In 1976 the average US consumer drank 1.6 gallons of bottled water. In 2000 that increased more than 10 fold and in 2007 the average American consumed nearly thirty gallons of bottled water. This trend does not show any signs of slowing down, despite the U.S. having one of the best public water systems in the world. It is suggested there are numerous reasons for this growing trend. In an article published in the Journal of Water (Doria, 2006) the two most common survey responses included health purposes and taste as the reasoning behind bottled water intake. But, is bottled water safer or better in some way or just more expensive and a drain on resources? In fact there are many more controls for tap water than there are for bottled water and 40% of bottled water, which includes Pepsi Co. and Coca-Cola’s top-brands Aquafina and Dasani are simply filtered tap water, not water from natural springs or other “pure” sources. A study in the Journal of General Internal Medicine comparing nutritional value by mineral content found large variations in the minerals of bottled water, which is consistent with the findings of regular tap water. Additionally, the authors suggested that tap water actually contains important minerals (Ca, Mg, K) which may contribute to as much as 10% of the minerals in the diets of many American.

When the environment is considered, bottled water comes under significant scrutiny. In the United States it takes more than 10 million barrels of oil to produce bottled water and that does not include packaging and delivery. When bottled water is imported, that environmental impact is further increased. Once done with the contents Americans throw away 22 billion water bottles each year, which equates to more than 60 million each day. If not properly recycled, it will take as long as 1,000 years for the average plastic bottle to biodegrade. The worst part is for all this time and money it is often the fact that bottled water is generally no safer or healthier than tap water, despite costing up to 10,000 times more. Following a four year study conducted by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) approximately 1/3rd of 1,000 bottles, from 103 different brands, were contaminated with varying levels of synthetic organic chemicals, bacteria and even arsenic.

In some cases, health issues related to water consumption is warranted, particularly for individuals with compromised immune systems, significant health issues and very young children. According to the CDC 1,000 people die annually from waterborne pathogens. But with the safety associated with regulated water standards most cause for significant health fears are extremely limited. Still many people want water that tastes and smells better than that offered by the municipal water supply. According to Gary Woodard, University of Arizona, whether for health or aesthetic purposes, home filtration devices serve to relieve both issues.

There are numerous types of systems for water filtration including ultra violet systems, distillation systems, carbon filter systems and reverse osmosis systems. Of these systems, the Center for Disease Control (CDC) recommends the reverse osmosis system. The under sink device uses a semi-permeable membrane to reduce contaminants by filtering passing water. The CDC suggests the filtration system is effective at preventing dissolved salts, solids, and many contaminants from being consumed but is not reliable at removing bacteria and viruses. The largest issue related to the filtration process is the rate of filtration. The process delivers only 0.5 gallons per 50 minutes of filtration.

Charlie Hollis, President of Aquapure Solutions, suggests the only proven methods to protect against microorganisms and waterborne pathogens are to use distillation, ozonation, and UV light filtration. Distillation and UV systems require electricity and UV light does not positively affect taste and therefore often requires an additional carbon filter. Although most filtration systems work fine, self-installed systems or refrigerator filters require filter changes. If the filter is not changed Woodard suggests the risk for bacteria in the water will be greater than drinking unfiltered water from the tap. Likewise, the container the water is consumed from should be clean and made of appropriate material. Refilling bottled water containers actual increases one’s risk of bacteria regardless of the source.

In conclusion, bottled water seems to be no better than tap water from a general health standpoint and probably does not offer much more aesthetically than tap water that has been filtered. At a price of $1.25 per 20 ounce single serving, bottled water (filtered tap water in most cases) costs 8 dollars a gallon, or 2x the cost of the gas per gallon, used to produce it. It is certainly an individual’s choice to select the water source for personal hydration and use, but from an environmental standpoint it would seem the money spent on taxes to support municipal water is better spent than that which creates greater waste and a larger reliance on oil.