On Jul 29, 11:12?am, "Pete C." wrote:
" wrote:

It has been known for years that much of the water sold as bottled
water is tap water. I have told people that, and have had them
insisit that it wasn't true, even when I showed them articles with
quotes from company representatives.

I'm afraid you don't comprehend the difference between the source of the
water i.e. public water supply, and the end product that is bottled
which is most certainly not the same thing any more than a bottle of
soda which is made with the same base water is. That tap water goes
through three or more stages of filtration generally including reverse
osmosis which produces pure water that is significantly cleaner than
municipal tap water. This filtered water is what is bottled for the
Aquafina and Dasani products and also what is mixed with the various
syrups to make the sodas, it is most certainly *not* tap water.

Pete C.

I spoke somewhat abruptly, but I think my meaning was clear: water
purchased in bottles under brand names is not of a higher objective
quality than that which comes from the tap in most of the US. In
fact, had I taken time to clarify, I might have pointed out that in
some places, tap water is of a higher objective quality.

While there is a filtering process for bottled water, the standards in
many municipalities (Chicago among them) are higher for tap water than
for bottled water. In other words, in such places the tap water goes
through more processsing than the bottled water. Testing done on
bottled water versus tap water has shown, in many areas, that the tap
water actually has lower bacteria count. This was, in fact, the topic
of the Roe Conn Radio Show in Chicago (www.wlsam.com) just a few days
ago, when the bottlers were announcing the new labeling. In Chicago,
the reason appears to be that the city of Chicago has set standards
for tap water, while standards for bottled water are standardized
nationally.

A couple points to note: Chicago water is among the most sophisticated
in terms of municipal water treatment in the world. Other cities have
sent people to Chicago to learn from them. Also, the level of purity
of almost any water supply in the United States is extremely high.
You'd have to search hard to find a non-potable water supply in the
US.

I am far from someone who is chasing dwon ways to abide by a "green"
agenda. My motives for keeping abreast of the topic, aside from
professional, have more to do with personal finance. The cost of a
bottle of water seems to typically hover around $1-$2 per pint for
water. At the low end of this, water costs $8 per gallon. Water from
the tap costs several orders of magnitude less, and there is little
discernible difference between the two products. The more expensive
may edge out the less expensive option in quality in some cases, but
in other cases it is itself edged out.

With all of the above being said, those who live in hard water areas
may well opt for bottled water of the kind from a water cooler.
Inthat case, the cost of the water is closer to $1.25 per gallon.

On Jul 29, 6:21?pm, "Pete C." wrote:
Oren wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 18:03:37 -0400, David Starr
wrote:

Every time I see someone with bottled water, I think of someone sitting in the
garage filling thousands of bottles with water coming from an old rubber garden
hose, and giggling as he pictures his bank account growing.

I just can't figure out what the big attraction of bottled water is.

CONveniences (cap locks intentional)

--
Oren

Hofstadter's Law - It [a task] always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's Law.

Convenience is a big one. Shelf life is another.

The water in the bottle is *not* the same as that from a garden hose or
tap, even if the initial source was the tap, it is significantly cleaner
biologically. Remember that tap water going into the bottling plant is
filtered, chlorinated, dechlorinated and reverse osmosis filtered, all
the while passing through piping systems that are sanitized with
chlorinated water several times per shift along with the bottling line
and then it's filled into bottles that have been sanitized as well. It's
the same water and process as the soda bottled on the same lines.

Pete C.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

As I mentioned in a previous post, it is not necessarily true that
bottled water is cleaner biologically than tap water. In many areas,
tap water is bound by higher standards than those set for bottled
water.

As far as I'm concerned, I am all for the guy who can market and sell
tap water's approximate equal (we can quibble all we want over
details, the difference is not significant in most cases, and bottled
water doesn't always end up on top). I'm just not going to be a
customer when there is a suitable substitute readily available and
several magnitudes lower in cost. A pint of tap water costs about
1/100 of a cent. A pint of bottled water costs about $1.

There was, in fact, a restaurant (I believe it was The Berghoff, now
gone) which was selling "Chicago Tap Water", which people would
apparently buy by the case because of the superior water treatment in
Chicago.

" wrote:

On Jul 29, 6:21?pm, "Pete C." wrote:
Oren wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 18:03:37 -0400, David Starr
wrote:

Every time I see someone with bottled water, I think of someone sitting in the
garage filling thousands of bottles with water coming from an old rubber garden
hose, and giggling as he pictures his bank account growing.

I just can't figure out what the big attraction of bottled water is.

CONveniences (cap locks intentional)

--
Oren

Hofstadter's Law - It [a task] always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's Law.

Convenience is a big one. Shelf life is another.

The water in the bottle is *not* the same as that from a garden hose or
tap, even if the initial source was the tap, it is significantly cleaner
biologically. Remember that tap water going into the bottling plant is
filtered, chlorinated, dechlorinated and reverse osmosis filtered, all
the while passing through piping systems that are sanitized with
chlorinated water several times per shift along with the bottling line
and then it's filled into bottles that have been sanitized as well. It's
the same water and process as the soda bottled on the same lines.

Pete C.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

As I mentioned in a previous post, it is not necessarily true that
bottled water is cleaner biologically than tap water. In many areas,
tap water is bound by higher standards than those set for bottled
water.

As far as I'm concerned, I am all for the guy who can market and sell
tap water's approximate equal (we can quibble all we want over
details, the difference is not significant in most cases, and bottled
water doesn't always end up on top). I'm just not going to be a
customer when there is a suitable substitute readily available and
several magnitudes lower in cost. A pint of tap water costs about
1/100 of a cent. A pint of bottled water costs about $1.

There was, in fact, a restaurant (I believe it was The Berghoff, now
gone) which was selling "Chicago Tap Water", which people would
apparently buy by the case because of the superior water treatment in
Chicago.

The Berghoff is gone? I haven't been to Chicago in quite a while, but
recall having a few nice dinners there. Bummer.

" wrote:

On Jul 29, 11:12?am, "Pete C." wrote:
" wrote:

It has been known for years that much of the water sold as bottled
water is tap water. I have told people that, and have had them
insisit that it wasn't true, even when I showed them articles with
quotes from company representatives.

I'm afraid you don't comprehend the difference between the source of the
water i.e. public water supply, and the end product that is bottled
which is most certainly not the same thing any more than a bottle of
soda which is made with the same base water is. That tap water goes
through three or more stages of filtration generally including reverse
osmosis which produces pure water that is significantly cleaner than
municipal tap water. This filtered water is what is bottled for the
Aquafina and Dasani products and also what is mixed with the various
syrups to make the sodas, it is most certainly *not* tap water.

Pete C.

I spoke somewhat abruptly, but I think my meaning was clear: water
purchased in bottles under brand names is not of a higher objective
quality than that which comes from the tap in most of the US. In
fact, had I taken time to clarify, I might have pointed out that in
some places, tap water is of a higher objective quality.

Please provide a cite to an example of a municipal water supply being of
higher objective quality than the bottled water of the "big guys" i.e.
Aquafina or Dasani.


While there is a filtering process for bottled water, the standards in
many municipalities (Chicago among them) are higher for tap water than
for bottled water.

Standards set minimums, product quality can readily exceed those
minimums.

In other words, in such places the tap water goes
through more processsing than the bottled water.

No, tap water goes through specified processing, bottled water may or
may not go through various processing.

For example:

A "spring water" may undergo little or no processing, but it must be
tested to insure it meets the standards for bottled water.

A "purified water" may start as municipal water, having already
undergone processing to meet municipal water standards, before being
further filtered and sanitized at the bottling plant to meet the
standards for water used for the production of soft drinks and
significantly exceeding the standards for bottled water.

Testing done on
bottled water versus tap water has shown, in many areas, that the tap
water actually has lower bacteria count.

This will almost certainly be a test performed on a "spring water" or
other minimally processed water, not a "purified water" which is a very
different product.

This was, in fact, the topic
of the Roe Conn Radio Show in Chicago (www.wlsam.com) just a few days
ago, when the bottlers were announcing the new labeling. In Chicago,
the reason appears to be that the city of Chicago has set standards
for tap water, while standards for bottled water are standardized
nationally.

Again standards set a minimum quality and products regularly exceed
those minimums.


A couple points to note: Chicago water is among the most sophisticated
in terms of municipal water treatment in the world. Other cities have
sent people to Chicago to learn from them. Also, the level of purity
of almost any water supply in the United States is extremely high.
You'd have to search hard to find a non-potable water supply in the
US.

Technically correct, however there is a very large difference between a
water meeting the standard for potable water which is rather low and a
clean, pure water. Potable water won't make you sick, but can still be
rather disgusting to drink, while clean, pure water will actually be
pleasant to drink.


I am far from someone who is chasing dwon ways to abide by a "green"
agenda. My motives for keeping abreast of the topic, aside from
professional, have more to do with personal finance. The cost of a
bottle of water seems to typically hover around $1-$2 per pint for
water. At the low end of this, water costs $8 per gallon. Water from
the tap costs several orders of magnitude less, and there is little
discernible difference between the two products. The more expensive
may edge out the less expensive option in quality in some cases, but
in other cases it is itself edged out.

If your tap water tastes sufficiently good to you, by all means drink
it. Do not however assume that because your tap water tastes good and
all municipal water in the US is potable, that other people's tap water
tastes equally good.

I've traveled around the US a bit and I've found places with tap water
that I considered quite acceptable and places where I wouldn't use the
tap water for any consumption (drinking or cooking) and was leery of
using it for brushing my teeth. Most places I've been fell somewhere in
between.

For those in between places, if I was going to live there, my drinking
and cooking water would come from my own reverse osmosis filter (and did
in one place I lived). Where I live now I have well based water from a
coop that is quite good quality, both subjective and objective (though a
bit high ph) so I don't filter it further for cooking purposes. For
drinking purposes it gets filtered by a basic filter in the
refrigerator. I purchase a limited amount of bottled water for my
emergency supply.


With all of the above being said, those who live in hard water areas
may well opt for bottled water of the kind from a water cooler.
Inthat case, the cost of the water is closer to $1.25 per gallon.

Hard water isn't generally the issue. I've lived where I had well water
that was quite hard, but was perfectly palatable. The problems generally
are taste and smell issues, or people who do not wish to consume the
chlorine and other chemicals that are in municipal tap water and are not
present in nearly all bottled water.

Pete C.

"mm" wrote in message

At the steel mill, the guys in the hot mills used to take salt
tablets. I think they took them as they felt they needed them, from a
dispenser on the wall, but maybe there was a minimum on hot days.

I have this vague feeling that they stopped doing that 10 or 20 years
ago, or someone claimed that they should do something else instead,
but I don't remember.

I remember the salt tablet dispensers where I used to work over 30 years
ago. Today, most people take in too much salt under normal conditions and
it was causing more problems with high blood pressure, etc. Now the
Gatorade and similar drinks is the way to go.

"Jonesie" wrote in message


We have suffered some major floods in our area which made it necessary to
add more chemicals to our local water that effected the taste and made the
consistency of water quality suspect. Some communities have reported cases
of contamination that required residents to boil drinking water until
further notice. Hospital waste has been washing up on beaches and sewerage
has made its way into reservoirs not to mention threats of intentional
contamination by those new breed of bad guys that have become a tool used
to scare the bejesus out of everyone.

Bottled water may rise to $3.00 a gallon but I will still prefer it over
any public water source that will meet the standards set that can be much
lower then what might be acceptable to me. What is wrong with treating it
like any other beverage like Coke or Pepsi?

So where does your bottled water come from? The same sources that have the
salt, fertilizer, hospital waste and fish poop that your local source uses.
No way around it. You may have local problems, but that bottle of water you
just bought may have been my urine last week. I use a charcoal filter for
my water.

wrote in message
news
On Wed, 01 Aug 2007 17:41:11 -0500, "Pete C."
wrote:

sylvan butler wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 23:21:31 GMT, Pete C. wrote:
tap, even if the initial source was the tap, it is significantly
cleaner
biologically. Remember that tap water going into the bottling plant is
filtered, chlorinated, dechlorinated and reverse osmosis filtered, all
the while passing through piping systems that are sanitized with
chlorinated water several times per shift along with the bottling line

At least, that is what they want you to think you are paying for... You
should read the test results on bottled water sometime. Some are good.
Many are not so good.

I'm not interested in bogus "test result" propaganda put out by the
loony groups opposed to bottled water. I've spent days at a Coca Cola
bottling plant and know full well how their products are produced.


As long as you understand drinking bottled water is analogous to
drinking a coke or a beer it is not confusing.
Drinking bottled water around the house is silly if your tap water is
drinkable but on the road it is just a soft drink, that is better for
you than sugar water or the chemical equivilent in a "diet" drink..

That's how I view it. I bottle of water every month or so to obtain the
bottle, then refill it as needed. Toss bottle after while to prevent alge,
mold, and bacterial growth.

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:

"Jonesie" wrote in message


We have suffered some major floods in our area which made it necessary to
add more chemicals to our local water that effected the taste and made the
consistency of water quality suspect. Some communities have reported cases
of contamination that required residents to boil drinking water until
further notice. Hospital waste has been washing up on beaches and sewerage
has made its way into reservoirs not to mention threats of intentional
contamination by those new breed of bad guys that have become a tool used
to scare the bejesus out of everyone.

Bottled water may rise to $3.00 a gallon but I will still prefer it over
any public water source that will meet the standards set that can be much
lower then what might be acceptable to me. What is wrong with treating it
like any other beverage like Coke or Pepsi?

So where does your bottled water come from? The same sources that have the
salt, fertilizer, hospital waste and fish poop that your local source uses.
No way around it. You may have local problems, but that bottle of water you
just bought may have been my urine last week. I use a charcoal filter for
my water.

You seem to loose sight of the fact that the municipal water supply
treats water so that it meets the standards for municipal water, while
the bottling plant takes that municipal water and treats it to a higher
standard for beverage production, a standard that is a good deal higher
than what your charcoal filter will produce.

On Aug 1, 6:21?pm, "Pete C." wrote:
" wrote:

On Jul 29, 6:21?pm, "Pete C." wrote:
Oren wrote:

On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 18:03:37 -0400, David Starr
wrote:

Every time I see someone with bottled water, I think of someone sitting in the
garage filling thousands of bottles with water coming from an old rubber garden
hose, and giggling as he pictures his bank account growing.

I just can't figure out what the big attraction of bottled water is.

CONveniences (cap locks intentional)

--
Oren

Hofstadter's Law - It [a task] always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's Law.

Convenience is a big one. Shelf life is another.

The water in the bottle is *not* the same as that from a garden hose or
tap, even if the initial source was the tap, it is significantly cleaner
biologically. Remember that tap water going into the bottling plant is
filtered, chlorinated, dechlorinated and reverse osmosis filtered, all
the while passing through piping systems that are sanitized with
chlorinated water several times per shift along with the bottling line
and then it's filled into bottles that have been sanitized as well. It's
the same water and process as the soda bottled on the same lines.

Pete C.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

As I mentioned in a previous post, it is not necessarily true that
bottled water is cleaner biologically than tap water. In many areas,
tap water is bound by higher standards than those set for bottled
water.

As far as I'm concerned, I am all for the guy who can market and sell
tap water's approximate equal (we can quibble all we want over
details, the difference is not significant in most cases, and bottled
water doesn't always end up on top). I'm just not going to be a
customer when there is a suitable substitute readily available and
several magnitudes lower in cost. A pint of tap water costs about
1/100 of a cent. A pint of bottled water costs about $1.

There was, in fact, a restaurant (I believe it was The Berghoff, now
gone) which was selling "Chicago Tap Water", which people would
apparently buy by the case because of the superior water treatment in
Chicago.

The Berghoff is gone? I haven't been to Chicago in quite a while, but
recall having a few nice dinners there. Bummer.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yes, it is gone. There is a Berghoff Cafe or something downstairs of
the former restaurant. It closed about a year ago, I think.

On Aug 1, 6:52?pm, "Pete C." wrote:
" wrote:

On Jul 29, 11:12?am, "Pete C." wrote:
" wrote:

It has been known for years that much of the water sold as bottled
water is tap water. I have told people that, and have had them
insisit that it wasn't true, even when I showed them articles with
quotes from company representatives.

I'm afraid you don't comprehend the difference between the source of the
water i.e. public water supply, and the end product that is bottled
which is most certainly not the same thing any more than a bottle of
soda which is made with the same base water is. That tap water goes
through three or more stages of filtration generally including reverse
osmosis which produces pure water that is significantly cleaner than
municipal tap water. This filtered water is what is bottled for the
Aquafina and Dasani products and also what is mixed with the various
syrups to make the sodas, it is most certainly *not* tap water.

Pete C.

I spoke somewhat abruptly, but I think my meaning was clear: water
purchased in bottles under brand names is not of a higher objective
quality than that which comes from the tap in most of the US. In
fact, had I taken time to clarify, I might have pointed out that in
some places, tap water is of a higher objective quality.

Please provide a cite to an example of a municipal water supply being of
higher objective quality than the bottled water of the "big guys" i.e.
Aquafina or Dasani.



While there is a filtering process for bottled water, the standards in
many municipalities (Chicago among them) are higher for tap water than
for bottled water.

Standards set minimums, product quality can readily exceed those
minimums.

In other words, in such places the tap water goes
through more processsing than the bottled water.

No, tap water goes through specified processing, bottled water may or
may not go through various processing.

For example:

A "spring water" may undergo little or no processing, but it must be
tested to insure it meets the standards for bottled water.

A "purified water" may start as municipal water, having already
undergone processing to meet municipal water standards, before being
further filtered and sanitized at the bottling plant to meet the
standards for water used for the production of soft drinks and
significantly exceeding the standards for bottled water.

Testing done on
bottled water versus tap water has shown, in many areas, that the tap
water actually has lower bacteria count.

This will almost certainly be a test performed on a "spring water" or
other minimally processed water, not a "purified water" which is a very
different product.

This was, in fact, the topic
of the Roe Conn Radio Show in Chicago (www.wlsam.com) just a few days
ago, when the bottlers were announcing the new labeling. In Chicago,
the reason appears to be that the city of Chicago has set standards
for tap water, while standards for bottled water are standardized
nationally.

Again standards set a minimum quality and products regularly exceed
those minimums.



A couple points to note: Chicago water is among the most sophisticated
in terms of municipal water treatment in the world. Other cities have
sent people to Chicago to learn from them. Also, the level of purity
of almost any water supply in the United States is extremely high.
You'd have to search hard to find a non-potable water supply in the
US.

Technically correct, however there is a very large difference between a
water meeting the standard for potable water which is rather low and a
clean, pure water. Potable water won't make you sick, but can still be
rather disgusting to drink, while clean, pure water will actually be
pleasant to drink.



I am far from someone who is chasing dwon ways to abide by a "green"
agenda. My motives for keeping abreast of the topic, aside from
professional, have more to do with personal finance. The cost of a
bottle of water seems to typically hover around $1-$2 per pint for
water. At the low end of this, water costs $8 per gallon. Water from
the tap costs several orders of magnitude less, and there is little
discernible difference between the two products. The more expensive
may edge out the less expensive option in quality in some cases, but
in other cases it is itself edged out.

If your tap water tastes sufficiently good to you, by all means drink
it. Do not however assume that because your tap water tastes good and
all municipal water in the US is potable, that other people's tap water
tastes equally good.

I've traveled around the US a bit and I've found places with tap water
that I considered quite acceptable and places where I wouldn't use the
tap water for any consumption (drinking or cooking) and was leery of
using it for brushing my teeth. Most places I've been fell somewhere in
between.

For those in between places, if I was going to live there, my drinking
and cooking water would come from my own reverse osmosis filter (and did
in one place I lived). Where I live now I have well based water from a
coop that is quite good quality, both subjective and objective (though a
bit high ph) so I don't filter it further for cooking purposes. For
drinking purposes it gets filtered by a basic filter in the
refrigerator. I purchase a limited amount of bottled water for my
emergency supply.



With all of the above being said, those who live in hard water areas
may well opt for bottled water of the kind from a water cooler.
Inthat case, the cost of the water is closer to $1.25 per gallon.

Hard water isn't generally the issue. I've lived where I had well water
that was quite hard, but was perfectly palatable. The problems generally
are taste and smell issues, or people who do not wish to consume the
chlorine and other chemicals that are in municipal tap water and are not
present in nearly all bottled water.

Pete C.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Please note that I did not mention any particular brand name, so my
comments were directed generally at the concept of purchasing bottled
water. That being said, here is an example: http://www.case.edu/pubaff/univcomm/water.htm
This is one of many examples that can be found regarding tap vs.
bottled water. I am not necessarily talking about any particular
brand, nor am I opposed to anyone selling bottled water. Because
inflection can't come through here, you are perhaps misunderstanding
the "tone" of my comments.

I am well aware that minimum standards can readily be exceeded by
producers, and regularly are. Its really a cost/benefit analysis in
my mind: the difference is inconsequential relative to cost.
Additionally, you are guaranteed a minimum with the municipality in my
example (Chicago). There is little to prevent Pesico or Coca Cola or
any other bottler from reducing company standards to below that of any
particular locale, as long as they remain above the legal standards
set nationally. They could do so and people would not know it, and
would not even be harmed by it. That is my point: the difference is
so inconsequential in most places that people would not be affected.

Penn and Teller did a piece on this, with people drinking "boutique"
water. It literally was being filled with a garden hose in the back
of the reataurant. The comments being made, even different comments
about supposedly different water that came from the same
source, ,leads me to believe that (A) the water was perfectly fine and
(B) people were fooling themselves into believing there was more to it
than there was.

I have traveled throughout much of the country as well. I will be the
first to tell you that water in some other parts of the country is not
as pleasant-tasting as Chicago's water. I will also tell you that
there are places where I can't tell the difference. I don't assume
that everyone's water tastes equally good. I do assume that the
differfence in virtually all parts of the United States is not worth
the additional cost on an ongoing basis. If you are visiting, for
example, and the water tastes awful, you might wish to purchase
bottled water.

As for hard water, it isn't as much the taste as the mineral deposits
in coffee makers and such that might propmpt one to use bottled water.

I am thrilled any time someone can find a legal way to make money.
There are entrepreneurs everywhere. If you are connected in some way
to the bottled water industry, I hope you make tons of money at it.
I am an absolute lover of capitalism. I am simply saying why my money
is not spent that way.

On Jul 28, 4:32?am, "Jonesie" wrote:

Bottled water may rise to $3.00 a gallon but I will still prefer it over
any public water source that will meet the standards set that can be much
lower then what might be acceptable to me. What is wrong with treating it
like any other beverage like Coke or Pepsi?

--
Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

If you do the math, at $1.00 per pint, it is already well over $3.oo
per gallon. It sits at about $8.00 per gallon.

Even at $1 per liter bottle, you are close to $4.00 per gallon

"Pete C." wrote in message
You seem to loose sight of the fact that the municipal water supply
treats water so that it meets the standards for municipal water, while
the bottling plant takes that municipal water and treats it to a higher
standard for beverage production, a standard that is a good deal higher
than what your charcoal filter will produce.

Perhaps. Some municipal water is better than some bottled water from test
results I've seen. Varies, or course, but bottled water was still subjected
to the same contamination the OP was trying to avoid. It did not come from
some pure reservoir.

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:

"Pete C." wrote in message
You seem to loose sight of the fact that the municipal water supply
treats water so that it meets the standards for municipal water, while
the bottling plant takes that municipal water and treats it to a higher
standard for beverage production, a standard that is a good deal higher
than what your charcoal filter will produce.

Perhaps. Some municipal water is better than some bottled water from test
results I've seen. Varies, or course, but bottled water was still subjected
to the same contamination the OP was trying to avoid. It did not come from
some pure reservoir.

Unless you differentiate between bottled spring water which could well
be comparable or lower purity than municipal water, and bottled purified
water which will pretty much always be higher purity than municipal
water, you're not making a valid comparison.

" wrote:

On Aug 1, 6:52?pm, "Pete C." wrote:
" wrote:

On Jul 29, 11:12?am, "Pete C." wrote:
" wrote:

It has been known for years that much of the water sold as bottled
water is tap water. I have told people that, and have had them
insisit that it wasn't true, even when I showed them articles with
quotes from company representatives.

I'm afraid you don't comprehend the difference between the source of the
water i.e. public water supply, and the end product that is bottled
which is most certainly not the same thing any more than a bottle of
soda which is made with the same base water is. That tap water goes
through three or more stages of filtration generally including reverse
osmosis which produces pure water that is significantly cleaner than
municipal tap water. This filtered water is what is bottled for the
Aquafina and Dasani products and also what is mixed with the various
syrups to make the sodas, it is most certainly *not* tap water.

Pete C.

I spoke somewhat abruptly, but I think my meaning was clear: water
purchased in bottles under brand names is not of a higher objective
quality than that which comes from the tap in most of the US. In
fact, had I taken time to clarify, I might have pointed out that in
some places, tap water is of a higher objective quality.

Please provide a cite to an example of a municipal water supply being of
higher objective quality than the bottled water of the "big guys" i.e.
Aquafina or Dasani.



While there is a filtering process for bottled water, the standards in
many municipalities (Chicago among them) are higher for tap water than
for bottled water.

Standards set minimums, product quality can readily exceed those
minimums.

In other words, in such places the tap water goes
through more processsing than the bottled water.

No, tap water goes through specified processing, bottled water may or
may not go through various processing.

For example:

A "spring water" may undergo little or no processing, but it must be
tested to insure it meets the standards for bottled water.

A "purified water" may start as municipal water, having already
undergone processing to meet municipal water standards, before being
further filtered and sanitized at the bottling plant to meet the
standards for water used for the production of soft drinks and
significantly exceeding the standards for bottled water.

Testing done on
bottled water versus tap water has shown, in many areas, that the tap
water actually has lower bacteria count.

This will almost certainly be a test performed on a "spring water" or
other minimally processed water, not a "purified water" which is a very
different product.

This was, in fact, the topic
of the Roe Conn Radio Show in Chicago (www.wlsam.com) just a few days
ago, when the bottlers were announcing the new labeling. In Chicago,
the reason appears to be that the city of Chicago has set standards
for tap water, while standards for bottled water are standardized
nationally.

Again standards set a minimum quality and products regularly exceed
those minimums.



A couple points to note: Chicago water is among the most sophisticated
in terms of municipal water treatment in the world. Other cities have
sent people to Chicago to learn from them. Also, the level of purity
of almost any water supply in the United States is extremely high.
You'd have to search hard to find a non-potable water supply in the
US.

Technically correct, however there is a very large difference between a
water meeting the standard for potable water which is rather low and a
clean, pure water. Potable water won't make you sick, but can still be
rather disgusting to drink, while clean, pure water will actually be
pleasant to drink.



I am far from someone who is chasing dwon ways to abide by a "green"
agenda. My motives for keeping abreast of the topic, aside from
professional, have more to do with personal finance. The cost of a
bottle of water seems to typically hover around $1-$2 per pint for
water. At the low end of this, water costs $8 per gallon. Water from
the tap costs several orders of magnitude less, and there is little
discernible difference between the two products. The more expensive
may edge out the less expensive option in quality in some cases, but
in other cases it is itself edged out.

If your tap water tastes sufficiently good to you, by all means drink
it. Do not however assume that because your tap water tastes good and
all municipal water in the US is potable, that other people's tap water
tastes equally good.

I've traveled around the US a bit and I've found places with tap water
that I considered quite acceptable and places where I wouldn't use the
tap water for any consumption (drinking or cooking) and was leery of
using it for brushing my teeth. Most places I've been fell somewhere in
between.

For those in between places, if I was going to live there, my drinking
and cooking water would come from my own reverse osmosis filter (and did
in one place I lived). Where I live now I have well based water from a
coop that is quite good quality, both subjective and objective (though a
bit high ph) so I don't filter it further for cooking purposes. For
drinking purposes it gets filtered by a basic filter in the
refrigerator. I purchase a limited amount of bottled water for my
emergency supply.



With all of the above being said, those who live in hard water areas
may well opt for bottled water of the kind from a water cooler.
Inthat case, the cost of the water is closer to $1.25 per gallon.

Hard water isn't generally the issue. I've lived where I had well water
that was quite hard, but was perfectly palatable. The problems generally
are taste and smell issues, or people who do not wish to consume the
chlorine and other chemicals that are in municipal tap water and are not
present in nearly all bottled water.

Pete C.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Please note that I did not mention any particular brand name, so my
comments were directed generally at the concept of purchasing bottled
water. That being said, here is an example: http://www.case.edu/pubaff/univcomm/water.htm
This is one of many examples that can be found regarding tap vs.
bottled water. I am not necessarily talking about any particular
brand, nor am I opposed to anyone selling bottled water. Because
inflection can't come through here, you are perhaps misunderstanding
the "tone" of my comments.

Tone has nothing to do with it, you made specific claims that are not
true:

While there is a filtering process for bottled water, the standards in
many municipalities (Chicago among them) are higher for tap water than
for bottled water. In other words, in such places the tap water goes
through more processsing than the bottled water.

This claim is simply not true. The bottled purified water absolutely
goes through more processing than the tap water. Bottled spring water
however goes through little or no processing, only testing.

Without differentiating between bottled purified water and bottled
spring water, all claims or comparisons to "bottled water" are invalid.


I am well aware that minimum standards can readily be exceeded by
producers, and regularly are. Its really a cost/benefit analysis in
my mind: the difference is inconsequential relative to cost.
Additionally, you are guaranteed a minimum with the municipality in my
example (Chicago). There is little to prevent Pesico or Coca Cola or
any other bottler from reducing company standards to below that of any
particular locale, as long as they remain above the legal standards
set nationally. They could do so and people would not know it, and
would not even be harmed by it. That is my point: the difference is
so inconsequential in most places that people would not be affected.

People would indeed know it and be harmed, since neither bottled spring
water, nor bottled purified water contain the chlorine, chloramines,
fluoride and reaction byproducts found in tap water. Many people choose
to drink bottled water to avoid consuming the chemicals added to tap
water.


Penn and Teller did a piece on this, with people drinking "boutique"
water. It literally was being filled with a garden hose in the back
of the reataurant. The comments being made, even different comments
about supposedly different water that came from the same
source, ,leads me to believe that (A) the water was perfectly fine and
(B) people were fooling themselves into believing there was more to it
than there was.

Now there is a scientific test for you. Probably just like the testing
that the soft drink industry uses in claiming that people can't tell the
difference between cane sugar and high fructose corn syrup. I for one
can absolutely tell the difference, it is quite significant, for example
comparing a can of "regular" HFCS based Dr. Pepper and a can of "Dublin"
cane sugar based Dr. Pepper. I can also readily detect chlorine in tap
water.


I have traveled throughout much of the country as well. I will be the
first to tell you that water in some other parts of the country is not
as pleasant-tasting as Chicago's water. I will also tell you that
there are places where I can't tell the difference. I don't assume
that everyone's water tastes equally good. I do assume that the
differfence in virtually all parts of the United States is not worth
the additional cost on an ongoing basis. If you are visiting, for
example, and the water tastes awful, you might wish to purchase
bottled water.

Many people consider pretty much any municipal tap water to taste
terrible due to the chlorine. It's likely that those who have been
drinking it for most of their lives are so accustomed to it that they
don't notice it and therefore don't detect the difference between
municipal tap water and bottled water. Those of us who have spent most
of our lives drinking chlorine free well water detect the added chlorine
in a picosecond and find it repulsive. There are also the people who
consider the health aspects of not consuming toxic chemicals like
chlorine, chloramine, fluoride or their reaction byproducts.


As for hard water, it isn't as much the taste as the mineral deposits
in coffee makers and such that might propmpt one to use bottled water.

That really isn't a bottled water issue per se. Bottled spring water is
hard water in many cases, and municipal water varies drastically in
hardness from area to area. A home water softener is typically a better
choice than bottled water since it also addresses the problem of mineral
scale buildup in pipes, plumbing fixtures, toilets, sinks, tubs, etc. as
well as the laundry issue where hard water necessitates increased
detergent usage.


I am thrilled any time someone can find a legal way to make money.
There are entrepreneurs everywhere. If you are connected in some way
to the bottled water industry, I hope you make tons of money at it.
I am an absolute lover of capitalism. I am simply saying why my money
is not spent that way.

Again you're implying that bottled water is simply a money making scheme
with no benefits, which simply isn't true.

Pete C.

"Pete C." wrote in message

Unless you differentiate between bottled spring water which could well
be comparable or lower purity than municipal water, and bottled purified
water which will pretty much always be higher purity than municipal
water, you're not making a valid comparison.

Does not matter, that was not my original point. My original point was
that the OP says he is using bottled water because municipal water comes
from nasty sources. So does bottled water. If I take a leak today, someone
is going to drink it next week be it in a bottle, tumbler, spring, lake,
whatever. Just the way the water system of the planet works.

Edwin Pawlowski wrote:

"Pete C." wrote in message

Unless you differentiate between bottled spring water which could well
be comparable or lower purity than municipal water, and bottled purified
water which will pretty much always be higher purity than municipal
water, you're not making a valid comparison.

Does not matter, that was not my original point. My original point was
that the OP says he is using bottled water because municipal water comes
from nasty sources. So does bottled water. If I take a leak today, someone
is going to drink it next week be it in a bottle, tumbler, spring, lake,
whatever. Just the way the water system of the planet works.

Yea, and the water you consumed to make that **** was part of a steaming
dinosaur turd at some point too. None of that has any relevance to the
quality of today's water, be it tap, spring or purified.

Pete C.

"Pete C." wrote in message

Yea, and the water you consumed to make that **** was part of a steaming
dinosaur turd at some point too. None of that has any relevance to the
quality of today's water, be it tap, spring or purified.

Pete C.

That was my point, It cannot be avoided. Thank you for recognizing it.

kjpro @ usenet.com wrote:
wrote in message
ups.com...


Even if there was research backing up the eight glasses a day idea,



There's medical people that will back this up....


No, there aren't. Just more of your usual ill informed bull.

Prove your assertion.

Provide the cite to a peer reviewed medical journal with a paper
demonstrating any empiracle evidence for he utility of consuming
8 glasses of water per day.

We'll wait while you try to use adictionary to undersand the challenge.

We'll wait longer while you search in vain for such a paper.

If you can't or won't produce such an article, we'll all
know what you are.

A loudmouth ill informed liar.

Have a nice day.

Jim Redelfs wrote:

SNIP HAPPENS

While bottled water may come from a municipal "tap", when the bottler is done
purifying the it, the water is a far cry from what it was.

ROTFL.

What, its no longer dihydrogenmonoxide?

Pete C. wrote:
" wrote:
Tone has nothing to do with it, you made specific claims that are not
true:

While there is a filtering process for bottled water, the standards in
many municipalities (Chicago among them) are higher for tap water than
for bottled water. In other words, in such places the tap water goes
through more processsing than the bottled water.

This claim is simply not true. The bottled purified water absolutely
goes through more processing than the tap water. Bottled spring water
however goes through little or no processing, only testing.

He didn't say anything at all there about processing. He said that the
standards are higher for tap water, not that the processing is better.
He's right. There aren't many legal requirements for bottled water.

--
Spammer gets 30 years in the slammer
Suddenly wishes Viagra was harder to come by
http://www.theregister.com/2007/08/02/spammer_gets_30_years/