Nestle “Pinks” its Image to Mask Use of Cancer-Producing Plastic Resins

Nestle® Pure Life® Purified Water partners with The Breast Cancer Research Foundation® To Support Breast Cancer Awareness by funding BCRF Research Grants with Special “Pink Pack” Retail Program.

What Nestle would rather you did not know, is that byproducts styrene and benzene released into the air from producing their plastic water bottles may cause cancer.  In addition, Nestle admits to using BPA lined cans for their liquid baby formula, a plastic known to cause cancer.

for more info: http://www.allergystore.com/articles/water_3.htm and http://www.stainlesswaterbottles.org/2010/01/15/what-is-bpa-the-facts-and-details-of-bpa/

Here is the link to the article applauding Nestle for supporting Breast Cancer:

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/nestle-pure-life-purified-water-is-proud-to-partner-with-the-breast-cancer-research-foundation-to-support-breast-cancer-awareness-2011-09-28

It is a good pink-washing scheme, but we’re onto you Nestle!

The Right Economic Development

Anacortes American

Sept. 28, 2011 

Anacortes’ municipal water supply will be needed to address much of Skagit County’s predicted population growth of 100,000 by 2060. Tethys Enterprises’ consumption of five million gallons of water per day for a bottled water/beverage plant equals the same amount of water per day as 41,000 people at current rates of water consumption in our area.

Not only is the Skagit River our potable water source, it is a hydroelectric source for the City of Seattle. The Skagit River Hydroelectric Project, owned by Seattle City Light, provides about 25 percent of Seattle’s electrical power. In 2005, Seattle City Light studied the effects of climate change on the Skagit River. In short, “A warming climate could have significant effects on the hydrologic balance of watersheds on which hydropower depends. Model studies indicate that over the next 40 years, projected climate change could require the utility to reconsider its current operating procedures.”

The study indicates an increase in average monthly river flow during winter months and a decrease during spring months, resulting in a critical water management shift. The crux is that inflow during spring months is used to refill the Ross Reservoir for power generation during the following high-demand winter period when flood-control requirements limit useable storage of water. Under 2040 conditions, the study indicates current reservoir operation guidelines could not be modified to meet the current level of generation to serve load, in-stream flow requirements and flood control objectives, resulting in a projected loss to meet Seattle customer demand.

Water management is a climate change issue, as Anacortes City Council members learned during their study session of July 12, 2010. Guest Lara Whitely Binder of the Climate Impacts Group, U. of W., informed the Council of projected wetter winters and hotter, drier summers. She said, “Water supplies, water quality, in-stream flows, flood risk, hydroelectric supplies, public health, food production and the agricultural, forest and timber economies will be affected by climate change. Snow packs are declining and this trend is expected to continue.”

She warned that weather trends are not necessarily linear, and communities must be prepared to adapt and respond as climate conditions develop. In the face of our preparation to various climate change scenarios, no single water-entitlement community should build its kingdom at the expense of others—including a contract for more water-intensive industry that is entitled up to five million gallons of water per day to bottle our water and ship it, never again to return to our watershed. The right economic development is water sustainable. Why not a regional Skagit River Basin climate summit?

Sandra Spargo, Anacortes, Wash.

Anacortes American, Sept. 28, 2011 – The Right Economic Development

 The Right Economic Development

Anacortes’ municipal water supply will be needed to address much of Skagit County’s predicted population growth of 100,000 by 2060. Tethys Enterprises’ consumption of five million gallons of water per day for a bottled water/beverage plant equals the same amount of water per day as 41,000 people at current rates of water consumption in our area.

Not only is the Skagit River our potable water source, it is a hydroelectric source for the City of Seattle. The Skagit River Hydroelectric Project, owned by Seattle City Light, provides about 25 percent of Seattle’s electrical power. In 2005, Seattle City Light studied the effects of climate change on the Skagit River. In short, “A warming climate could have significant effects on the hydrologic balance of watersheds on which hydropower depends. Model studies indicate that over the next 40 years, projected climate change could require the utility to reconsider its current operating procedures.”

The study indicates an increase in average monthly river flow during winter months and a decrease during spring months, resulting in a critical water management shift. The crux is that inflow during spring months is used to refill the Ross Reservoir for power generation during the following high-demand winter period when flood-control requirements limit useable storage of water. Under 2040 conditions, the study indicates current reservoir operation guidelines could not be modified to meet the current level of generation to serve load, in-stream flow requirements and flood control objectives, resulting in a projected loss to meet Seattle customer demand.

Water management is a climate change issue, as Anacortes City Council members learned during their study session of July 12, 2010. Guest Lara Whitely Binder of the Climate Impacts Group, U. of W., informed the Council of projected wetter winters and hotter, drier summers. She said, “Water supplies, water quality, in-stream flows, flood risk, hydroelectric supplies, public health, food production and the agricultural, forest and timber economies will be affected by climate change. Snow packs are declining and this trend is expected to continue.”

She warned that weather trends are not necessarily linear, and communities must be prepared to adapt and respond as climate conditions develop. In the face of our preparation to various climate change scenarios, no single water-entitlement community should build its kingdom at the expense of others—including a contract for more water-intensive industry that is entitled up to five million gallons of water per day to bottle our water and ship it, never again to return to our watershed. The right economic development is water sustainable. Why not a regional Skagit River Basin climate summit?

Sandra Spargo, Anacortes, Wash.

Anacortes American, Sept. 28, 2011 – The Right Economic Development

 The Right Economic Development

Anacortes’ municipal water supply will be needed to address much of Skagit County’s predicted population growth of 100,000 by 2060. Tethys Enterprises’ consumption of five million gallons of water per day for a bottled water/beverage plant equals the same amount of water per day as 41,000 people at current rates of water consumption in our area.

Not only is the Skagit River our potable water source, it is a hydroelectric source for the City of Seattle. The Skagit River Hydroelectric Project, owned by Seattle City Light, provides about 25 percent of Seattle’s electrical power. In 2005, Seattle City Light studied the effects of climate change on the Skagit River. In short, “A warming climate could have significant effects on the hydrologic balance of watersheds on which hydropower depends. Model studies indicate that over the next 40 years, projected climate change could require the utility to reconsider its current operating procedures.”

The study indicates an increase in average monthly river flow during winter months and a decrease during spring months, resulting in a critical water management shift. The crux is that inflow during spring months is used to refill the Ross Reservoir for power generation during the following high-demand winter period when flood-control requirements limit useable storage of water. Under 2040 conditions, the study indicates current reservoir operation guidelines could not be modified to meet the current level of generation to serve load, in-stream flow requirements and flood control objectives, resulting in a projected loss to meet Seattle customer demand.

Water management is a climate change issue, as Anacortes City Council members learned during their study session of July 12, 2010. Guest Lara Whitely Binder of the Climate Impacts Group, U. of W., informed the Council of projected wetter winters and hotter, drier summers. She said, “Water supplies, water quality, in-stream flows, flood risk, hydroelectric supplies, public health, food production and the agricultural, forest and timber economies will be affected by climate change. Snow packs are declining and this trend is expected to continue.”

She warned that weather trends are not necessarily linear, and communities must be prepared to adapt and respond as climate conditions develop. In the face of our preparation to various climate change scenarios, no single water-entitlement community should build its kingdom at the expense of others—including a contract for more water-intensive industry that is entitled up to five million gallons of water per day to bottle our water and ship it, never again to return to our watershed. The right economic development is water sustainable. Why not a regional Skagit River Basin climate summit?

Sandra Spargo, Anacortes, Wash.

Friends of Sebago Lake Comments of EGGI and Normandeau Studies on Fryeburg

Friends of Sebago Lake provides comments on two Fryeburg water studies which study the altered hydrologic flow impacts on Wards Brook Aquifer and Lovewell Pond caused by ground and spring water extraction by local uses and Poland Spring, a subsidiary of the Nestle Corporation.

Written by Roger Wheeler.

Link to comments: http://friendsofsebago.blogspot.com/2008/05/eggi-and-noramndeau-study-fosl-comments.html

The UN Is Aiding a Corporate Takeover of Drinking Water

July 3, 2011 | By Scott Thill, AlterNet

Billions of dollars are being given out to the most ardent promoters of water privatization.

Early last month, pharmaceutical titan Merck became the latest multinational to pledge allegiance to the CEO Water Mandate, the United Nations’ public-private initiative “designed to assist companies in the development, implementation and disclosure of water sustainability policies and practices.”

But there’s darker data beneath that sunny marketing: The CEO Water Mandate has been heavily hammered by the Sierra Club, the Polaris Institute and more for exerting undemocratic corporate control over water resources (PDF) under the banner of the United Nations. It even won a Public Eye Award for flagrant greenwashing from the Swiss non-governmental organization Berne Declaration. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

“There is no admission of problems with the Water Mandate, or the United Nations Global Compact itself” — the strategic policy initiative committed to human rights, labor and the environment – Blue Gold and Blue Covenant author and activist Maude Barlow, who also chairs the National Council of Canadians and Food & Water Watch, explained to AlterNet. “These initiatives continue to flourish, not least because the most powerful member states of the United Nations are fully behind them. This also means that the United Nations is not funded fully. Programs and agencies often rely on private sponsorship to function, and are often barely getting their core administrative budgets funded.”

Another major problem is that routinely compromised and controversial institutions like World Bank, International Monetary Fund and regional development banks in general are in control of the United Nations’ biggest projects. In April, the World Bank assumed control of the United Nations Climate Conference’s new $100 billion Green Fund, which is the opposite of a comforting proposition, considering the World Bank’s repeatedly noxious financing of oil and coal projects.

“That gives control of billions of dollars to those who have been the most ardent promoters of water privatization,” added Barlow, whose foreword for the Council of Canadians’ recently damning report on private sector influence over the United Nations (PDF) argued that the planet is on the verge of a water crisis of terrifying proportions. “We’re also seeing the IMF forcing indebted nations to sell off public assets, including water systems, as a condition of receiving financial support. The whole system is rigged for these corporations, and they still are losing contracts, not meeting their obligations and watching as remunicipalization moves forward in France and other core markets.”

That kind of illogical corporate performance would logically lead to less control, not more. But the United Nations continues to hand over the reins to multinationals like its new cosigner Merck, which has repeatedly settled in courtover everything from carcinogenic pollution to deceptive marketing. Despite the fact that the United Nations’ own Joint Inspection Unit stated in a 2010 report (PDF) that the Global Compact’s corporate partnerships were an unregulated mess.

“The lack of a clear and articulated mandate has resulted in blurred focus and impact,” the report stated. “The absence of adequate entry criteria and an effective monitoring system to measure actual implementation of the principles by participants has drawn some criticism and reputational risk for the Organization, and the Office’s special set up has countered existing rules and procedures. Ten years after its creation, despite the intense activity carried out by the Office and the increasing resources received, results are mixed and risks unmitigated.”

The report suggested that not only was a clearer mandate from Member States required to “rethink and refocus” the Compact’s corporate partnerships, but that the United Nations’ General Assembly must better direct the Secretary-General to delineate the Compact’s overall functions “in order to prevent a situation whereby any external group or actor(s) may divert attention from the strategic goals agreed to promote interests which may damage the reputation of the United Nations.” The short version? It’s not working, and won’t work in its current form for the foreseeable future.

But the United Nations’ own advice to itself has evidently fallen mostly on deaf ears.

“Unfortunately, the United Nations appears to be embracing more and more partnerships with the corporate sector across the board,” Corporate Accountability Internationalcampaign director Gigi Kellett told AlterNet. “Civil society has been raising concerns about this flawed approach for over 10 years. There are strong voices within the United Nations, including some Member states, who are questioning the partnership paradigm adopted by the UN and calling for more transparency and accountability.”

But they are voices in the wilderness without the concerted support of a motivated public, as well as the usual civil society champions who make stopping this strain of corporate abuse their life’s work. Power truly respects only one thing, and that is equally exercised power. And the public is fully empowered to make all the change it wants, provided it can unplug itself from distracting sex scandals and mainstream media marketing primarily designed to nurture its collective complacency.

“Corporations rely on people’s tacit support and willingness to look the other way when they engage in conduct that harms people or the environment and undermines democratic governance and decision-making,” Kellett said. “When people come together in coordinated fashion and withhold their support from a corporation, that relationship is turned on its head. Boycotts are one powerful way that individuals can withhold their support, but there are range of other strategies. When activists come together and raise questions about a corporation’s actions and tie them to its brand and image, the resulting media exposure can greatly impact how the corporation is perceived by consumers, investors or even government regulators.”

But how do you boycott a multinational that controls your water supply? Can you shame a mammoth corporation into abdicating control over a lucrative commodity that should instead be regarded as a universal human right? Talk about your Sisyphean tasks.

“Boycotts are much more difficult with water than a product like Coke,” said Barlow. “There are no substitutes for water, and when these corporations are given monopoly power over water systems, boycotts are very unrealistic. Suez, Veolia and others are very concerned about their corporate image, but there is no effective means to hurt them financially except to end or block the contracts before they are signed. Boycotts have been very effective as public awareness campaigns, but citizens need to apply pressure on their governments as the first step in stopping the proliferation of voluntary initiatives.”

Demanding regulation of the private sector’s products — from water and natural resource commodification to inscrutable financial instruments and beyond — as well as the public’s political electives appears to be the paramount first principle. Because the problem is getting worse and going nowhere, especially now that our dystopian climate crisis has permanently disrupted business, and existence, as usual. From escalating warming and extreme weather to destabilized nations and environments, Earth is already precariously balanced on the tipping point. And giving profit-minded corporations voluntary control over their power and procedures is a 20th century anachronism best left behind.

“We have not proven to have what it takes to deal with the climate crisis,” argued Barlow, “and this is because it is all seen as a giant political and financial game, rather than the best and only chance to head off a catastrophe like we have never before imagined. Climate change is upon us, but we will never admit it fully, nor invest in stopping it, if our governments continue to represent corporate interests above others. It is up to us to challenge our states, and make sure they know we are engaged and aware.”

Link to full article: http://www.alternet.org/story/151367/why_a_corporate_power_grab_at_the_un_threatens_our_most_critical_resource?page=1

Victory Against Nestlé in Wacissa Florida Announced by Friends of the Wacissa

Sept. 16 — Last night at 7pm, the Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners unanimously passed a landmark “Aquifer Protection Ordinance,” that will protect the Wacissa River from bottling in the future, according to Friends of the Wacissa. The ordinance will protect the river by ensuring that attempts to take water from the county for bottling will have to be approved by a super majority of the county commissioners.
  l
In June of 2010, Nestlé set up four test wells to assess the Wacissa River as a potential site to pump water and truck it to a Nestlé bottling plant outside of Jefferson County, where Wacissa is located. This site would have pumped up to 1.5 million gallons of water a day from this undeveloped spring location, while taking a significant toll on the environment.
Friends of the Wacissa: http://www.savethewacissa.com/
Defending Water notes that to drive this victory deeper into law, organizers should learn about what our Maine communities of Shapleigh and Newfield have done with their local rights based ordinance.

Friends of the Wacissa River Announce Victory Against Nestlé

Sept. 16, 2011 — Last night at 7pm, the Jefferson County Board of County Commissioners unanimously passed a landmark “Aquifer Protection Ordinance,” that will protect the Wacissa River from bottling in the future, according to Friends of the Wacissa. The ordinance will protect the river by ensuring that attempts to take water from the county for bottling will have to be approved by a super majority of the county commissioners.
In June of 2010, Nestlé set up four test wells to assess the Wacissa River as a potential site to pump water and truck it to a Nestlé bottling plant outside of Jefferson County, where Wacissa is located. This site would have pumped up to 1.5 million gallons of water a day from this undeveloped spring location, while taking a significant toll on the environment.
Friends of the Wacissa: http://www.savethewacissa.com/
Defending Water notes that to drive this victory deeper into law, organizers should learn about what our Maine communities of Shapleigh and Newfield have done with their local rights based ordinance.

“Nature’s Fix” is a new Nestle drug you don’t need

Nestle’s new social media campaign makes buying flavored carbonated water sound as addictive as the next biggest drug.  Calling it’s product, “Nature’s Fix,” the company wants consumers to get “hooked” on the product by succumbing to peer pressure from cute animals.  At the rate Nestle charges for the water they practically steal from vulnerable communities, over 1000 times the cost of tap water, it does seem kind of like a drug.  But it’s not, it’s water that all of us should have the right to drink without the privilege of paying Nestle for it.

“Get hooked on something good,” they say.  We think all of these drug references are fascinating, considering how unnecessary and irresponsible it is to buy bottled water of any kind in the first place.  See the video to the right of this article, “The Story of Bottled Water” for a sobering summary of the impact of plastic bottles on our planet, and all those fuzzy animals that Nestle is ripping off.

Aside from the environmental impact of plastic bottles, Nestle’s tactics to acquire their “fix” has devastated multiple communities around the U.S.  We have a summary of articles underneath our “Nestle” tab for further information.

Animals do not want you to drink Nestle’s water, even if it has little bubbles in it.  Nestle does not protect the environment, they are not good stewards, they are simply a huge corporation looking to create the biggest quarterly statement for their shareholders…and right now, people are into “healthy” products.  Don’t let the glass food storage jars behind the squirrel fool you in the commericals.  Nestle would not make any money if you used your own tap water and squeezed some lime into it.  You can make healthy choices without supporting this company that has a long global history of being destructive to people and to the environment.

Links to press coverage:

http://www.bevnet.com/news/2011/nestle-brings-on-mother-nature

 

http://popsop.com/48343