Ban on Single Use, Plastic Water Bottles in U. S. National Parks Removed

[Lorenzoid]

I'll just add that if you visited a national park in 1975, there was no bottled water available for purchase. It was hardly available anywhere in the US. Perrier was a new fad. EVERYONE drank water from the water fountain or the tap. Nobody felt inconvenienced. Sure, you could buy a soda. It was a sweet treat. You didn't buy a 24-pack of soda bottles to take to your cabin and bring two with you each day on a hike.

 

[2airishuman]

Water, on the other hand, can be obtained from water fountains and other taps nationwide.

Part of the problem is that there are a large and growing number of places that don't have water fountains.

 

[doctormike]

Part of the problem is that there are a large and growing number of places that don't have water fountains.

Yeah, and that's a chicken and egg thing. The more bottled water is marketed, the less incentive to put in water fountains. But I'm still pretty sure that running water is still going to be available at any place that sells soft drinks. Not that hard to put in a tap, especially if you don't sell bottled water there.

 

[Caveeagle]

There's nothing "flawed" about a policy that may encourage people to do something. A policy, regulation, law, etc., doesn't need to be bullet-proof to be effective. Are speed limits "flawed" because people are often able to exceed them without getting caught? Speed limits encourage safer driving. Are tax codes "flawed" because enforcement is difficult, there are loopholes, fairness may be questionable, and so on? Yet tax codes are effective in doing the overall job of bringing in revenue. This modest policy was limited to bottled water sales in the parks--and it may have been reasonably effective in reducing plastic waste because people drink a lot of bottled water, sales of which have been outpacing sales of soda for years. Beyond water bottles, though, I suppose the belief was that if a visitor realized the intent of the policy, he might think twice before buying a soda in a plastic bottle or having his groceries packed in a plastic bag.

There is a lot "flawed about it". And just because speed limits might be a good idea, doesn't make every other government limit effective.

You seem to have some expertise in the beverage industry. Haha... let's see, we are in about year ten of when most public schools removed soda vending machines from schools grounds. Intent was to reduce childhood obesity. ..how's that working out?

Several large markets have introduced a sin tax on sodas, or sugared beverages. Changes are driving same-store declines and layoffs. Even causing pollution where people just drive outside the county to avoid paying higher taxes for the items they want to buy.

I find it ironic that some of my same friends who sight the failures of prohibition while legalizing pot tend to be supportive of government intervention regulating things like bottled water.

how many of you realize that brewing of beer is one of the most environmentally harmful beverage out there, wasting 5:1 water in the brewing process. The process for bottling water actually wastes less water than cleaning out your nalgene or camelback at home.

And yes.. I have pulled far more beer cans and bottles from our local rivers than water bottles.

 

[doctormike]

There is a lot "flawed about it". And just because speed limits might be a good idea, doesn't make every other government limit effective.

You seem to have some expertise in the beverage industry. Haha... let's see, we are in about year ten of when most public schools removed soda vending machines from schools grounds. Intent was to reduce childhood obesity. ..how's that working out?

Several large markets have introduced a sin tax on sodas, or sugared beverages. Changes are driving same-store declines and layoffs. Even causing pollution where people just drive outside the county to avoid paying higher taxes for the items they want to buy.

I find it ironic that some of my same friends who sight the failures of prohibition while legalizing pot tend to be supportive of government intervention regulating things like bottled water.

how many of you realize that brewing of beer is one of the most environmentally harmful beverage out there, wasting 5:1 water in the brewing process. The process for bottling water actually wastes less water than cleaning out your nalgene or camelback at home.

And yes.. I have pulled far more beer cans and bottles from our local rivers than water bottles.

I don't understand a lot of this, it seems very off topic from the point of this thread. But the point about a reusable bottle filled from a tap being better than bottled water had nothing to do with water consumption rates. It's about the fact that in order to get a drink of water, we now just assume that it's also necessary to generate a piece of plastic trash (with very low total recycling rates) that will be somewhere on the planet 1000 years after we all are dead.

Folks in favor of legalizing pot also usually promote the advantage of the extra tax revenue from the "sin" taxes. So the straw man argument about government making water illegal (or whatever that analogy is supposed to mean) makes no sense to me either.

 

[Caveeagle]

@doctormike, I am all for drinking water from the tap, or a reusable container. I am just against the original point of this thread , which seems to be encouraging a ban on bottled water sales.

Recycle rates for PET were 30% in 2015. I agree that is too low. I don't see banning bottled water having any impact on this metric. Truth is that "sin taxes" tend to be ineffective at solving the root cause issue and just create a new revenue stream that will probably not be spent to effectively address the root cause issue.

So how about a real solution? I suggest ANY consumer packaged product with waste generation > x% be taxed to support a fund that is 100% directed towards recycling and environmental clean up. 100% !!!!! No slush funding for lobbyist etc.

This would encourage companies to reduce the waste footprint for all items and generate funding for recycling and cleanup. Consumers can make a choice to buy what they want. If, or when waste is reduced and taxes decline, there should not be any need to raise new taxes, because the problem is getting solved.... right?

 

[doctormike]

So how about a real solution? I suggest ANY consumer packaged product with waste generation > x% be taxed to support a fund that is 100% directed towards recycling and environmental clean up. 100% !!!!! No slush funding for lobbyist etc.

This would encourage companies to reduce the waste footprint for all items and generate funding for recycling and cleanup. Consumers can make a choice to buy what they want. If, or when waste is reduced and taxes decline, there should not be any need to raise new taxes, because the problem is getting solved.... right?

Now THAT'S a great idea..! I hate overpackaging, and you see it everywhere. Especially at supermarkets, even with fresh food.

I think that we are probably in agreement about the basic principals of this.

Since we live in 2017, and since everybody online is looking to have the greatest possible impact, we tend to phrase things as larger than life and everything is a battle between good and evil. Read the OP. This isn't a ban on bottled water, it's a policy that suggests that these centers voluntarily limit bottled water sales and encourage refillable containers. Even to a libertarian, that's hardly government oppression. It's a good idea, and it's nice to see people promoting steps in the right direction. Just because something isn't perfect doesn't mean that it's worthless...

 

[Lorenzoid]

There is a lot "flawed about it". And just because speed limits might be a good idea, doesn't make every other government limit effective.

I wholeheartedly agree. I'm sure there are a lot of regulations that don't have the effect that was intended. If something isn't working, then try something else. I believe we DO need to encourage people to reduce plastic waste. The question is how best to do that. Make it difficult to buy water in bottles? Educate the public? Something else? We need to do something about the mountains of plastic in our landfills and oceans from things like shopping bags and water bottles, not ignore the problem and hope it goes away.

. let's see, we are in about year ten of when most public schools . . . soda vending machines from schools grounds. Intent was to reduce childhood obesity. ..how's that working out?

So what? That has nothing to do with the effectiveness of a Park Service policy that limits sales of bottled water on reducing plastic waste.

Several large markets have introduced a sin tax on sodas, or sugared beverages. Changes are driving same-store declines and layoffs. Even causing pollution where people just drive outside the county to avoid paying higher taxes for the items they want to buy.

So what? That has nothing to do with the effectiveness of a Park Service policy that limits sales of bottled water on reducing plastic waste.

I find it ironic that some of my same friends who sight the failures of prohibition while legalizing pot tend to be supportive of government intervention regulating things like bottled water.

What do your friends and whether you find their positions ironic have to do with the effectiveness of a Park Service policy that limits sales of bottled water on reducing plastic waste?

how many of you realize that brewing of beer is one of the most environmentally harmful beverage out there, wasting 5:1 water in the brewing process. The process for bottling water actually wastes less water than cleaning out your nalgene or camelback at home.

This isn't about wasting water, it's about plastic ending up in landfills and oceans.

There is no logic in arguing against the effectiveness of one policy by arguing that other totally unrelated policies exist that are not effective.

 

[Lorenzoid]

. . .

So how about a real solution? I suggest ANY consumer packaged product with waste generation > x% be taxed to support a fund that is 100% directed towards recycling and environmental clean up. 100% !!!!! No slush funding for lobbyist etc. . . .

There are a lot of places that charge a deposit on bottles. I'm guessing it's effective. Deposit, tax, whatever--something needs to be done.

 

[Caveeagle]

So what? That has nothing to do with the effectiveness of a Park Service policy that limits sales of bottled water on reducing plastic waste.

Umm, I suggest it speaks directly to the ineffectiveness of implementing "feel good" rules that are ineffective and do little to nothing to address the root cause of the problem.

So some mother who wants purified water to mix up formula in a baby bottle has to just tolerate your new rule, even though you focus in on one item, and ignore soda, sports drinks and candy wrappers that are just as big of problem.

I find suspect, the way activist pick their battles and expect others to suspend rational thought, where skepticism and critical thinking are in very short supply.