Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - The deception behind the bottled water industry

billege · 02-20-2006, 11:29 AM

I wanted to comment on this one, though most good points have already been made.

I think that a lot of people commonly forget that money is a system of valuation, not just made up numbers applied to products. Money is a great concept that enables me to say “society thinks my 8 hours at my desk today is worth $X” and also “the resources spent in making this shirt, or bottle of water, are worth this.”

Given that system of valuation, it’s easy to tell if how much effort went into whatever it is you’re buying. That’s what money does for us.

My point segues to the article’s mention of how many gallons of oil is used in the bottled water industry. That’s some false logic thrown out to insinuate that bottled water is some kind of great oil waster. Well, the thing is that every product (just about) has some energy consumed to make it. I can’t imagine one that doesn’t. Does it take the burning of oil to get my bottle of water to my desk? Of course it does. But the thinking can’t stop there. It also took burring of oil to get the Twinkie to my desk; but, no one’s going to vilify Twinkies by compiling a statement like “Twinkies are responsible for the use of XX gallons of oil!” Because that’s true for just about every consumer product there is.

Think about this product: Dirt.

That’s right, Dirt. Bagged dirt. Lowe’s and Home Depot have tons of dirt in bags. I can go buy dirt, because it’s better than the dirt I already have. At some point that bagged dirt was not in bags. A bulldozer, that likely runs on diesel, scooped up the dirt and took it to a dump truck. The dump truck burned some more fuel taking the dirt to a machine that surely runs on electricity, or I guess, more oil. Either way, something used energy to get the dirt into bags. Then someone put the bags on a pallet, that a forklift burned more petrochemicals to move to a truck. The semi burned more oil to bring the dirt to a store, where I bought it under lights lit by other fossil fuels (I live in OH, 90% of our generation is coal), off a cash register that runs on electricity. Then I put the dirt in my car, which burned MORE petrochemicals to get it home. Then I put the dirt on top of the dirt I already had. Now how does one sum up the value for all of those resources expended? With money, that’s how. I paid $x for the bag of dirt, and that summed the value of every bit of energy expended in getting that dirt to me. If someone with a lot of spare time wanted to, they could figure out that X% of the $Y spent was for the cost of transport, IE fuel costs. In fact, a dedicated individual could figure out how much oil was used from start to finish, and go on the warpath against the frivolous use of oil for moving dirt.

My point is that it takes oil to get a Twinkie on your desk, a bag of dirt on your garden, a hotdog at the game, or that bottle of water in your hand. The value of everything that went into that water is contained in the cost charged for it. The bottle of water in my hand costs $0.25 (a 20 pack for $5). Some percentage of the 25 cents went for the cost of oil. Though the aggregate might sound impressive, but it’s not really at all.

02-20-2006, 11:29 AM	#33 (permalink)
billege Watcher Location: Ohio	I wanted to comment on this one, though most good points have already been made. I think that a lot of people commonly forget that money is a system of valuation, not just made up numbers applied to products. Money is a great concept that enables me to say “society thinks my 8 hours at my desk today is worth $X” and also “the resources spent in making this shirt, or bottle of water, are worth this.” Given that system of valuation, it’s easy to tell if how much effort went into whatever it is you’re buying. That’s what money does for us. My point segues to the article’s mention of how many gallons of oil is used in the bottled water industry. That’s some false logic thrown out to insinuate that bottled water is some kind of great oil waster. Well, the thing is that every product (just about) has some energy consumed to make it. I can’t imagine one that doesn’t. Does it take the burning of oil to get my bottle of water to my desk? Of course it does. But the thinking can’t stop there. It also took burring of oil to get the Twinkie to my desk; but, no one’s going to vilify Twinkies by compiling a statement like “Twinkies are responsible for the use of XX gallons of oil!” Because that’s true for just about every consumer product there is. Think about this product: Dirt. That’s right, Dirt. Bagged dirt. Lowe’s and Home Depot have tons of dirt in bags. I can go buy dirt, because it’s better than the dirt I already have. At some point that bagged dirt was not in bags. A bulldozer, that likely runs on diesel, scooped up the dirt and took it to a dump truck. The dump truck burned some more fuel taking the dirt to a machine that surely runs on electricity, or I guess, more oil. Either way, something used energy to get the dirt into bags. Then someone put the bags on a pallet, that a forklift burned more petrochemicals to move to a truck. The semi burned more oil to bring the dirt to a store, where I bought it under lights lit by other fossil fuels (I live in OH, 90% of our generation is coal), off a cash register that runs on electricity. Then I put the dirt in my car, which burned MORE petrochemicals to get it home. Then I put the dirt on top of the dirt I already had. Now how does one sum up the value for all of those resources expended? With money, that’s how. I paid $x for the bag of dirt, and that summed the value of every bit of energy expended in getting that dirt to me. If someone with a lot of spare time wanted to, they could figure out that X% of the $Y spent was for the cost of transport, IE fuel costs. In fact, a dedicated individual could figure out how much oil was used from start to finish, and go on the warpath against the frivolous use of oil for moving dirt. My point is that it takes oil to get a Twinkie on your desk, a bag of dirt on your garden, a hotdog at the game, or that bottle of water in your hand. The value of everything that went into that water is contained in the cost charged for it. The bottle of water in my hand costs $0.25 (a 20 pack for $5). Some percentage of the 25 cents went for the cost of oil. Though the aggregate might sound impressive, but it’s not really at all. __________________ I can sum up the clash of religion in one sentence: "My Invisible Friend is better than your Invisible Friend."