are you that the water in the bottle is safe for human consumption? Even though there are bodies that check the quality of any products in the market, that doesn’t stop the unregulated people from operating the black market.

So, be sure to always check the quality mark and be careful with the brand of water that you purchase from the store.

See Related : A Complete Guide to Greywater

Conclusion on the Pros and Cons of Bottled Water

If you weigh the pros and cons of bottled water, you are now able to answer the question, “Should bottled water be banned?” With that in-depth information on bottled water pros and cons, you can now decide which side you belong.

One thing to consider is that water is renewable . However, there is limited amounts of fresh drinking water available. We need to find ways to use gray water systems to free up water consumption elsewhere.

Our take is that bottled water usage should be mitigated as much as possible. Our oceans are clearly being damaged by the over-consumption of plastics. The pros simply don’t outweigh the cons of using bottled water. You can make sacrifices with your everyday life to curb bottled water consumption.

Use these greywater systems in your home to free up drinking water since you won’t use potable water for other purposes.

What are some additional pros and cons of bottled water? Please let us know in the comments below. We’d love to hear from you.

Articles you might also like

30 Facts about Electricity that Everyone Should Know

Cycling into the Future: Best Ebike Conversion Kits

Pros and Cons of Recycling Every Eco-Conscious Person Should Know

15 Rainwater Harvesting Benefits to Transform Household Water Consumption

The Best Sustainable Furniture Brands for Eco-Friendly Living

How to Recycle Shredded Paper: A Step-by-Step Guide

Everything You Need to Know About Porcelain Enamel Cookware

Electric Meter Reading Guide: Determine Your Energy Consumption

What Is Net Metering? How It Works and How You Can Benefit

Safe Propane Tank Disposal: How to Dispose of (or Recycle) Propane Tanks

Best Organic Face Masks: Our Top Picks

6 Tips for Building an Energy Efficient Home on a Budget

Should Bottled Water Be Banned?

I often hear of arguments saying bottles of mineral water should be banned. The logic of banning bottled water is that it is a strong commitment to reducing single-use plastic which has high environmental costs. However, others argue it is a rather drastic measure which only tackles small part of the problem.

Reasons to ban bottled water

• Plastic bottles require oil, water and environmental costs of transporting. This use of oil and plastic contributes to global warming, carbon emissions and is unecessary.
• Creates unnecessary landfill. Many plastic bottles end up as litter in the sea or the countryside where the plastic doesn’t degrade. This is both a visual eyesore but can cause problems and even death for wildlife.
• The water footprint of a bottled water is greater than just the water involved. Bottled water requires water in the packaging, production and distribution stage.
• Banning bottled water will encourage people to choose sustainable alternatives – refillable water.
• Already airports are providing places to top up water bottles rather than expect people to buy new ones.

Reasons not to ban bottled water

1. Water has a lower water footprint than other drinks . According to IBWA water has the lowest water footprint of any drink

• 1.39 litres to make one litre of bottled water
• 2.02 litres for one-liter soda.
• 4 litres of water for one-litre beer
• 4.74 litres for one-litre wine.
• 34.5 litres of water for every litre of alcoholic spirits

2. Encourages less healthy options. If bottled water is banned, but people want to drink they will be forced to choose less healthy options such as sugary and carbonated drinks. The problem of single-use plastic is not reduced, but we just see a rise in demand for other types of bottled drinks.

3. It takes away people’s choice of whether to buy water. Why should we ban bottled water, but not soda and alcohol which is worse for you?

4. There are better ways to deal with the problem of single-use plastic . Rather than ban bottled water, it would be better to tackle the wider issue. This could involve an ‘environmental tax’ on all plastic, single-use drinks. This provides a financial incentive to cut back on buying plastic bottles. The revenue raised could be used to fund clean-up operations in the sea and rivers.

5. Tap water may be unsafe or more likely to contain contaminants . Even in the US, potentially millions of people are drinking unsafe tap water. ( Science Mag ) One study found that during the Flint water crisis in 2015, nearly 21 million Americans—about 6%—were getting water from systems that violated health standards.

Personal view

For what it is worth I’d like to give my twopence worth on this topic. But, first, I have to admit my bias and prejudices. The thing is I don’t drink alcohol, I don’t drink soft drinks – I really hate Coke and things like that. I’m vegetarian. I cycle to work. I vote Green (if I ever get round to voting). I get up at 6 am in the morning to meditate. But, I do have one weakness – I really like drinking bottled water.

Sometimes, I like to sip the nicely carbonated San Pelegrino, other times I like to drink the pure still Evian. Sometimes I drink filtered tap water. But, water is the only thing I like to drink. I know it’s a bad habit – But, I’ve tried to kick it without success.

And I’m sure people are right when they say Thames tap water is much better for your health than Evian. (I mean all those nitrates, and chlorine is good for you right ?) And the fact tap water gets recycled seven times means it must be very eco.

Tax Bottled Water

Now as an economist I’m very fond of Pigouvian taxes. I believe we should have higher taxes on petrol , Fatty foods e.t.c

If people think bottled water has negative externalities (pollution, unnecessary landfill) then I’d be happy for an appropriate tax to be placed on bottled water so bad people like me can pay the true social cost.

But, if we tax bottled water shouldn’t we tax soft drinks? And is not water good for you? Maybe we should subsidise bottled water and tax soft drinks to encourage people to drink sugar-free liquid?

• Carbon Tax – Pros and Cons
• Environmental sustainability – definition and issues
• How to avoid environmental damage in the economy

News from the Columbia Climate School

Should Universities Ban Bottled Water?

Kavita Jain-Cocks

The University of Vermont is set to join a small but determined group of universities by moving to  end the sale of bottled water on campus as of January 2013.  Ending a ten year contract with Coca-Cola has allowed for increased options as the university attempts to reduce their environmental impact by cutting down on bottled water and to provide healthier options to students.  As in most of these situations, students pushed for change collecting well over a thousand signatures in favor of a “sustainable beverage system” and citing issues such as the oil required to make plastic bottles, the water that went to waste in the process (about three liters of water are required to bottle just one), the lack of recycling that takes placed with disposed bottles, that the bottled water is often sourced from tap water, and that their particular water supply was one of the cleanest in the country.  Although the university imposed change has yet to take place, students have already succeeded in reducing sales from 362,000 to 235,000 bottles per year between 2007 and 2010.

Other universities in Canada and the United States to have banned plastic bottled water include Belmont University, Oberlin College, Seattle University, University of Ottawa, University of Portland, University of Wisconsin (Stevens Point), Upstate Medical University, and Washington University in St. Louis.  Others including, but not limited to, New York University and Stanford University have banned plastic bottles from their dining halls.  Finally there are numerous student led efforts to ban bottled water at places such as Brown University, Cornell University, and Pennsylvania State University, though these have yet to become official.

Since bottled water is often cited as a convenience, places such as the University of Canberra in Australia have installed water vending machines that charge students to refill containers, though the prices are lower than they would have been for bottled water.  Others have installed something called hydration stations , which are essentially drinking fountains with an extra spigot making it faster and easier to refill bottles.  It has yet to be seen whether these changes will end up increasing the purchases of soft drinks as some claim it will.

As with most changes not everyone is happy about these developments, at the College of Saint Benedict in Minnesota, following the ban the Minnesota College Republicans handed out plastic water bottles to students claiming that the new policy deprived students of the right to choose.  Other criticisms include claims that people will tend to choose less healthy options such as soft drinks, that bottled water is simply convenient and even hydration stations or similar options will not be at the same level, that students may rightly be wary of unclean tap water especially at older schools, and as mentioned earlier that ultimately consumers should be able to decide for themselves what they buy.

Others assert that there is a surprisingly large amount of misinformation circling that unfairly portrays the detriments of bottled water.  The proponents of this include Chris Hogan , a spokesman for the International Bottled Water Association.  An editorial by John B. Challinor II , Nestle Waters Canada’s director of corporate affairs, elaborates on this point of view claiming that bottles are made in a more environmentally friendly way than is usually portrayed and that a ban would be largely irrelevant since bottled water is a competitor of other bottled beverages, not tap water.  Beverage companies such as Coca-Cola also have come out against these bans claiming, among other things, that people tend to hugely overestimate the scale of bottled water’s effect on landfills.  John Sicher, editor and publisher of Beverage Digest, points out that “Consumers have spoken” and they “like bottled water and that will remain for the foreseeable future”.

On the other side of the issue , are the groups pushing for change arguing that a ban on bottled water will help protect the environment while reducing campus beverage costs and improving the universities’ images as they “go green”.  Other points made are that for the most part bottled water is not really better for you than tap water and the idea that as a “basic human right” water is not something they should have to pay for.  Therefore, despite the criticisms they encounter, movements to ban bottled water have been gaining traction in various universities across the country as well as in other parts of the world.

Related Posts

How One Sustainable Development Student Balances Academics and Athletics

From Fission to Fusion: A Sustainability Student’s Quest for a Greener Future

Meet the Woman Pioneering Sustainable Change in Fashion

Congratulations to our Columbia Climate School MA in Climate & Society Class of 2024! Learn about our May 10 Class Day  celebration. #ColumbiaClimate2024

Kind of a ridiculous idea if you ask me. The best way that universities (and everyone else) can contribute to a drop in bottled water consumption is to have clean, working water fountains in more locations. These are far too few and far between, both on campuses and in places like shopping centers, municipal buildings, and offices.

We are using legal means to deal with cultural norms in a way that is heavy handed. The effects will be minimal, and the smoke caused by all the complaints will be considerable. If we want to save water (and everything else) how about reducing the number of parking spots on campuses?

I bought my Gobie H2O filtered water bottle about a year ago and not only have I stopped adding to the number of one time use water bottles, I also know I have clean water when I drink it. You can’t say that for sure from a water fountain or from any “bottled water”. Also I save money because I can fill up my filtered bottle at any bathroom sink, outside water hose, water fountain or just about any where I go. It has a wide mouth so I can even add ice. It just makes sense.

[…] more than 100 comments. Columbia University’s Water Center posted an essay last week asking, “Should Universities Ban Bottled Water?” which is getting a little of Twitter […]

I regularly travel with a Gobie water filter bottle as mentioned above and it’s been absolutely fantastic, particularly in areas of the world where sanitation is a little limited.

Should bottled water be banned? It’s very wasteful of resources, not just the bottle, but shipping, manufacture and proper disposal / recycling – but then so are soft drinks and they’re not going to be banned in a month of Sundays.

great idea altogether, but the suggestion to have more water fountains available reminds me of the days when we did have more water fountains available — and the water they dispensed usually tasted awful. Need to fix that if they are to be successful against the bottled water industry.

We all have different views on whether to ban the bottled water completely or not. But in doing the first step in going green, i see nothing wrong with it if you are helping the community and your health. It is indeed costly, but would the outcome be worth it in the end?

Bottled water should be taxed, just like cigarettes have been taxed. It is BAD for the environment.

From the WATER wasted to actually create the disposable plastic bottle to the waste created to actually recycle it, IF you are one of the 30% who actually recycle it. And even for the recyclers. That bottle does not magically get picked up and refashioned to become another bottle. That bottle sits and sits until it is picked up by a human in a Middle East oil guzzling truck. It is then dropped off at some recycling plant where it is chopped up and melted to one day meet its destiny as some plastic widget on some other product that will one day be chucked and left to litter this planet for a generation to come in some landfill somewhere. The WISE thing to do is to just carry an aluminum refillable WATER bottle everywhere you go. I’ve vowed to NEVER EVER drink bottled water.

Get the Columbia Climate School Newsletter

• Presidential Search
• Editor's Pick

In Photos: Harvard’s 373rd Commencement Exercises

Rabbi Zarchi Confronted Maria Ressa, Walked Off Stage Over Her Harvard Commencement Speech

Former Harvard President Bacow, Maria Ressa to Receive Honorary Degrees at Commencement

‘A’ Game: How Harvard Recruits its Student-Athletes

Interim Harvard President Alan Garber Takes the Political Battle to Washington

Don't Ban the Bottle

From November 18 to November 21, Harvard students have the opportunity to vote on an Undergraduate Council referendum that seeks to ban the sale of plastic water bottles on campus and increase the availability of tap water sources such as filling stations. Proponents of the proposal have hailed it as commonsense measure, claiming the ban would represent a commitment to protecting the environment. Banning plastic water bottles, which are inarguably harmful to the environment, would have important symbolic implications, but the very real negative consequences of implementing such a ban far outweigh the symbolic victory that would come with its passage. Instead of approving this misguided proposal, we should look for more efficient ways to tackle this problem.

The environmental damage caused by disposing plastic water bottles is a textbook case of a negative externality. The ban proposes to reduce the damage of this externality by limiting the choice of the consumers. Limiting consumer choice, however, is extremely problematic on an economic level and often brings with it a number of unintended consequences.

At the University of Vermont, which recently banned the sale of water bottles, students bought over 350,000 bottles of water yearly before the ban. It is reasonable to project that the sales revenues lost from banning water bottles would not be insignificant. This fall in revenues could lead to either lower pay or fewer student-employees being hired at student-run establishments that sell water bottles, such as Lamont Café. Employment opportunities represent a valuable part of Harvard financial aid packages, and limiting sales at Harvard establishments hinders Harvard’s ability to pay its students fair wages.

Furthermore, when consumers are no longer able to purchase a preferred good, they often choose to purchase a substitutable, or similar, good. In this case, that means that students might purchase bottled sodas in place of the banned bottled water. Few would argue that this is the ideal outcome. In addition to causing the same environmental harm as bottled water, bottled soda is also a danger to students’ health.

Students who do not switch to soda might instead buy bottled water from other stores in Harvard Square. Because these alternate purchasing locations are not as convenient as on-campus locations, students might choose to buy bottled water in bulk so as to limit the time they spend buying water. Because of this, students who previously consumed bottled water infrequently and only out of necessity might actually consume more of it, since they would have bulk quantities on hand.

Fortunately, there is an alternate option for reducing Harvard’s consumption of bottled water that avoids or lessens all of the aforementioned consequences: incentivizing consumer behavior. The second portion of the proposed referendum, the building of more tap water fill stations, is a great example of a proposal that incentivizes behavior. Because tap water is free and bottled water expensive, students should naturally consume less bottled water and use the free tap water instead once it is made more accessible through the fill stations.

Another way to incentivize students to purchase few water bottles would be to impose a University tax on bottled water. By raising the price students must pay for bottled water, the tax would cause students to purchase less water, reducing the detrimental environmental impact of the bottles. Furthermore, the University could then use some of the tax revenues to supplement employee pay to ensure that the tax does not result in lower salaries for student-employees. The remaining tax revenues could then be used to fund other environmental initiatives, including the building of more filling stations. Coupling a bottled water tax with a program to increase tap water accessibility would thus present a much more efficient solution to reducing Harvard’s environmental impact than would an outright ban on bottled water.

Aside from its direct inefficiencies, the proposed ban also creates problems for the image of environmentalism. Because banning bottled water represents an encroachment on individual choice and consumer freedom, such a policy invites criticism on an ideological level. As I have previously sta ted, there is considerable danger in taking a radical tact on an issue that could be more effectively solved by a moderate approach. An outright ban of water bottles offers easy fodder for conservative pundits bent on opposing the cause of environmentalism, making it easy for such pundits to label proponents of this policy as radicals who are willing to overlook any and all individual freedoms in order to achieve their aims. Inviting these kinds of attacks on environmentalism is ultimately harmful to the larger goal of convincing more people to recognize the necessity of environmental consciousness. An incentive-based approach would avoid these sorts of attacks by preserving the choice of the consumer, allowing the progress of environmentalism to go unhindered.

Because the current proposal does not solve the issue at hand in an efficient and responsible manner, we should vote “no” as an affirmation that we can devise a better solution.

Carson J. Scott ’16, a Crimson editorial writer, is an economics concentrator in Winthrop House.

Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.

• Skip to Nav
• Skip to Main
• Skip to Footer

Would Banning Plastic Bottles Help or Hurt the Planet?

Please try again

Plastic bottles are EVERYWHERE and are a big source of pollution. But banning them might create another problem for the environment. Here’s why.

TEACHERS: Guide your students to practice civil discourse about current topics and get practice writing CER (claim, evidence, reasoning) responses.  Explore lesson supports.

How did plastic bottles become such a problem

Early forms of plastic have existed since the mid-1800s. But when WWII came along, scientists diverted all their plastic technology to help with the war effort. So after the war, all this plastic needed to go somewhere, so why not the American consumer? What we got was a plastic explosion, and it’s never really stopped. That’s why today, it’s estimated that humans have created over 8 BILLION tons of plastic, most of which still exist. See, plastic doesn’t ever really break down completely or biodegrade — it just breaks apart into smaller and smaller pieces over time. These tiny bits of plastic make their way into oceans, creating a plastic soup of pollution that can get into the bellies of all kinds of marine animals like fish, pelicans, and turtles. Some research studies predict that by 2050, pound for pound, plastics in the oceans will outweigh all the fish.

What are the pros and cons around banning plastic bottles?

About 70% of plastic water bottles bought in the U.S. are not recycled, and so end up in the oceans. On top of that, plastic bottles are made from fossil fuels. In fact, the Pacific Institute found that it took about 17 million barrels of oil to produce enough plastic for the bottles of water consumed by Americans in 2006. And since then, consumption has increased by 65%, meaning Americans need over 28 million barrels of oil to fuel their plastic water bottle needs for one year.

But banning plastic bottles altogether can have unintended consequences. After the University of Vermont instituted their ban on selling single-use plastic water bottles on campus, total shipments of all plastic bottles actually INCREASED 20 percent as people bought OTHER plastic bottle beverages like soda and juice instead. And switching to alternatives like glass or metal containers can require more energy to transport because they weigh more. That means burning more fossil fuels and creating more pollution.

Fast Facts About Plastic Pollution (National Geographic)

What’s the real price of getting rid of plastic packaging? (BBC)

A million bottles a minute (The Guardian)

2017 United States National Postconsumer Plastic Bottle Recycling Report

The environmental impact of corn-based plastic (Scientific American)

Key moments in lead in water crisis in Flint, Michigan (US News)

State Plastic and Paper Bag Legislation

To learn more about how we use your information, please read our privacy policy.

• About Lori Bennear
• Publications
• Current Research

Ban the Bottle

Should we be able to cause major environmental damage just because it is convenient? Individuals purchasing bottled water seem to think so. In addition to harming our world, water bottles can cause risks to human health, are a waste of money, and are a drain on water and energy sources. Colleges and universities all over the country are recognizing this and as of 2012, more than 90 schools  either banned or restricted the sale of plastic water bottles on campus. To continue sustainability efforts, Duke University should take similar action, banning these bottles and encouraging the use of reusable water bottles and existing water fountains and hydration stations.

Source: http://www.shopdukestores.duke.edu/webitemimages/106/65495.jpg

Despite attempts to encourage recycling, 38 billion water bottles, or 80% of bottles purchased , end up in landfills each and every year. This wouldn’t be so horrifying if it weren’t for the fact that waste from these products never really goes away. The bottles that we get rid of, end up poisoning us. Because most water bottles are made of petroleum-based polyethylene terephthalate (also known as PET), they break down through photodegradation into smaller and smaller pieces instead of biodegrading. This does not frequently happen in landfills since bottles are not likely to be exposed to the sun. However, ten percent of plastic (3.8 billion water bottles annually) ends up in the ocean as a result of trash being deposited in waterways by humans, wind, and heavy rains. Once exposed to sunlight, breakdown of these plastics results in toxic chemicals, including BPA and PS oligomer. These toxins are ingested by ocean animals , which can be ingested by humans and cause serious health risks.

Source: http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/139/cache/ngkids-waterbottles470_13983_600x450.jpg

In addition to damaging our health and environment, these bottles damage our economy. Would you be willing to pay $1.45 every time you wanted to fill up a water bottle using the faucet in your kitchen? As it turns out, you may be doing that without knowing it. The Natural Resources Defense Council found that 25 percent or more of bottled water is really just tap water. Tap water itself costs only about 0.9 cents per gallon, meaning that when we buy bottled water, we are paying 560 times what that amount of water is worth. As a country experiencing hard economic times, does it make sense for us to be paying this much for a resource that we can get from a faucet for free? Americans spent $11.8 billion on water bottles in 2012 alone. This is $11.8 billion that we are able to put right back in our pockets by making a simple behavioral change. Duke University should play a part in helping us make better economic decisions by having students and faculty take advantage of water fountains and water bottle refilling stations that have already been installed all over campus.

Source: http://www.ntid.rit.edu/sites/default/files/imagecache/newsphoto_big/hydration.jpg

Lastly, the production of water bottles is a huge waste of oil and water.  Despite the fact that water bottle companies claim to be a “healthy and eco-friendly choice” , the production of bottled water uses 17 million barrels of oil each year, which is enough to fill a million cars for a year  and takes three liters of water just to bottle one liter.  When taking into account production and transportation of these bottles in the United States, the Environmental Research Letters journal estimated that 32 to 54 million barrels of oil are used annually, which represents almost a third of our entire country’s energy consumption. This is energy that does not have to be used if we just turn on our tap. As Duke University moves towards becoming carbon neutral, banning water bottles on campus will be an important step.

Our university needs to recognize and communicate the implications of selling water bottles on campus. If banning water bottles seems too extreme, the administration should, at a minimum, post and distribute information telling consumers of the impacts of their choices. Misinformation or lack of information is not an excuse at one of the best universities in the country. However, I think that the best option is simply to ban them. We already have the infrastructure available for individuals to quickly adjust to this change. Free water bottles are distributed regularly and there is no lack of places to fill them. Duke needs to step up, ban the bottle, and end consumer irresponsibility.

Solid Waste

duke university sustainability water bottles

12 Comments

April 2, 2014 at 8:36 am

Although the Duke Marine Lab has banned water bottles for a few years now, I don’t see this policy being successful on main campus. Usually in these sorts of reforms you worry only about hesitation from administrators and such, but I expect a sizable portion of the Duke undergrad population would be less than supportive as well.

What are some of the ideas for restricting sales, instead of an outright ban? Perhaps removing the bottles from vending machines while still allowing them at the campus eateries would be a more viable goal.

April 7, 2014 at 12:43 am

Although I agree that plastic water bottles are unnecessary and cause significant harm on our environment, I think that if Duke were to ban plastic water bottles, they would have to make significant changes around campus. Although there are drinking fountains scattered around most buildings, I think they would need to be much more accessible and clearly designated. For example, I often times buy a water bottle when i’m going into the library because getting up in the middle of my work and searching the floor for a drinking fountain can be a pain. If more drinking fountains were installed, and maintained, I think that Duke could begin the process of easing out of plastic water bottle sales.

April 8, 2014 at 8:29 pm

I agree with the two previous comments. I would expect neither the student body nor the administration to be on board with this change. And as the previous comment states, I think that there are other, positive, changes that could be made on campus that would be beneficial to both the environment and the student body. I think making the information about the harmful nature of plastic bottles more readily accessible to the human body as a whole could be extremely beneficial. This could include planned talks, signs etc. I also think that incentives to use reusable water bottles could also be highly effective in reducing the use of water bottles on campus. Duke can even do more to encourage recycling and make clearer what numbers can and cannot be recycled.

April 9, 2014 at 1:08 am

Hi Hannah, I think you make some really good points about the exorbitant price of a water bottle compared to just drinking tap water, the effects of plastic ingestion and chemical leach on marine animals, etc. However, I disagree with your proposition to ban water bottles on Duke’s campus. I’ll admit that part of this may be grounded in my own practice of stocking water bottle packs in my room. (Confessions of an environmental science student…) Regardless, like others have commented before me, there’s just not enough water fountains to supply students’ needs. Think about large events like LDOC or a 5K fundraiser that need to distribute water in mass quantities easily and efficiently. I think you would agree with me that the water fountain infrastructure around campus simply cannot accommodate this.

I think a better option would be to make recycling more convenient for students. Rather than have one recycling disposal area in a dorm’s common room, why not put a large recycling dispenser in each hall? I realize that by using plastic water bottles a lot, I am less environmentally friendly than if I used reusable bottles, but by recycling all of my plastic bottles I feel (or at least I’d like to hope) that I am still being environmentally conscious. It’s also easy to target plastic water bottles as the culprit, but the larger problem is plastic in general. (So should we ban all plastic takeout containers, plastic bags, etc.?) Ever since its invention, plastic has been filling our landfills and killing marine life. I think sustainability lies in finding an equally cheap, biodegradable substitute, which of course is easier said than done.

April 15, 2014 at 3:08 am

As a student who has not bought a water bottle on campus in over 2 years, I think that a shift towards a plastic water bottle ban would be implementable. I have never had an issue locating places to refill my Nalgene on campus. That being said, it’s unreasonable to assume that the rest of the student body will be as receptive to such a lifestyle change that a ban would impose.

However, I agree with previous commenters in that there are some steps that we can take on campus to help decrease plastic water bottle usage. For example, perhaps water bottle sales are limited to certain locations on campus, such as the lobby shop or some place in the BC. If water bottles are less accessible then people may be less likely to go out of their way to buy them. If Duke accompanied this change with signage about plastic water bottle consumption implications, and handed out free refillable water bottles at the beginning of each semester, year, month, etc, we could see real, implementable change. Although this would be incremental, it would be a big step in helping the student body become more aware of the environmental consequences to their everyday actions.

April 17, 2014 at 8:19 pm

I completely agree with Hannah on this issue. The fact that Duke University claims that it will achieve carbon neutrality by 2024 and has yet to ban plastic bottles is foolish. I think that we have to view a ban on plastic water bottles as a lifestyle change throughout the student body, and not as an outrageous ploy by environmentalists to modify other student’s behavior. However, before such ban could be put in place I firmly believe that the drinking water infrastructure at Duke must undergo serious renovations. Currently, few dormitories and academic buildings have been retrofitted with refilling stations at every water fountain location. It would not be fair to implement a plastic water bottle ban if the University has not done its part to make drinking water highly accessible. I also believe that students who are not familiar with the subject matter must be reassured that the water that is available at the refilling stations is clean, if not cleaner than bottled water brands currently sold on campus.

To implement such a campaign I think one must model the phase out of Styrofoam take out containers on campus and even the “Ban the Bag” campaign that recently took place in Portland, Oregon. The city of Portland made the decision to ban the use of plastic bags in supermarkets, requiring that suitable alternatives must be provided. Having lived in Portland last summer, I can say the campaign was incredibly effective in two major ways. First, paper bags became the immediate alternative to plastic. These bags are not only less harmful to the environment but also easily reusable. Second, it made the purchase of more substantial grocery bags often made from recycled plastics more attractive and logical. Although initially met with resistance from supermarkets and consumers the “Ban the Bag” has proven to be incredibly effective. Unfortunately it sometimes takes what is perceived as drastic policy change in order to implement that change. I believe that if Duke pledged to improve access to drinking water and refilling stations across campus they could effectively phase out plastic water bottles in due time.

April 22, 2014 at 12:57 pm

I find it really surprising that 90 universities around the country have banned plastic water bottles but Duke has not, especially given its desire to go carbon neutral and the sustainability efforts around campus. I agree with previous comments that there would have to be some infrastructural improvements, but I don’t think it would be anything too impractical. If the city of San Francisco can ban plastic water bottles, I’m sure Duke’s small community could manage it as well.

April 22, 2014 at 5:36 pm

Hannah, Im really happy you wrote about this. As a non-environmental major, I felt somewhat out of place when I first walked into class, and it only took me a class or so to realize that bringing one or two plastic water bottles to every class was probably not the best way to make a good first impressions. I found myself hiding my water bottles inside my backpack and drinking quickly or at the water fountain so no one would catch me. I have always tried to use the copious amounts of free water bottles distributed each year, but inevitably miss place them or forget them. Furthermore, I dont feel too guilty about it in my standard engineering classes, some of which we have marveled at their engineering accomplishments. And alas, I am concerned about the quality of water in Durham and have chosen plastic bottles over filters in the interest of my own health. To me, plastic bottles are easy and convenient.

As an institution, Duke, or any University for that matter, has the power make the rules and the students must follow them. In high school, I was forced to wear jacket and tie everyday and my classmates and me complained about it until the day we left, but we always understood why. With regards to plastic bottles, this power can serve the greater good. Banning plastic bottles would undoubtably cause student offenders to throw their arms in the air and rant about it with other perpetrators, at least for a while. But in the back of their minds, everyone would understand why the change was made. After some time, It would become more convenient for everyone to adjust to carrying around water bottles and the revolt against the Man would subside.

Im surprised Duke has not already banned them, given their commitment to carbon neutrality. I think it is myopic to think that the administration would not make the necessary steps to update the infrastructure to make it easy for us to obtain water. At the same time I think exceptions, or other provisions, need to be made for special events such as LDOC and the 5K fundraiser.

Revolution often times begins on the college campus. Duke has the power and means to influence the behavior of its students and beyond. Why it is still most convenient for me to drink out of a plastic bottle as I write this comment is still unclear to me.

April 23, 2014 at 8:58 pm

Hannah, I completely agree with you. I think that fact that the bottled water is such a strong industry is both incredibly disappointing from an environmental and an impressive display of how successful marketing efforts of companies like Coca Cola and Pepsi have been.

Honestly, I think banning water bottles is the only way to limit their use on Duke’s campus. By and large, Duke students just don’t understand the impact that water bottles have on the environment or just don’t care. No amount incentives or educational initiatives will change that. Moreover, even if reusable water bottles are made more readily available, plastic water bottles will always be more convenient, especially when you can pay for them with a swipe of your Duke card.

It’s especially important for a school like Duke to take the lead on this issue. Banning water bottles at Duke would be most meaningful if doing so would encourage peer institutions to do so as well.

April 23, 2014 at 11:55 pm

I think you’re right that it is important for a school like Duke to do something about this. I think it’s good that duke has banned styrophoam packsging for takeout boxes. Also some duke eateries earn recognition during Duke’s Green Dining awards for offering discounts for customers that bring their own coffee mugs. Also the artist Chris Jordan came to speak to my class about plastic in the ocean ( in Charlotte Clark’s env 245) and how it affects the ecology of albatross.

April 24, 2014 at 2:33 am

I am very impressed by the supportive comments below on banning the plastic water bottles. Although I do use my own water bottle most of the time, I often felt unable to argue or even raise this question to my roommate. Besides, I do have a confession to make that there are times that I feel that I would like to get a taste of lemonade or green tea and purchase one from the vending machines. Constantly I feel that while using reusable water bottles is definitely worth promoting, it is really a liberty of personal choice. As one of the comments that mentioned that “Duke has the power to make the rules and students must follow them.” I am hesitating to find proper justification about strict banning of all plastic water bottles, let alone the potential outcry and opposing sentiments to the rule among student community.

Instead, I think Duke should really take efforts to become a better choice architect. As many has mentioned, the hydration stations (or now called water filling stations) should really be more popular on campus. Not only in gyms, lecture halls or the Bryan center, but also in dorms and living spaces. Almost all students living in around the main quad have been complaining how hard it is to locate a water fountain in the building. Besides, Duke should also tries to promote using of water bottles but restricting the alternatives, such as starting from reduce the availability of plastic bottled water, then other drinks. I believe putting this nudges that encourage the students to actively choose reusable water bottles would have a much higher acceptance in the Duke community.

April 30, 2014 at 11:06 pm

This is an interesting proposition. While I don’t necessarily agree with an outright ban, I do think that “re-filling stations” should be made more prevalent on campus and other incentives put in place for people to consume less bottled water.

Two thoughts:

First, how effective is the recycling of water bottles? (I ask this in response to a previous comment that offered increased recycling as an easy fix.) I recall reading that, because the plastic is already thin and soft, recycled water bottles must be converted into more amorphous products like fleece. If this is indeed the case, it seems that increased recycling is hardly an adequate solution.

Second, what are feasible and appropriate policy actions at a national scale? Would interventionist policies be desirable?

• Ban Plastic Water Bottles: It's Effect On Environment and Alternatives - Folkire

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Follow @RethinkingRegs on Twitter

• Next on @whartonknows (10A ET @BizRadio111)... New rules for #offshore drilling by #oil companies. @sjp078 & @loribennear discuss + and -.. April 18, 2016
• Today's topic is titled Executive Action on the Home Front: Domestic #Policy in the #ObamaAdministration https://t.co/rXmxeApjlK March 1, 2016
• Kicking off our Rethinking Regulation Seminar with Dr. John Graham! March 1, 2016
• Entries feed
• Comments feed
• WordPress.org

© 2024 Lori Bennear Research Group

Theme by Anders Noren — Up ↑

Site Login >

Should Bottled Water Be Banned?

Are you a fan of bottled water? Do you often reach for a plastic bottle when you’re thirsty on the go?

The convenience and portability of bottled water have made it a staple in our modern lives. However, there is growing concern about the negative impact that plastic water bottles have on the environment. This has led to the question: should bottled water be banned?

As an environmentally conscious individual, you may believe that banning plastic water bottles is necessary to reduce waste and protect our planet. Plastic bottles take hundreds of years to decompose, and they can harm wildlife if they end up in oceans or other natural habitats.

On the other hand, some argue that bottled water provides a safe and convenient source of hydration, especially in areas where tap water is not readily available or safe to drink.

So what are the pros and cons of banning bottled water? Let’s explore both sides of this debate.

• Key Takeaways
• Plastic water bottles have a negative impact on the environment by taking hundreds of years to decompose and harming wildlife.
• Limiting access to drinking water for those without clean tap water is a concern with banning plastic water bottles.
• Banning water bottles can encourage eco-friendly practices and have a positive impact on the environment.
• The convenience and availability of bottled water in stores is a factor in the perception that it is cleaner and safer than tap water, but there are no significant health benefits from drinking bottled water.

Table of Contents

Should plastic water bottles be banned, why should water bottles be banned, reasons why we should not ban plastic water bottles, pros and cons of bottled water.

You know what’s crazy? Some people think plastic water bottles should be banned. It’s no secret that these bottles are a major contributor to environmental pollution, but is banning them really the best solution?

If you’re writing an opinion piece or argumentative essay on this topic, there are a few things to consider.

Firstly, let’s take a look at San Francisco. This city was one of the first in the world to ban plastic water bottles in public places. While this may seem like a positive step towards reducing waste, it hasn’t necessarily had the desired effect. Many people have simply switched to buying other bottled drinks such as soda or juice instead.

Additionally, some argue that by banning plastic water bottles we are actually limiting access to drinking water for those who don’t have easy access to clean tap water.

So before jumping on the bandwagon and calling for a nationwide ban on plastic water bottles, it’s important to weigh up all sides of the argument and think carefully about potential unintended consequences.

In today’s world, it’s hard to ignore the negative impact of plastic containers on our environment. As a writer of opinion pieces or argumentative essays, you may have come across the topic of banning water bottles.

San Francisco has already taken this step by prohibiting the sale of single-use plastic water bottles in public places. Here are four reasons why water bottles should be banned :

• Plastic waste is a major contributor to environmental pollution.
• The production and transportation of bottled water require significant amounts of energy and resources.
• Drinking tap water is a cheaper and more sustainable alternative.
• Banning water bottles can encourage individuals and businesses to adopt more eco-friendly practices.

By considering these points, it becomes clear that banning bottled water can have a positive impact on our environment.

As you write your own opinion piece or argumentative essay on this topic, remember to highlight the importance of reducing our environmental impact for future generations to come.

Contrary to popular belief, plastic water bottles play a crucial role in emergency situations where access to clean water is limited. In areas of natural disasters or other emergencies, bottled water can be quickly distributed and easily transported to those in need. Banning plastic water bottles would take away an important resource for those who rely on them during such times.

Furthermore, while cities like San Francisco have implemented bans on plastic water bottles, this may not necessarily solve the issue of waste. People will simply turn to other forms of single-use plastics or disposable containers for their drinking water needs. Instead of banning plastic water bottles altogether, efforts should be made to promote recycling and proper disposal methods for these products.

Ultimately, whether or not plastic water bottles should be banned is a matter of opinion and can make for an interesting argumentative essay or opinion essay topic.

Just like a coin, there are two sides to the debate on the advantages and disadvantages of relying on bottled water. On one hand, bottled water is convenient and readily available in most stores. It is also portable and easy to carry around, making it perfect for people who are always on-the-go. Additionally, bottled water is often perceived as cleaner and safer than tap water, which may contain harmful chemicals or bacteria.

On the other hand, the production and consumption of bottled water have negative effects on the environment. Bottled water generates a significant amount of plastic waste that ends up in landfills or oceans. In fact, San Francisco has already banned single-use plastic bottles from being sold on city-owned property due to environmental concerns. Moreover, some studies suggest that drinking bottled water may not be any healthier than drinking tap water since both sources undergo similar treatment processes before distribution.

Whether or not we should ban bottled water remains a topic of debate for opinion writing or argumentative essay. While it offers convenience and perceived safety benefits over tap water, its negative effects on the environment cannot be ignored. Ultimately, individuals can make small changes by reducing their reliance on single-use plastics and choosing reusable options instead.

Well, well, well. Looks like you’ve made it to the end of this article on whether or not bottled water should be banned. Are you feeling parched yet? Maybe you’re reaching for that trusty plastic bottle right now, ready to quench your thirst. But wait! Before you do that, consider the arguments presented here.

On one hand, those in favor of a ban argue that plastic bottles are wasteful and harmful to the environment. They point out the staggering amount of plastic waste that ends up in our oceans and landfills each year. And let’s not forget about the energy required to produce and transport all those bottles.

But on the other hand, some argue that banning bottled water is impractical and even elitist. Not everyone has access to clean drinking water, after all. Plus, some people just prefer the convenience of grabbing a bottle on-the-go.

So what’s the verdict? Honestly, it’s hard to say. But one thing we can all agree on is this: whether or not we ban bottled water outright, we need to start taking better care of our planet before it’s too late.

So next time you reach for that bottle, maybe consider filling up a reusable container instead – your taste buds (and Mother Earth) will thank you for it!

Audrey McGill

Meet Audrey, the water-enthusiast behind WeLikeWater.com. Her love for all things H2O inspired her to create this laid-back space where folks can dive into the world of water. From the fizzy to the calm, Audrey's been on a journey through every ripple and wave, and she's eager to share her discoveries.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Article | April 26, 2024

The unbottled truth: navigating the tap v bottled debate.

In the ongoing debate between bottled water and tap water, it is crucial to consider the sustainability, health, and daily choices associated with each option. Tap water undergoes a comprehensive treatment process and rigorous testing to ensure safety and quality. Contrary to popular belief, bottled water is not necessarily purer or healthier than tap water.

One of the main concerns with bottled water is its environmental impact. Plastic bottles contribute to the global plastic waste crisis, with millions of bottles ending up in landfills and oceans every year. Choosing tap water is a commitment to environmental sustainability and responsible consumption.

Advancements in water testing technologies and methodologies have been made by companies like Palintest. These innovations allow for more accurate and efficient analysis of drinking water, ensuring its safety and quality.

Tap water will continue to be a cornerstone of public health and environmental sustainability. With continuous innovations in testing and treatment technologies, we can have confidence in the safety and quality of our drinking water. By choosing tap water, we are making a positive impact on the environment and promoting a sustainable future.

Get unlimited access to:

Enter your credentials below to log in. Not yet a member of Water Online? Subscribe today .

Please enter your email address and create a password to access the full content, Or log in to your account to continue.

Please tell us more about you so that we can customize our newsletters to your specific interests:

• Request Info

Contact Details

• Company Profile

• Environment

Bottled Water Should Not Be Banned Persuasive Essay Example

Water bottles, a popular bottled beverage, have been a growing trend since 2010. Around 42.6 billion bottles are sold every year. In 2013, Concord, Massachusetts banned the use of plastic water bottles because of environmental concerns leaving everyone with the question: should water bottles be banned? The answer is simple. Bottled water should not be banned because it eliminates a healthy option, it is crucial to have in everyone’s emergency supply, and a ban on water bottles would not necessarily reduce waste. 

Removing water bottles would take away a healthy option to drink. In 2017, the National Park service, who placed a water bottle ban in their parks, revoked the ban due to much criticism from guests. “The ban removed the healthiest beverage choice at a variety of parks while leaving sugary drinks available at concessions” (Barnum). This explains that the water bottle ban took away water and left unhealthy drinks for the guests. This shows that water bottles should not be banned because people need a healthy option to drink. The ban was ineffective because it left the park guests without any water and offered sugary drinks in plastic bottles instead. When the point of view of the guests is considered, it is realized that they may feel dehydrated and may want water to refresh themselves. It might be frustrating to discover there is no water but only sugary drinks that will not satisfy their thirst as well as water would have. If there is no water bottle ban, then people will not have to worry about not having any water and places and places would get less criticism from the guests.

Bottled water should be a staple in all emergency water supply kits. At procon.org, it says “Between Dec. 2016, and Mar. 2018, residents of St. Joseph, LA, relied on state-issued bottled water as a replacement for tap water after high levels of lead were found in their system” (Markoff). This quote means that bottled water was used when their tap water, that got contaminated with lead, became too dangerous to drink. This proves that bottled water could be necessary in an emergency. What most people see are the effects the plastic has on the environment. What is not usually recognized is that bottled water can be very useful in an emergency, when water is needed. This can be applied by thinking about if the Thatcher community was to lose all of their tap water like the residents of St. Joseph did. It would then become essential to use plastic water bottles for a source of water.

It is true that banning water bottles may reduce waste. At 5gyres.org, it says “Less than 30% of all plastic water bottles are recycled. Roughly seven out of every 10 bottles are trashed. And from the landfill, many plastic water bottles end up in the ocean” (Box). This means that not many plastic bottles get recycled and instead get thrown to the ocean. Though this is true, other bottled beverages are more abundant in landfills and are even worse for the environment. Procon.org says “Plastic water bottles contain much less polyethylene terephthalate (PET) plastic than soft drink bottles that require a thicker plastic container due to the drinks’ carbonation- 9.89 grams of PET v. 23.9 grams for a 16.9 oz bottle… plastic water bottles make up 3.3% of all drink packaging in US landfills, which is less than both plastic carbonated soft drink containers (13.3%) and aluminum cans (7.9%)” (Markoff). Plastic water bottles are much better for the environment than other plastic beverage bottles. Banning plastic water bottles would be unproductive. There would still be a large amount of plastic still going in landfills and oceans. It would be a better choice to ban plastic carbonated drinks instead of water bottles. 

Bottled water should not be banned; it would take away a healthy option to drink, it is needed in all emergency supply kits, and a ban on water bottles wouldn’t reduce much waste. Water bottles cut an innumerable amount of calories from diets, they are beneficial during an emergency when you can not access tap water and more waste comes from other beverage packages, not water. Stop the water bottle ban from happening to you for all of these reasons.

Related Samples

• Environmental Problems Essay Example
• Does Recycling Bring More Harm Than Benefits. Essay on Environment Protection
• Essay Sample about Pygmy-Possum Burramys Parvus
• Essay on Water Purification With Low-Cost Materials
• Digging Deeper. Essay on Global Warming
• Reasons to Visit Everglades Essay Example
• Animal Cloning Essay Example
• Essay Sample on Climate Change
• Animal Shelter and Euthanasia Essay Example
• Essay on Plastic Pollution: How to Reduce Your Plastic Footprint

Didn't find the perfect sample?

You can order a custom paper by our expert writers

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

The Push to Control Plastic Waste in New York: What to Know

As plastic continues to fill landfills and oceans, city and state leaders are backing state legislation to curb it.

By Hilary Howard

In 2020, the plastic supermarket bag was banned in New York. It is a member of the single-use-plastic family — items that release greenhouse gases when manufactured and, once used, can take years to break down in landfills.

Many more single-use plastic products could go the way of the supermarket bag should state lawmakers approve the Packaging Reduction and Recycling Infrastructure Act in early June.

Read on to find out more.

What are single-use plastics?

They are items like wrappers, packaging and food containers that are used once and then discarded. They are mostly made from fossil fuel–based chemicals.

Why not just recycle them?

Many single-use items — especially anything soft or bendable — are a challenge to recycle because of their chemical composition, among other reasons. Anything flimsy like a potato chip bag, a bread bag, a squeezable baby food pouch should go in the trash in New York City. And those plastic bags that some places like food delivery businesses are still allowed to use? They jam up the machines at recycling centers.

All hard, stiff plastics can be recycled in the city, said Joshua Goodman, a spokesman for the Department of Sanitation. Yet, most plastic products still end up in landfills or are incinerated. Both processes produce microplastics that are nearly impossible to remove from the air, ground and water.

Many environmental experts question whether it’s worth it to recycle any plastics , since the process is time-consuming, expensive and can leach toxins. Still, New Yorkers should continue recycling rigid plastic products so they don’t end up in landfills, Mr. Goodman said.

Why is recycling plastic so difficult?

Some 16,000 chemicals can be used in plastic production.

“The amount of plastics that are recycled is very low because there are so many different types of plastics, different colors and thousands of chemicals used to make them,” said Judith Enck, a former official for the Environmental Protection Agency and the president of Beyond Plastics , an advocacy group that is actively supporting the bill. “They all need to be sorted and cannot be recycled together.”

How would this bill limit the production of plastics?

The packaging reduction bill aims to reduce the use of plastic packaging by 50 percent over 12 years by requiring the companies that produce it to either find more sustainable options or pay a fee, which would go to municipalities across the state. The fee hasn’t been determined yet.

“The disposal of plastic packaging is costing municipalities and therefore taxpayers a great deal of money unnecessarily and that should be shared by producers, which is the incentive for them to not have unnecessary packaging,” said Assemblywoman Deborah J. Glick, a Manhattan Democrat and a sponsor of the bill.

How would the money raised by the fees be used?

The collected fees would be earmarked for municipalities’ recycling and waste disposal costs as well as infrastructure that cuts down on waste, such as public water fountains that can refill water bottles. Officials estimated that New York City could see as much as $150 million.

Would this law do anything else?

Out of the thousands of chemicals used in plastic production, 19 deemed among the most toxic would be prohibited from use in packaging, including formaldehyde and heavy metals.

Have other states done something similar?

So far, California, Oregon, Maine and Colorado have passed similar legislation on packaging but have yet to put the resulting laws into practice. Earlier this month, the Minnesota legislature approved a bill , and it awaits the governor’s signature.

Are there any exemptions for certain products or small businesses?

Anything covered by the Food and Drug Administration is exempt. That includes medical equipment and packaging and prescription drug containers. Infant formula and medical foods are exempt. Also, any company that has an annual revenue of $5 million or less would be exempt. Manufacturers that generate large amounts of packaging are the focus of the bill, its supporters say.

Who supports it?

There is widespread support for the bill. Backers include the New York City mayor, Eric Adams.

The legislation could reduce landfill waste by six million pounds a day and would also save taxpayers money, a spokeswoman for City Hall said.

“We must go after the producers who contribute to the plastics crisis and not place the burden on individuals,” said Elijah Hutchinson, the executive director of the Mayor’s Office of Climate and Environmental Justice.

The bill is also backed by Brad Lander, the New York City comptroller; Jessica Tisch, the sanitation commissioner; Jumaane Williams, the public advocate; and the City Council.

“The bill just makes sense,” said Sean Abreu, a council member who introduced and passed legislation allowing sports fans to bring refillable beverage containers into stadiums. “It will generate revenue for our city and will bring real benefits.”

More than 285 businesses and nonprofits, including the New York Public Interest Research Group, the League of Women Voters and the N.A.A.C.P., also support the bill.

Who is opposed to it?

Certain fossil fuel companies, chemical producers and business interests, especially large manufacturers of food and drink packaging, are opposed to the current version of the bill, with many arguing that prices could increase for packaged food and other items.

“We think it’s going way too far and will be very disruptive and expensive, and we don’t believe it’s achievable,” said Ken Pokalsky, a vice president at the New York Business Council, an association of statewide employers with 3,200 members.

He said his organization prefers the bill awaiting final approval in Minnesota, which does not specify targets for the reduced use of plastics.

Owen Caine, the vice president of government affairs at the Toy Association, a nationwide industry group, said that plastic protects toys from damage in transit. Making companies come up with alternative packaging would increase costs for consumers, he said.

The American Chemistry Council, a trade organization, would like to see “advanced” recycling, a new, somewhat untested strategy , included in the bill.

What’s next?

Final negotiations are underway. Amendments are being discussed on all sides, including comments from some State Senate members who want to lower the 50 percent reduction goal, Ms. Glick said.

This is the second go-round for the bill, which failed to pass last year. Industry opposition remains strong, but both houses’ environmental conservation committees passed the measure in February.

Leaders of the Assembly and Senate in Albany must bring the bill to a vote before the legislative session ends on June 6. Should that happen successfully, it would be up to the governor, who would need to sign it into law by year’s end.

Hilary Howard is a Times reporter covering how the New York City region is adapting to climate change and other environmental challenges. More about Hilary Howard

Politics in the New York Region

Limiting Donations to Israel: Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who rarely wades into state politics, publicly backed a bill  that could strip New York nonprofits of their tax-exempt status if their funds are used to support Israel’s military or settlements.

Transgender Student-Athlete Rules: A parent group in New York City asked for a review of rules that let students play on sports teams that align with their gender identity. Democratic officials responded angrily .

Equal Rights Amendment: As Election Day approaches, the proposed amendment to the State Constitution has become a divisive culture-war issue  that encompasses abortion, discrimination and transgender athletes.

Office of Cannabis Management: The head of New York State’s cannabis agency will step down at the end of his three-year term in September as part of an overhaul of the embattled agency , Gov. Kathy Hochul said.

A Thorny Mayoral Race: Zellnor Myrie, an Afro-Latino state senator from Brooklyn known for backing progressive causes, announced that he is moving to challenge  Mayor Eric Adams in next year’s Democratic primary in New York City.

Source: ABC Radio Perth | Program: WA Mornings

Should water bottles be banned in classrooms

• X (formerly Twitter)

A private school in regional Victoria has banned water bottles in the classroom.

Ballarat Clarendon College has requested students in years 5 to 9 leave their drink bottles outside the classroom during lessons. 

The school says "it's about managing the classroom, minimising distractions and really helping students develop skills around self-regulation."

Style Editor for Sydney Morning Herald, Damien Woolnough, told Nadia Mitsopoulos from ABC Radio Perth that drink bottles are fast becoming a cumbersome distraction both in and out of classrooms. 

"At Fashion Week here last week, one label collaborated and had these giant water bottles as the goody bag for all the guests and people went crazy trying to get them," he said.

Mr Woolnough also said that drink bottles have become a fashion accessory for students. 

"[It's] a way of expressing their personality and their style and fashion sense, whether that's through the colour or by personalising it with stickers," he said.

Emotional support bottles

Mr Woolnough believes that our attachment to our drink bottles runs deeper than expected.

Like a child's beloved soft toy or 'blanky', drink bottles have become known as a security attachment for many kids. 

"It sort of becomes a comfort, like how we check for our keys before we leave the house.

A lot of young people have checked for their water bottle and feel a bit disturbed when it's not with them," he said. 

• Nadia Mitsopoulos, Presenter

Join the conversation

Download the ABC listen app to text and call your favourite live radio