Spoiler Alert

Back in the good old days of the Cold War, everybody’s favorite secret agent, James Bond, fought villains like Dr. No, an evil scientist out to sabotage U.S. missile tests, and Mr. Big, a Soviet agent using pirate treasure to finance espionage in America. But as Bond’s friend Mathis tells him in Quantum of Solace, “When one is young, it’s easy to tell the difference between right and wrong. As one gets older, the villains and heroes get all mixed up.”

The reference is to a shady new Bond villain, agent of the Quantum organization – Dominic Greene. In public, Greene is a leading environmentalist whose organization, Greene Planet, buys up large tracts of land for ecological preserves. But behind the scenes, Greene has another agenda. As he says to his co-conspirators, “This is the most valuable resource in the world and we need to control as much of it as we can.”

The film makes a number of plays on the assumption that the resource in question is oil – but oil is so…twentieth century.

By the time Bond has pursued Greene from Italy to Haiti, from Haiti to Austria, and crash-landed his plane in a sink-hole in the high, barren desert of Bolivia, we make the discovery that this vital resource is – surprise! – water.

Colluding with Greene is a cast of evil characters taken straight from the history books. We have General Medrano, the ex-dictator of Bolivia, to whom Greene says, “You want your country back? My organization can give it to you.” We have the U.S. Ambassador, myopically sticking to the familiar program: “Okay, we do nothing to stop a coup, and you give us a lease to any oil you find.” And we have the British foreign office, continually wrangling with M15, Bond’s spy agency. When Bond’s boss, M, tells him that Greene is not an environmentalist but a villain, the foreign Minister says, “If we refused to do business with villains, we’d have almost no one to trade with.”  Ain’t it the truth.

The fact that Quantum of Solace makes water the villain’s object of greed, replacing oil, gold, diamonds, and mutually assured destruction, is telling of the point we’ve reached. More telling still is the fact that our villain’s cover has him acting as an environmentalist, the ultimate corporate greenwasher. The fact that the action winds up in Bolivia – the country where, in real life, both Bechtel and Suez have tried and failed to take control of community water resources during and shortly after the reign of former-dictator-turned-neoliberal President Hugo Banzer – brings the plot frighteningly close to reality.

If only the water movement had a few organizers with the physique, the gadgets, and the, er, style of Bond. While we have many great documentaries telling the story of the global water wars, including this year’s Flow and Blue Gold, one is forced to wonder if 007 does a greater service to the water movement than even our most highly talented documentarians. After all, who better than Hollywood to characterize the greenwashing corporate water profiteers as straight up evil, sans the need to justify the hyperbole?

Matieu Amalric, the actor who played Dominic Greene, wanted to wear make-up for the role, but director Marc Forster “wanted Greene not to look grotesque, but to symbolize the hidden evils in society.” Similarly, the original screenplay had Greene having some “hidden power.” But in the final cut, the director seems to have decided that corporate power was power enough.

One wonders if Dominic Greene – had he not died drinking motor oil to quench his thirst in the Bolivian desert – might give the keynote speech at the upcoming World Water Forum in Istanbul. After all, the World Water Council that puts on the forum is presided over by Loïc Fauchon, a former executive at one of the French subsidiaries of Suez, the world’s largest private water corporation.

As we learn from the WWF website, “One of the benefits of joining the WWC is the Council's ability to influence decisions related to world water management that affect organizations, business, and communities.” Perhaps their secret meetings will also be attended by executives of the Worldwide Fund for Nature, whose recent partnership with Coca-Cola aims to help the global soft-drink giant become “the most efficient company in the world in terms of water use,” with “every drop of water it uses…returned to the earth or compensated for through conservation and recycling programs.” And, with this blending of fact and fiction, it would hardly be surprising to find Greene’s signature on the CEO Water Mandate, which has companies with such devastating environmental track records as Dow Chemical, Shell Oil, Unilever, and Nestle pledging to “help address the water challenge faced by the world today.”

When M, Bond’s overweening boss at M15, finds out about Quantum, she demands, “What the hell is this organization, Bond? How can they be everywhere and we know nothing about them?”

Well, my darling M, the answer is simple: like transnational corporations, and like the large NGO’s that work with the private sector to reform its practices and green its reputation, and like the International Finance Institutions whose interests are increasingly endangering the United Nations’ mandate to defend and protect human rights, they can be everywhere because their particular form of villainy works best when hidden in plain sight.

Thankfully, the world’s water is safe, because, behind the scenes, secret agent 007 is on the job.

-Jeff Conant
e-mail • bio

A special congratulations goes out to one of our board members, Maude Barlow, whose impressive activism career recently led to her appointment as senior water advisor to the U.N. president!  In addition to the award-winning film, Blue Gold, which is based on her book,  Maude Barlow has written 15 other books and received six honorary doctorates. To add to her remarkable resume, she was just awarded the Citation for Lifetime Achievement from the Canadian Environment Awards, Canada's highest environmental award.

Congrats on both of these well-deserved honors, Maude!

-Food & Water Watch

Last week the feature documentary Blue Gold won the Audience Choice Best Environmental Film award at the Vancouver International Film Festival. Based on Maude Barlow's and Tony Clarke's book "Blue Gold: The Fight to Stop the Corporate Theft of the World's Water," this film brings to the forefront the unethical dealings of corporate giants, private investors, and corrupt governments that are trying to control what little is left of the world's fresh water supply. 

However, people are fighting back, trying to protect what is rightfully theirs and of their descendants. Their efforts range from lawsuits to revolutions, from local protests at schools to fighting it out at U.N. conventions, in the hopes that water is not reduced to being a commodity or a tool for manipulation. The film brings all this and more to light, not allowing anyone at fault to escape from blame.

The audience in Vancouver took notice, and we hope that the word keeps on spreading. Future showings of Blue Gold include the Planet in Focus Film Festival (October 22, 2008 in Toronto) and the Environmental Film Festival (March 22, 2009 in Washington, DC) – with hopefully more to come.

For more information, check out the Blue Gold website at http://www.bluegold-worldwaterwars.com

- Sofia Baliño

Global financial markets are in peril. Panic is gripping Wall Street. The Dow has taken huge dives and continues to stagger. September job loss was the highest in five years and nearly one in six homeowners are under water – owing more on their mortgages than their houses are worth. Times are tough.

Several state and local governments are drowning in these rough waters. They can’t make payroll or raise money for vital public works projects. With revenues running dry and municipal bonds becoming a hard sell, city officials have thrown their hands up in exasperation. A few are even thinking about turning to the private sector and the very financial institutions that helped get us in this mess.

Milwaukee's comptroller has proposed privatizing its water system, hawking it off to the highest bidder, to raise funds to keep city operations running. This is a classic example of taxing through the tap. The city would lease off the utility for 75 to 99 years in exchange for a one-time payment of $500 million. Then whatever corporation gets the deal will invariably hike water prices not only to recover the city’s payout but also to pad their stockholders’ wallets. Leases are an absurdly expensive way to raise money – even in this tight municipal bond market.

Milwaukee is not alone. Akron, Ohio, will vote on a similar lease of their sewers this November. Morgan Stanley is advising the deal, which comes as no surprise. They are eyeing water investment, as have Goldman Sachs, the now-defunct Lehman Brothers and AIG.

For more than a decade, the global water barons have been going into cash-strapped communities to push them to privatize their water. They have paraded around as if they were the saviors of these struggling governments, claiming to have the capital to make needed improvements and upgrades. In the last few years, investment banks joined this charade, expecting big payouts.

Ah, but time did tell another story. The investment bank era is over. The government forced the last two big independent investment banks – Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley – to become commercial banks. The problem? Not enough capital.

The irony is too great. These were the very banks that had pranced into communities proclaiming their wealth and bad-mouthing government finance. Then – bam! Stocks plummet as bad decisions catch up with greedy speculators. Now the federal government has to use our tax dollars to bail out the crumbling institutions. Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley stand to be two of the biggest beneficiaries of the $700 billion bailout. AIG already got its cushion. 

We trusted Wall Street with our homes, and look what happened – subprime lending, speculation, foreclosure crisis, doors boarded up, tent cities across the nation. Can we afford to trust it with our water?

Instead of corporate handouts and golden parachutes, our tax dollars should support projects that benefit the public good and protect the wellbeing of communities across the country. The federal government should ensure the safe and sound operation of our nation's water systems, so that something as precious and necessary as water is never subject to the whims of speculators and the fleeting fancies of the fat cats on Wall Street. 
 

Act now and tell Congress to support a trust fund for clean and safe water. Tell them we need public money for public utilities.

For more information about how corporations could seek heady profits from the water funding crisis, check out our report Costly Returns.

[Image from Candor]

Use your DJ skills to win $400 and participate in a historic cause worth rapping about!

The Great Lakes Tour of the documentary The Water Front and its filmmaker Liz Miller are offering a chance for remix artists to compete with their unique spin on the film's theme song "Please, Mr. Waterman." Legendary Detroit Bluesman Joe L. Carter lays down the heart-wrenching feature track that pleads to the authorities for relief from water cutoffs and loss of his home, his only worldly possession.

The Water Front asks the question, "What if you lived by the largest body of fresh water in the world but couldn't afford to use it?"  It follows the struggle of Highland Park, MI residents to keep control of their public water. The Great Lakes Tour debuted to its local audience on the Marygrove College campus on September 26. Residents from the area were engaged by the powerful film about a group of women who struggled to keep their community from being shut off from water after the city raised rates and began turning off for those who could not pay. Audience member Marian Kramer -- also one of the women featured in the film -- gripped the audience as she said "This film shouldn't just touch you, it should grab you."

The opening kicked off the 6-month tour of The Water Front throughout the Great Lakes region. Following the film, viewers participated in a dynamic discussion about the underlying economic and political issues that result in a fight for basic rights. The screening was a successful start to the film's fall tour of the Great Lakes Basin. Future audiences can expect to take part in lively give-and-take panel discussions following the screening. For those who haven't seen the film yet, the next screening of The Water Front will be on October 15 at 6:30pm at The Little Theatre at 240 East Avenue, Rochester, NY. Get additional screenings at: www.waterfrontmovie.com.

The Remix Contest runs from October 3 through December 16 with the
winner being announced at the film's New York City premiere. Rap about culture, rap about a cause and submit your remix.

Food and Water Watch and it's campaign Take Back The Tap are co-sponsors of the Great Lakes Tour of The Water Front. We hope to see you at the movies.

-Veronica Segovia
Food & Water Watch Intern | email

This is your chance to voice your opposition to water profiteering. You can vote against the privatization and commodification of water by participating in an online "Cambridge style" debate hosted by The Economist magazine.

The debate proposition is: "Water is both an industrial input and a prerequisite of life. Roughly a billion people do not have a constant supply of clean and safe water. Would water supplies be better managed if it were treated as a commodity, and priced accordingly? Or is water a basic human right that governments should secure for their citizens?" 

We know that water is a vital resource, critical for all of us. The provision of such an essential public good cannot be left in the hands of corporations, who will raise prices in the search for greater profit.

Join the debate and tell the moderator that allowing the market to determine the price of water will severely impact the world's poorest people, subjugate environmental conservation and trade public control for private profit.

Food & Water Watch Executive Director Wenonah Hauter commented:

The U.S. government and its corporate allies clearly believe that water is a new profit center. They are promoting markets and privatization as the solution to providing water to the world's poor -- 1.4 billion people without access to drinking water and 2.5 billion without sanitation services. International finance institutions, funded by the U.S. and other developed nations, provide loans to developing nations on the condition that they privatize services and charge steep user fees. Indeed, the very institutions that are charged with alleviating poverty, like the World Bank, are implementing policies that force people who make $1 or $2 a day to choose between food, housing or water.

Communities all over the world have suffered from the empty promises of water-privatization profiteers. Whether in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, or Guayaquil, Ecuador, or Atlanta, GA, the results have been devastating. They include cost-cutting measures that jeopardize public safety, job cuts to essential staff, maintenance and water quality problems, lack of infrastructure investment, sewage spills, corruption, environmental degradation, outrageous rate hikes and political meddling.

Almost across the board, private corporations deliver poorer service at a higher cost than do most public utilities. Surveys of U.S. utilities show that privately owned water utilities charge customers significantly higher water rates than their publicly owned counterparts charge -- anywhere from 13 percent to almost 50 percent more, according to an analysis by Food & Water Watch, the advocacy group I direct.

To cite just one example, in 2005, the government of Tanzania canceled its 10-year contract with the British-based firm Biwater after two years of poor management and unmet obligations left people without water and the government short about $3.25 million. The East African country enjoyed some measure of justice in early 2008 when an international tribunal ruled that Biwater must pay almost $8 million in damages and fees to the state water utility in Dar es Salaam. Not coincidentally, the company had taken control of the city's water supply in a controversial, noncompetitive privatization process favored by the British government and the World Bank.

The answer to providing safe, affordable drinking water and sewer services to developing nations is not giant corporations. The World Bank and other IFIs should stop predicating their loans on privatization. These powerful institutions must stop forcing poor countries to structure their economies in a way meant to benefit multinational corporations, and instead prioritize public health and increased access to clean and affordable water for all people. Because water is, after all, a human right.

Join her in saying no to the water barons who seek profit at the expense of clean, safe and affordable water for all.

For more information about the water debate, check out our Private vs. Public page and other reports on our website. 

– Mary Grant

Craig Zucker, founder of Tap’d NY, not only took back the tap, but took it and started using it for profit – basically putting himself in the same boat as some of the very bottled water companies he denounces. He’s begun his own bottled water company – but in this case, he bottles New York City tap water, which he purifies with a filter and then sells at the bottled water market rate.

What’s the point in buying bottled tap water at $1.50 a bottle when you can turn on your own tap for just $0.02 a gallon? Especially when the company’s owner pays that exact same $0.02 a gallon, and yet gets to make a financial killing out of cleaning it up a bit, putting it in a bottle, and selling it at the same price as traditional bottled water? Good question. Also considering that, when compared to a gallon of gas, the cost of a gallon of bottled water is much higher.

And yet somehow Zucker has managed to find consumers who believe there’s a good answer. His stance? Trying to take on the big, bad, overseas bottled water companies that try and lure consumers to drink their water over his bottled tap water – with a “local twist.” Making it seem like it’s a baseball game and he represents the home team, while other companies are the dreaded away team. Ignoring also that 40 percent of bottled water is actually purified tap water.

He’s right about one thing – tap water is a better option than bottled water. It’s regulated more often and by somewhat more stringent standards than those that regulate bottled water – though you can see from our September 23rd post that the EPA still has a long way to go in that regard. But in almost everything else, he’s misleading his customers. If you really want your water to be safe, inexpensive, and environmentally friendly, you have to remove the bottle from the equation.

So consider this – you can buy and install your own water filter and keep enjoying your affordable tap water, now purified, and in the long run you’ll have saved a lot more money than if you had switched to this bottled tap water business that offers you the same thing at an exorbitant price. In effect, you’ll have stopped a swindle in progress. And you’ll have done your part to take back the tap – responsibly.

- Sofia Baliño

Congratulations to local water activists in Shapleigh, Maine who worked tirelessly for six months to safeguard their water. They canvassed at the local dump, hosted educational workshops and struggled to protect their local watershed from corporate greed. And they won the battle: no testing or drilling from Nestlé. The committed movement in Shapleigh was spurred on by the dedicated grassroots efforts of POWWR (Protecting our Water and Wildlife Resources). This is not only a victory for Shapleigh but for communities everywhere working to take back the tap!

Please send Shapleigh a note of congratulations and encouragement.

Food & Water Watch
email

Rocket fuel in your water? No big deal, at least not to the group that’s supposed to protect our environment. Yes, you read that correctly: the Environmental Protection Agency evidently doesn’t think defending our most valuable resource is a “meaningful” priority. A document the EPA just released states that investing in the decontamination of perchlorate, a toxic rocket fuel, would not result in a "meaningful opportunity for health risk reduction for persons served by public-water systems." If reducing hazardous substances in our water supply isn’t meaningful enough for the EPA, what is? After such a ridiculously slack decision, perhaps the EPA’s water supply is in need of a test for brain impairing toxins.

Water in 35 states has tested positive for contamination with perchlorate at points high enough to affect thyroid and developmental health according to many experts. Even though every scientific panel that’s addressed the matter has appealed for a rigorous clean-up plan, the push for regulation has been hindered by political interference. The blame is being placed on the Pentagon and defense contractors for hampering with the ruling since they would likely be the ones to pay for any clean-up, being responsible for exposing the gunk to our water in the first place.

 "Even small changes in thyroid functions early on have impacts on functioning through high school and even into people's 20s."

Robert Zoeller, a University of Massachusetts professor spoke to the Washington Post about the health risk this chemical poses. "It's absolutely irreversible," he said. "Even small changes in thyroid functions early on have impacts on functioning through high school and even into people's 20s." The reference to the studies providing this evidence was deleted by officials from the White House Office of Management and Budget, who heavily edited the EPA proposal. With such political meddling, it appears that the country's so-called protection agency can't do much protecting after all.

Think drinking bottled water solves the problem? Think again. Even showering in water contaminated with high levels of toxins such as perchlorate could be harmful. Plus, bottled water isn't necessarily healthier and a lot of it comes from the tap anyway. Most importantly, supporting privatized water only makes the problem bigger, sending money to big corporations and away from our public resources. Help push for the only real solution, investing in clean and safe public water: ask Congress to provide the funds needed to protect our water sources.

Yesterday, Food & Water Watch's Executive Director Wenonah Hauter testified before the United States Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Transportation Safety, Infrastructure Security, and Water Quality. The committee was hearing testimony on legislation to amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act so that it requires manufacturers of bottled water to submit annual reports about contamination.

“The people and businesses in a watershed have the right to use it reasonably for drinking, growing food and other activities in the community . . . To restore the public’s faith in tap water and to ensure that future generations of Americans have access to safe, clean, affordable water, Food & Water Watch recommends that Congress pass a clean water trust fund," she said in her comments.

Check out the coverage from CBS.

Write your member of Congress in support of a water trust fund.

Get more information.

Check the map to see if FLOW is screening near you

Around the country and around the world communities are fighting for control of and access to safe, affordable public water. Film Director Irena Salina's film FLOW is a passionate, fact-filled world-tour of the issues facing the planet’s water today. Focusing on human rights, environmental destruction and corporate greed, FLOW shows the public challenges and the public fights for control over their most essential resource. Set in countries across the globe, Flow will inspire you and call you to action.

Join Food & Water Watch in this historic time as our movement for social justice and community control of water comes to local theaters. We'll be attending screenings around the country to bring this important film and movement into your community.

WATCH THE TRAILER

Too often these days it seems that large corporations and powerful individuals can do whatever they want. However, outrage over corporate control of water is causing more and more citizens to mobilize against efforts to profit from our public resources.

Such is the case in Akron, Ohio this week. On Monday, the citizen group Citizens to Save Our Sewers and Water (SOS) succeeded in putting on the November ballot a measure that would put to a public vote any effort by City Council to privatize city utilities.

The initiative drive—which collected nearly twice the signatures needed to order the issue to ballot—developed after Akron Mayor Donald Plusquellic announced in February his intention to lease Akron’s wastewater system to a private company. The mayor’s plan, which will also be on the November ballot, has the seemingly virtuous goal of financing a scholarship program for Akron youth.http://www.afsc.net/PDFFiles/mayorsplan0001.pdf

The contract, however, assembled in just a few short months, steps directly into many of the pitfalls of water privatization, not to mention fails to address questions of city and corporate responsibility and the degree and quality of services provided.

While the cause of financing education is a laudable goal, privatizing the city’s water system would create more problems than it would solve. Besides, the question at hand is not about the (inestimable) value of education, it is about whether or not corporations should control access to water in Akron.

It’s almost time to pull out the lawn chairs, open the sparklers, and put on your red, white and blue.  Whether your plans for the Fourth of July are to head to the beach, attend a parade, or simply relax with friends and family, chances are food and drink will be involved.  Here are some suggestions on which products to pick and which to avoid in order to have a safe and healthy holiday.

Let’s start with the meat. According to the Food Safety and Inspection Service of the USDA, summer is the prime time for foodborne illnesses.  But with proper precaution, you can keep your guests from getting sick. Always make sure to cook meats thoroughly (160° on the inside, even steak – see table below and previous entry) and double-check the expiration date on the package. Paying careful attention to the expiration date is especially important because some processors use carbon monoxide gas to keep meat looking red and fresh even if it is several days past its prime. Another thing to look out for is meat marked with the irradiation symbol . Some stores – like Wegmans – promote irradiation as a solution to prevent contamination. But in truth, irradiation does not miraculously purge the product of any and all harmful elements, transforming that steak or patty to sushi-grade meat. In fact, irradiation destroys many vital nutrients and vitamins, and consuming irradiated food may cause immune system failures, tumors and a host of other problems. In addition, the process of irradiation often creates a nasty texture, smell, and taste.

For those of you who plan to serve up seafood, there are a number of things for you to consider as well. Much of the seafood available in the United States is imported from foreign, industrial aquaculture farms.  Bacteria, viruses and parasites thrive in the unsanitary conditions that often characterize these farms, such that some imported fish have been described as “filthy” by inspectors, with Salmonella and other contaminants not uncommon.  Where chemicals and antibiotics (many of which have been outlawed in the United States) are applied in an attempt to eliminate the disease-causing agents, harmful residues can accumulate in the flesh. To protect yourself and your guests, ask your grocers where the product is from and how it was produced. Generally, the best bet is to opt for domestic, wild fish.  A particularly healthy and sustainable option is U.S. troll-caught Mahi Mahi.  If you are set on having salmon, choose U.S. wild Pacific salmon over Atlantic/farmed salmon.  Domestic halibut, whiting, and tilapia are also good choices.  If shellfish is on your menu, again stick to products from the United States.

Now undoubtedly you will need something to drink. But pass up the bottled water and instead treat your guests to tap water (if you will not be near a tap, fill up a cooler before you leave and take it with you).  Bottled water is not safer than tap water; in fact, tap water is better regulated and tested more frequently.  True, there may be impurities and the mineral content may not be to your liking, but these issues can be easily fixed with a simple filter.  Bottled water creates unnecessary garbage and pollution, plus it is expensive (it costs more per unit volume than gas).  So save your money or spend it instead on that fancy cake you’ve been eying.

So remember, when it comes to food, the bottom line is to cook meats and eggs to appropriate temperatures and choose local, sustainably-produced products.  Not only will you be supporting local producers, you will also be protecting your safety and the environment.  For resources and more information, consult the Eat Well Guide. And check out our water filtration guide to learn how to serve the best water in town, straight from your tap.
Have a good Fourth!

What if I told you that your soap might harm you?  And so might your cosmetics, cutting board, carpet, clothes, and many other products.  The culprit is a pesticide called Triclosan. On account of its antibacterial properties, manufacturers have put it into many of the things we interact with everyday. Marketed under the trade names Microban and BioFresh and an unlabeled ingredient in countless products advertising their antimicrobial properties, it can be detected in the blood, urine, and breast milk of people worldwide.  The problem is that research suggests that this chemical may have negative health and environmental effects.  It is thought to interfere with endocrine and cellular processes, contribute to antibiotic resistance, and break down into toxic chemicals such as dioxin and chloroform.  In addition to its effects on humans, it is also toxic to algae, phytoplankton, and other critical aquatic organisms. And it has been accumulating in water, generating concern that it will destroy fragile ecosystems.

So why is it used if it is so bad?  Good question. It is actually not any more effective at killing germs than warm water and a little soap, so its widespread application is unnecessary, little more than a marketing gimmick.  The Environmental Protection Agency is currently reviewing the product to determine if it is safe.  But they have registered it in the past, and their assessment so far has ignored evidence of its risks.  I don’t know about you, but I don’t like the idea that the things that fill my bathroom, kitchen, and closet could impair my health.  If you feel the same way, tell the EPA to ban non-medical use of Triclosan!

- Darcy White
email

There, amidst California’s coastal redwoods, you shall find Felton, a community of water warriors celebrating victory over the corporate forces that controlled their water.

The 3,000 adult residents of the Felton Water District organized for six years against California American Water, a subsidiary of American Water Works, which itself is part of German energy giant RWE.

Feltonites offered to buy the water system, but got rebuffed big time: RWE leadership stated, flatly, that the system was not for sale at any price and expressed its determination to oppose all public acquisition efforts so that Felton did not start a domino effect of citizens taking control of their water resources.

This was despite the fact that RWE was losing money on its U.S. water investments and wanted out. Even its attempt to unload American Water has been a big flop.

Finally, less than a week to go before a jury was to decide how much Felton needed to pay the company to take the system through eminent domain, Cal-AM and RWE negotiated a sale. San Lorenzo Valley Water District will buy the water system for $10.5 million and manage it for the Felton community.

 Jim Mosher, one of the lawyers representing Felton FLOW – Friends of Locally Owned Water – told Food & Water Watch: “We fought off every one of Cal-Am’s tactics to derail the process. But in the end, our position was completely vindicated.”

Much more about this at “The Fight for Public Water in Felton, California.

Send a high-five to the Felton activists.

Robert Schubert
email • bio

Corporate attempts to label their products as “green” for the sake of turning a fast buck are nothing new. Corporations exist, after all, in order to make money, and capitalizing on whatever is capturing the public’s collective imagination is often the best way of doing so. But Fiji Artisanal Water’s entree into the green movement strikes us as particularly suspect.

The company has recently launched fijigreen.com, a website outlining the ways in which their water is “good for the environment.”

If you’re anything like us, you are probably wondering how this claim could be true.

It can’t. 

While Fiji’s Artisanal Water’s commitment to reducing their packaging, investing in rainforest renewal and reducing their carbon emissions may be applauded by some, these measures are not enough to make them a green company. By definition, bottled water is simply not an environmentally friendly product.