Turning off the tap: Daniel Jaffee on the long-term effects of relying on bottled water after a drinking water crisis

Plastic bottled water is both a boon and a problem: it is convenient, yet it’s also more expensive than public tap water, and the empty plastic bottles often litter streets and pollute waterways. Some households, though, are stuck relying on pallets of bottled water for their everyday basic needs. In this argument, Daniel Jaffee, an associate professor of sociology at Portland State University, explains what’s at stake when a community’s only guarantee of safe drinking water comes from plastic bottles.

Daniel Jaffee, "When Communities Face Drinking Water Crises, Bottled Water Is a ‘Temporary’ Solution That Often Lasts Years – and Worsens Inequality." The Conversation, 25 October 2023.

 

1. According to Jaffee, what is the demographic profile of the households who purchase and consume the most bottled water? What is one reason he gives why these households might distrust the quality of the tap water in their communities?
   
2. In paragraph 10, Jaffee poses this naysayer argument: “What’s wrong with replacing tap water with bottled water?” Name the three points he makes in response to explain the short-term and long-term consequences of relying on bottled water
3. Read Michael R. Greenberg’s article, “Critical Infrastructure, Environmental Justice, and Flint, Michigan,” which is also found in the 5th edition of They Say / I Say with Readings. Which public water crisis do both Greenberg and Jaffee discuss? In the conclusion of his article, Greenberg suggests a solution to fixing deteriorating water systems in the U.S. What is that solution? How is it both similar and different from the solution Jaffee poses in the conclusion of his argument?
4. Check out this chart, which shows the rise is sales of bottled water in the U.S. since 2010. What factors do you think contribute to this growth? Reflect on your own choices to use – or not use – bottled water. What influences your decisions to buy bottled water or use tap water? Compose a response to Jaffee’s argument that relies on your own personal experiences using bottled water.

Comments

[Micoloho]

2.
a. Bottled water bear a financial burden
b. Bottled water yields more waste on the environment, waste systems, and electricity consumption
c. Bottled water diffuses political will to tackle the lack of public water infrastructure

[unknown]

summary of the article + opinion:
Bottled water is typically used long term after a natural or man-made event that contaminates drinking water. They are usually on high demand and are often given out for free as an ‘emergency response’. Furthermore bottled water costs families thousands of dollars every year which is a waste of money when they have access to tap water. In countries with a lack of accessible drinking water, bottled water is an easier method of providing water as it does not require the government to make decisions like raising taxes in order to pay for repairs or build pipes to provide each household with water. Water bills are also rising fast and bottled water can be an alternative. The use of bottled water is causing a growing distrust in tap water and is causing the water infrastructure in the USA to deteriorate. To counter these issues (particularly the growing mistrust of tap water and the deteriorating water infrastructure) the USA should invest a large amount of money into new, improved water infrastructure like new pipelines. This would hopefully help to restore the confidence in tap water and reduce the usage of bottled water. In conclusion, the USA should invest more into water infrastructure if they want to tackle the growing mistrust in tap water and provide everyone in the country with clean water.

[unknown]

Daniel Jaffee believes that bottled water is often turned to as the immediate temporary solution to contaminated water resulting from both 'natural disasters' and 'series of human-made emergencies'. This is steadily causing a growth of mistrust in tap water, of which both plastic and money are wasted at the detriment of the environment, because many people in the USA believe water sourced from taps is unsanitary and water bills are also increasing. Although bottled water appears to be a decent solution in the short term, over time it has an awful impact on families' financial states (because bottled water also costs money) and the environment. The American government should invest in renovating and thoroughly improving national water infrastructure so that people's trust in tap water can be restored and sanitary water can be freely accessed without the stress and fear of tainted water.

[Chrissy]

I think these two summaries really touch on the main point of this article that the US government should allocate money in national water infrastructure to restore the credibility of the tap water. But it's a hard battle against polluted water system. Maybe another solution is to boil the tap water - as the Chinese would do - for drinking. In this way, people can save their money and protect the environment while drinking healthy water.
Another point I would like to comment is that bottled water can be contaminated as well. The micro plastic particles can seep into water and damage human bodies as recent study has shown. I hope the government can really put efforts in solving the water system problem.

[Cindy]

I agree with Jaffee's argument that bottled water is not a permanent solution to the contaminated water crisis. Bottled water has resulted in financial, environmental, and political problems. Jaffee proposes that the only way to solve this crisis is to reinvest in national water infrastructure to regain people's trust in tap water. Although this idea is practical, it is not the ultimate solution to the problem. Many people consume bottled water not only because they believe tap water is contaminated. The reasons range from convenience to preference for the taste of bottled water. Therefore, reinvesting in water infrastructure alone may not solve the issue comprehensively. I believe the real problem is that people fail to acknowledge the harmful effects of bottled water. While societies and schools have made efforts in promoting bottle recycling and using reusable bottles, these initiatives have had little impact in practice. To address this issue, the government needs to step in and regulate and legislate on this matter more actively.

[Sophie]

Jaffee explains in the article that the typical solution of using bottled water after accidental contamination of the water system leads to environmental, economic, and racial issues. We often neglect the damages of contemporary practices when they provide convenience; while in fact, contemporary practices could cause everlasting issues. If we focus on the Black and the Latino population mentioned in the article, the wealth and social status gap being aggravated, we’d realize we’re going one step forward and three steps back on bringing racial equality. To avoid the mischiefs from expanding, investment in water infrastructures is definitely necessary.

[James]

The solution to regain the American's trust on tap water, as Jaffee concluded, is to repair the damaged water mains. Jaffee's opinions are true, bottled water only serves as a short term solution to the polluted water crisis but causes long term effects. Along with putting the burden of costs to the residents and harms the environment during production and waste, bottled water also causes racial issues. I agree with Jaffee that the burden should not be left to the residents. The government has its roles in investing the water infrastructure repairement, protecting the environment, and facilitating the lives of its people. A one-time fix on the problem is better than long-term costs on bottled water.

[Abdul RAhman]

Author Danial Jaffee is attempting to explain how excessive plastic usage is harming the environment and why nothing is being done about it other than using it as an instrument of political play.

[alex wong]

This article discusses how the distribution of bottled water is often turned to as a solution for problems such as low accessibility to drinking water, natural or human-made disasters, and other emergencies. This is not an accurate solution because it simply becomes an alternative for the already compromised tap water suppliers. When water is freely distributed, requests for permanent solutions such as safe water bulk tank deliveries are denied because stress is released from finding solutions. Families and people of color tend to distrust their home-provided water more because of damaged pipes which they cannot afford to replace. This situation also affects racial inequality because lower-income families and people of color eventually struggle to afford expensive bottled water. Jaffee proposes that the federal government needs to propose and invest in a new approach to water infrastructure to ensure clean and safe water for families to have access to.
I completely agree with Jaffee that safe drinking water is an issue that needs to be permanently addressed. My own family purchases jugs of clean drinking water because the pipes that provide water to our home are not trustworthy, however some families do not have that option. People in homes all over the country feel that their water is unsafe to drink and have to take extra measures to buy expensive water filters or gallons of filtered water, which some simply cannot afford. If low-income families rely on bottled water as their only clean alternative, but eventually cannot afford it anymore, they are stuck in a position where they no longer have clean water to drink. Even bottled water is out of the financial range for some low-income families and the federal government needs to take action to provide safe drinking water everywhere. Bottled water is only a temporary solution that becomes waste on the street and in oceans after use because many people litter or improperly dispose of the bottles.

[Emily & Derek]

Daniel Jaffee, a sociology professor, observes that persistent contaminated tap water has aggravated social inequality. He advocates for a sufficient reinvestment in water infrastructure. Like him, I contend that the government should improve the pipe systems to secure water quality for lower-income communities.

[Rukawa Yuan]

Daniel Jaffee argues that bottled water is helpful to provide residents with clean and safe water as a temporary emergency measure in case of a natural disaster or water contamination. Nevertheless, it can not serve as a genuine solution to the problem, for the overuse of bottled water significantly increases energy consumption and worsens environmental problems.
From my perspective, the American government should place emphasis on the construction of the deteriorating water infrastructure system rather than keep using bottled water, which leads to long-term dependence. Only then will the public have more confidence and trust towards the water system, embrace tap water and abandon bottled water.

[Jestem]

Daniel Jaffee explains that bottled water is not a permanent solution for public distrust of tap water. I agree with Jaffee that we should solve the problem in another way. Infrastructure construction can be strengthened to make sure that the tap water supplied is safe enough. What's more, the government can popularize alternative solutions providing clean drinking water at home, such as boiling water, a common solution in China. This practice empowers people to ensure water purity for themselves.

[钱浩天]

Author Daniel Jaffee asserts that relying on bottled water as a response to drinking water issues is a temporary solution that often leads to long-term exacerbating social and economic inequalities. I agree with Daniel Jaffee that bottled water dependence has troubling consequences, and to solve this situation requires reinvestment from federal government.

[Yilin Xu/ Haotian Qian]

In recent discussions of drinking-water crises, a controversial issue has been who should shoulder the responsibility to tackle this urgent issue. Sociology professor Daniel Jaffee contends that it is federal government that ought to take charge of funding water infrastructure. Though I concede that previous efforts of the federal government in the past five decades demonstrate its political feasibility, I still posit that investment by the state government will face fewer obstacles. One salient reason is that the states equipped with qualified water infrastructure may oppose federal government policy since it will disproportionately distribute burden on them.

[Anna Mathis]

I agree with Daniel Jaffee. Bottle water pollution is the biggest concern when it comes to this water drinking crisis. The public doesn’t trust the tap water system, rightfully so but at what cost to the world.,