Melanie Vanderveer, a writer for the Pocono Record, wanted to know.  She purchased some water quality test kits and three popular bottle waters:  DASANI, Aquafina, and Fiji water.  She also tested her local tap water in Stroudsburg, PA.  The findings are somewhat alarming.

Vanderveer tested for “pH, total Alkalinity, total chlorine, total harness, iron, copper and nitrates.”  Iron, copper and nitrates were fine.  Not the case with the pH and the alkalinity.

She quotes Michael Ronco, a scientist with FX Browne, Inc. which is a nationally recognized environmental consulting firm.  “The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection recommends a range between 6.5 and 8.5 for pH.”  A level that is too low is can be too acidic.  The results?

Aquafina’s pH level was 2!  “According to the water quality test kit, that is a dangerous level.”  Vanderveer tested two more bottles, purchased at different stores with the same results.  Ronco says “A pH that low could potentially cause harm.  Soda has a pH of around 4.”  The tap water from Stroudsburg and DASANI had pH levels of 5.  “That’s in the caution range.”  Fiji fared the best with a pH of 6.5…but let’s not forget the environmental impact of Fiji!

Next, she tested the Alkalinity of the water.  “Alkalinity is the measure of waters ability to neutralize acid. The alkalinity of Aquafina was low.” DASANI’s was zero, the tap water was 180 (ideal) and Fiji’s was 240 – which is high.

“The alkalinity correlates with the pH.  It’s very acidic.  The water has no ability to neutralize the acid,”  Ronco said.  “The source has a major impact on the quality of the water.  It could be the plastic they use.  Plastic leaches ions out of the bottle at high temperatures.”  (As I’ve been saying since before we started H2Ox2 – how do you know where your bottle’s been before you bought it?)

“All four types of water had safe chlorine levels.”

Fiji and DASANI registered 120 for hardness of water.  Stroudsburg and Aquafina were at ideal levels.  “The hardness of the water is the measure of calcium and magnesium ions.  Water hardness isn’t regulated,” Ronco said.  “Hard water has a lot of mineral content.”

Nitrate levels were in the safe zone for all waters.

Interesting findings to be sure.  On top of those ions leaching out of these plastic bottles, what’s leaching in?

Your best bet?  Buy a reuseable metal bottle from H2Ox2 and fill it with your tap water.  If you’re unsure about your water quality, buy a home test kit and find out.  Filters, like the one we sell, can be reasonable and easy to install!

Just in time for your August camping, our new special is 20% of all Guyot Bottles until the end of the month!

It’s extremely rugged and perfect for camping or everyday use!

The Super Rugged Guyot Standard

There’s a great review about thinksport bottles in the Wimbledon Preview Issue of Tennis Magazine:

“There’s nothing worse than a mouthful of warm water on a changeover.  thinksport’s water bottle, made of double-walled stainless steel, keeps beverages cold under the hottest conditions.”

I’ve been loving mine this summer.  Coffee in the morning, rinse, and water all afternoon.

A website that I found – and love – called hartofgreen poses this brilliant question:

How can canned tomatoes and water be certified organic when the lining of the can contains BPA?

Pretty basic, huh?  Makes a lot of sense, doesn’t it?

Get rid of the plastic.  Whether it’s reusable plastic, disposable plastic, or a plastic BPA filled liner in your canned food,  you’re not doing yourself any favors.  You’re consuming chemicals that are linked to cancer, diabetes, heart disease.  A good quality metal water bottle that’s leach free is a great first step!

Meeting minutes from the North American Metal Packaging Alliance that were obtained by the Environmental Working Group outline the groups strategy to create doubt on the ever-increasing public awareness of the dangers of BPA.

Attending companies were Coca-Cola, Alcoa, Crown, North American Metal
Packaging Alliance, Inc., Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA), American
Chemistry Council, Del Monte.  Their goal was to “develop potential communication/media strategies around BPA.”  So, basically, we have some pretty heavy industry giants discussing how to convince the public that the benefits of using BPA are worth the risk of the exposure to it.  Their approach? Somewhat icky.

One approach was to incite a little fear.   “Do you want to have access to baby food anymore?” and stressing the added expense of buying frozen food over BPA laden canned food.

Another tactic is to find credible people to represent BPA’s safety.  If they could find a child or pregnant mother who would say something great about BPA, or find “a testimonial from an outside expert” then people would feel better about BPA. They don’t believe that they could find a scientific spokesperson, but   “Their ‘holy grail’ spokesperson would be a ‘pregnant young mother who would be willing to speak around the country about the benefits of BPA.”

They decided that their industry needs “research on how perceptions of BPA are translating into consumer behavior” and “focus on the impact of BPA bans on minorities (Hispanic and African American) and poor…”  Huh?  Yes, they want to “put the danger of BPA in perspective.”  Does that mean that it’s ok to sell food contaminated by BPA to people who can’t afford to choose otherwise?

And, last but not least, they want to focus on “more legislative battles…befriending people that are able to manipulate the legislative process.”  This is in reaction to legislation in Connecticut and California banning phthalates and BPA in children’s items and proposed federal legislation that basically does the same. Yes, that’s right.  Manipulate.

I suggest that you read the entire document by following this link to the Washington Post, who originally broke the story.

Grown adults with responsible positions discussing how best to convince the world that a known gender bending compound is actually good for all of us.  It’s somewhat surreal.   I would think they’d be working together to find an alternative to BPA, wouldn’t you?

What can you do?  Buy a safe metal water bottle from H2Ox2.  Next, avoid canned foods – especially tomatoes and other acidic foods.  Buy soda in bottles or…gulp…plastic.

According to The Endocrine Disruption Exchange,  Bishphenol A (BPA) was “synthesized in 1891 and first recognized as a synthetic estrogen in the 1930s.”  It was later discovered “that the individual monomers of BPA could be combined to make two kinds of plastics:  polycarbonate and epoxy resins.”  Yes – that’s right – it’s been a known synthetic estrogen since the 30’s.  However, we are all being exposed to it on a daily basis, and in ways we didn’t even realize!

We’ve all heard about how BPA is used in polycarbonate water bottles and baby bottles.  What many don’t realize is that it’s also used in so many other consumer goods.  Basically, anything that’s made of hard plastic probably contains BPA:  eyeglass lenses, baseball helmets, CDs…the list is endless.

Even more troubling is the BPA that we don’t hear too much about…yet.  BPA can be found in epoxy resin which is used to line food cans, soda cans, and even in dental sealants!  According to TEDX,  BPA “is one of the hightest volume chemicals produced worldwide with a global production capacity exceeding 6 billion pounds per year.”  (It beg’s the question of what happens to it once it hits the garbage dump…)

In 2007, the Environmental Working Group released a study of BPA in canned foods. This study found that:

• Of all foods tested, chicken soup, infant formula, and ravioli had BPA levels of highest concern. Just one to three servings of foods with these concentrations could expose a woman or child to BPA at levels that caused serious adverse effects in animal tests.
• For 1 in 10 cans of all food tested, and 1 in 3 cans of infant formula, a single serving contained enough BPA to expose a woman or infant to BPA levels more than 200 times the government’s traditional safe level of exposure for industrial chemicals. The government typically mandates a 1,000- to 3,000-fold margin of safety between human exposures and levels found to harm lab animals, but these servings contained levels of BPA less than 5 times lower than doses that harmed lab animals

What can you do to minimize your exposure to BPA?  First and foremost, give up water bottles that are not BPA-free.  Your best bet is a stainless or Sigg bottle from H2Ox2.  Get rid of your hard plastic beverage glasses, pitchers, and storage containers. Your next step should be to eliminate as many canned foods as you can.  There are very few companies that offer BPA free cans.  Buy food in glass jars – especially acidic foods like tomatoes – if you don’t have time for fresh.  Buy powdered baby formula instead of canned.

The BPA manufacturers are working very hard to promote it’s benefits and represent it as safe.  Tomorrow, I’ll share a leaked memo that shows exactly what’s happening.  Honestly – it’s hard to imagine this stuff actually goes on.

Check out this great animated video -  Bottled Water – The Real Story – about where bottled water comes from from the Food and Water Watch.  It’s quick, informative, and may just help you make the decision to “Take Back the Tap!”  Be stylish, be responsible – use a reusable water bottle from H2Ox2.com!

Last week, my 14 yr. old, came home from school and declared that he decided that he really needed less stuff and that was going to be a new focus for him.  My 13 yr. old has always lived this way – it makes laundry so much easier!  (The 10 yr. old is going to get on board this summer.)  All of this is leading up to a really wonderful website that I found yesterday, Useless.org.

Useless is not just a website.  It’s a brand. It’s a philosophy.  It’s a way of life – and it’s a way that many of us are adopting whether we realize it or not during these economic times.  Just you visiting H2Ox2 tells me that you’re interested in consuming less by using a reusable bottle and creating less trash.  Mark Simmons, the founder of Useless, was recently interviewed by Max Gladwell.  In that interview, Mark explains the thought process behind creating his site and the extra step they’re taking:

Two years ago I was working with Al Gore’s Alliance for Climate Protection trying to work out what to say about climate change that would get people from all walks of life involved to help solve the crisis. I saw that, while many people thought of climate change as a left wing conspiracy, they all felt, regardless of their political views, that we Americans use too much stuff. The thought of “use less” lodged in my mind and a year later when I was trying to develop a brand around reducing use of disposable water bottles and bags it struck me that “useless” would be a perfect name because on the face of it, while it is quite negative, if you scratch just below the surface you see it’s not negative at all, it’s a positive way to message about the desire to use less. And if on the one hand we in the developed world are using too much stuff and that’s contributing to climate change, on the other hand there are people in the developing world who are going without the very basics of life such as clean water and sanitation. In fact, 2.6 billion lack proper sanitation and resulting diseases is the biggest killer of children under five. So there is a natural counter-point to use less, which is to give more. The pieces then all fit into place for me. The brand would be called USELESS and its mission would be to help people USE LESS and GIVE MORE in a cool, thought-provoking way.

So, in addition to selling organic cotton t-shirts with their logo, they also sell one-of-a-kind tote bags made from old bill boards, and – ahem – a plastic bottle with their logo on it.  We’re going to overlook the bottle due to the fact that their working to find products that are manufactured in the US.  Being from Detroit, I find that incredibly admirable – but I still wouldn’t drink from it! (Unfortunately, there is not a metal bottle that’s made in the US at this time.)  I’ve already purchased a few t’s and a tote bag – I’m feeling a little guilty about not making my first purchase a “useless earth” – which amounts to a $25.00 direct donation to fund “water and sanitation projects in the developing world.”

Shopping at Useless is like buying with a conscience.  They reuse, buy organic, and help others.  They are a model to follow and we encourage you to visit them!  If you purchase anything from H2Ox2.com this summer and use the code “USELESS EARTH” at checkout, we’ll take 10% of your purchase and put it toward supporting a “USE LESS EARTH.”

On October 1, it will be illegal to throw away rigid plastic containers in NC.  According to an article written by Jennifer Preyss in The Elizabeth City Daily Advance, “Rigid plastics are defined as bottles that have a neck smaller than the body of the container.” Water bottles, sports drinks, even laundry detergent will be covered under this new law.

“The law was designed to reduce energy consumption and lower greenhouse gas emissions while providing economic incentives for entrepreneurs.”  Plans are already underway to take advantage of the recycling opportunities.  Clear Path Recycling in Fayetteville, NC is “building a $50 million plant” that will downgrade PET into polyester and sell it “primarily to national carpet manufacturing giant Shaw Floors according to Scott Mouw, environmental supervisor for the N.C. Department of Environmental and Natural Resources.

Capitalism (good), leads to recycling (good), leads to less trash and leaching (good.)  The only flaw in the program could be the availability of curbside recycling and how it will be enforced. I’ve been unable to find an accurate curbside recycling rate for the state of NC so far but will report back with it when I do.  I believe this rate will have a major impact on the success of this law!

As many who have read my blogs know, I heartily support a bottle deposit law on water and sports bottles, but not at the expense of the retailer.  It will be interesting to watch how this develops and how successful they are.

According to a report in the Wall Street Journal on 5/26/09, “the FDA is pushing more stringent testing standards for the $11 billion bottled water industry, saying companies will have to eliminate any causes of fecal contamination in water sources before they can bottle the water for sale.”

Water will have to be tested for coliform, and if that’s found, then they’ll have to test for fecal contamination.  Currently, “the water that goes into bottles is already tested for coliform and fecal contamination, but the water source itself wasn’t previously required to be tested.”

Basically, if I drank bottled water, I’d be really happy to know that they were double checking for fecal matter in my water.  As it is, I only buy bottled water for my tortoise – and she really doesn’t care since she regularly adds fecal matter to it all by herself.  It’s too bad they don’t require tests for the chemicals that leach from the plastic into the bottles.

I’m still stuck on the $11 BILLION that our country spends on bottled water!  All that plastic going into our landfills…