Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Water

Is Drinking from the Toilet Bowl the Best Way to Deal with Water Shortages?

By Elizabeth Royte, AlterNet. Posted September 20, 2008.


More and more cities are implementing "toilet to tap" programs as the answer to our water crisis. But is it the best and safest option?
Advertisement

This piece originally appeared in the New York Times Magazine.

Before I left New York for California, where I planned to visit a water-recycling plant, I mopped my kitchen floor. Afterward, I emptied the bucket of dirty water into the toilet and watched as the foamy mess swirled away. This was one of life's more mundane moments, to be sure. But with water infrastructure on my mind, I took an extra moment to contemplate my water's journey through city pipes to the wastewater-treatment plant, which separates solids and dumps the disinfected liquids into the ocean.

A day after mopping, I gazed balefully at my hotel toilet in Santa Ana, Calif., and contemplated an entirely new cycle. When you flush in Santa Ana, the waste makes its way to the sewage-treatment plant nearby in Fountain Valley, then sluices not to the ocean but to a plant that superfilters the liquid until it is cleaner than rainwater. The "new" water is then pumped 13 miles north and discharged into a small lake, where it percolates into the earth. Local utilities pump water from this aquifer and deliver it to the sinks and showers of 2.3 million customers. It is now drinking water. If you like the idea, you call it indirect potable reuse. If the idea revolts you, you call it toilet to tap.

Opened in January, the Orange County Groundwater Replenishment System is the largest of its type in the world. It cost $480 million to build, will cost $29 million a year to run and took more than a decade to get off the ground. The stumbling block was psychological, not architectural. An aversion to feces is nearly universal, and as critics of the process are keen to point out, getting sewage out of drinking water was one of the most important public health advances of the last 150 years.

Still, Orange County forged ahead. It didn't appear to have a choice. Saltwater from the Pacific Ocean was entering the county's water supply, drawn in by overpumping from the groundwater basin, says Ron Wildermuth, who at the time we talked was the water district's spokesman. Moreover, population growth meant more wastewater, which meant building a second sewage pipe, five miles into the Pacific -- a $200 million proposition. Recycling the effluent solved the disposal problem and the saltwater problem in one fell swoop. A portion of the plant's filtered output is now injected into the ground near the coast, to act as a pressurized barrier against saltwater from the ocean.

Factor in Southern California's near chronic drought, the county's projected growth (another 300,000 to 500,000 thirsty people by 2020) and the rising cost of importing water from the Colorado River and from Northern California (the county pays $530 per acre-foot of imported water, versus $520 per acre-foot of reclaimed water), and rebranding sewage as a valuable resource became a no-brainer. With the demand for water growing, some aquifers dropping faster than they're replenished, snowpacks thinning and climate change predicted to make dry places even drier, water managers around the country, and the world, are contemplating similar schemes. Los Angeles and San Diego, which both rejected potable reuse, have raised the idea once again, as have, for the first time, DeKalb County, Ga., and Miami-Dade County, Fla.

While Orange County planned and secured permits, public-relations experts went into overdrive, distributing slick educational brochures and videos and giving pizza parties. "If there was a group, we talked to them," says Wildermuth, who recently left Orange County to help sell Los Angelenos on drinking purified waste. "Historical societies, chambers of commerce, flower committees."

The central message was health and safety, but the persuaders didn't skimp on buzz phrases like "local control" and "independence from imported water." Last winter, the valve between the sewage plant and the drinking-water plant whooshed open, and a new era in California's water history began.

When I visited the plant, a sprawl of modern buildings behind a concrete wall, in March, Wildermuth, in a blue sport coat and bright tie, acted as my guide. "Quick!" he shouted at one point, mounting a ledge and clinging to the rail over a microfiltration bay. "Over here!" I clambered up just as its contents finished draining from the scum-crusted tank. The sudsy water, direct from the sewage-treatment plant, was the color of Guinness. "This is the most exciting thing you'll see here, and I didn't want you to miss it," he said.

Wildermuth went on to explain what we were looking at: inside each of 16 concrete bays hangs a rack of vertical tubes stuffed with 15,000 polypropylene fibers the thickness of dental floss. The fibers are stippled with holes 1/300th the size of a human hair. Pumps pull water into the fibers, leaving behind anything larger than 0.2 microns, stuff like bacteria, protozoa and the dread "suspended solids."


Digg!

See more stories tagged with: water, drinking water, recycled water, reclaimed water

Elizabeth Royte is the author of Bottlemania: How Water Went On Sale and Why We Bought It and Garbage Land: On the Secret Trail of Trash.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Water! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Hey, if it's good enough for my dog...
Posted by: kwalla on Sep 20, 2008 1:01 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
than it's good enough for me. Though I would prefer mine with a slice of lemon.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

utility pep talk?
Posted by: maxfactor on Sep 20, 2008 4:15 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
wondered if all the pharmatainted urin gets filtered? Well the glitzy machinery won`t - all that oestrogen like compounds will accumulate in your body over the years...
The healthier solution is conservation. No more Whisky on the rocks, empty pools,brown lawn, no car wash girls.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: utility pep talk? Posted by: jvaljon1
» RE: utility pep talk? Posted by: Spot
Same difference
Posted by: kepstein7777 on Sep 20, 2008 4:21 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The point about so-called fresh water vs treated water is a good one. Fresh isn't so fresh, if you think about it.

The only thing that always confused me is how they can remove a million contaminants from sewage water, but it's rarely feasible to remove salt from salt water.

It might also be nice if we could get over our hang-ups over gray water. Depending how gray it is, it could be used for watering gardens, etc., and put less strain on treatment resources

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Seriously . . . Posted by: Scientz
» The science of desalination Posted by: stellabloo
» RE: Same difference Posted by: happybear
» RE: Same difference..?? Posted by: donl51
All the world is filled with water!
Posted by: Nightstallion on Sep 20, 2008 5:08 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Get a water filter, a good one with replacement filter bodies. BUY TWO ULTRA VIOLET LAMPS!

Make a spiral tube of inch and a half polyurethane seven or eight feet long, (DO NOT USE PVC!)place one UV lamp inside the spiral. Run the spiral to the water filter and attach it with proper BRASS fittings. Make a funnel of a five gallon plastice jug. Attach that to the other end of the spiral. get a round stove ring and attach legs to it, set the funnel in the ring place that higher than your spiral and filter arrangement on the OUT end of your water filter use another un cut five gallon water jug as the catch basin.

You may use rain water, swamp water, toilet water, or grey water to filter as long as you understand that grey water wrecks your filter five times as fast as swamp water. The UV kills any bugs and you have a safe drinking water catch sistern. Hang your second UV bulb over the jugs you are holding for future use. This works I know because I am still alive & I too used to live in Washington State woods.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Treated to waste-water, gesunheit!
Posted by: nadine sellers on Sep 20, 2008 5:30 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Putting it plainly, Elizabeth Royte treats us to a wonderful voyage through purified liquids. We are offered a new look at our deep prejudices about this most essential of matters, the very water we drink for survival.

If you do look at all the chemical abuses perpetrated on all our ancient waterways, it seems much safer to drink toilet to tap than to live downstream from a dairy farm.

Herbicides, pesticides, antibiotics, household products and food additives? we are indeed the very poisoners of our essential matter. Now can we take a look at our liquid life? And eliminate or reduce the use and abuse of it?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why Not REALLY Solve The Problem?
Posted by: Last Chance on Sep 20, 2008 5:51 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The only reason such toilet-to-tap technology is needed is because more and more people are producing more and more sewage every year for the growing economy. But if we peacefully reduce the human population with family planning clinics that help every woman decide if and when to birth her children, a smaller population will enjoy plenty of safe and clean resources for everyone, including water from natural springs. Otherwise, pollution will continue to grow until the planet can no longer support life.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Absolutely!! Posted by: socialpsych
» I agree, but ---> Posted by: Last Chance
recycled water is the only water in my tap
Posted by: fcvoigt on Sep 20, 2008 6:28 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Many years ago I read that every drop of water coming out of taps in London had already been through seven people's kidneys. Sorry I can't remember the source but the statement should be easy enough to check.

Our primary school kids here in north Germany visit the local sewage plant as part of the topic "water" in their third year and all know that waste water is treated to a very high standard.

Of course there is a "yukkkkkk" effect if you think "toilet to tap".

But swimming in untreated excreta piped five miles out to sea and washed back by the tide seems a lot yukkier to me.

Maybe it would help to look over the rim of the saucer and see what the rest of the world is doing to stay healthy.

In fact, where I live, there is only one water pipe to the house, so the water I get is ALL drinking water quality - including the water which flushes my toilet.

And incidentally it tastes way better than that plastic bottled stuff.

Alternet I really appreciate your site. I drink to your good health and wish you a wonderful day,
fcv

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I live in Orange County
Posted by: vkobaya1 on Sep 20, 2008 6:40 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I live in Orange County, have since 1978. When I moved here, the tap water was undrinkable. I was lucky as a few months after I moved here, they started some water treatment, removed the sulfur, which had made it awful. Was still very, very hard as I tested it and was out of range of the inexpensive testing kits I could get. Over the years, the water has improved and improved. Over the last year, the water had reached almost awesome quality, at it's best, now tastes like mountain spring water, and even now in the summer, it is very, very drinkable.

I'm a chemist and know something about high purity water. Worked with high pressure liquid chromatography in the early 80s and ordinary distilled water was far too contaminated for such such systems. It took a very elaborate, complex filtering system to purify the ordinary laboratory distilled water to the quality that high pressure liquid chromatography demanded. There is no reason that the water filtration systems described in this article would not produce very high quality drinking water.

Reliability is another question, depends on how much you trust the people running the system. Given the example of the crooks currently running Washington, I would not put it past them to fail to monitor and maintain the system, rather than spending the money on maintenance and quality control to steal the money and look the other way when the system fails. Frankly, if they do, I would advocate a bullet between the eyes of the crooks.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wastewater Treatment
Posted by: modeler on Sep 20, 2008 7:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
4 Million Berliners had recycled water in their taps when I grew up over 80 years ago. The sandy ground filtered the pretreated waste. The islands formed by the trenches were used to grow vegetables. The first time chlorination was used was post WW II. That made the taste awful as I was told.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Nothing New - Just Upscaled
Posted by: snax on Sep 20, 2008 7:58 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As anybody who has ever lived on rural property can tell you, recycling waste water is nothing new. From well, to septic tank, to drain field, to ground water, to well again. This type of project is just implementing the same thing on a far larger scale with some extra filtering thrown in.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Agreed Posted by: socialpsych
It's good enough for Bush -----
Posted by: symcokid on Sep 20, 2008 8:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
not for me, but they are even processing cow manure right now and that is supposed to be palatable potable water too. What do you imagine the Astronauts are drinking?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Municipal water systems that draw from large rivers have been toilet to tap for years!
Posted by: Joni50 on Sep 20, 2008 9:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Think about it. If your city or town gets its water from a river and there are other cities or towns that drain sewerage into that river, you've been drinking toilet to tap all along! In New Orleans, where the municipal supply is drawn from the Mississippi river, it's said that the water there has been flushed through ten toilets before it comes out the taps in the Big Easy. I grew up there, and a lot of people use filters because of the 'yuck' factor and the chlorine taste. However, a lot of people don't use filters because filters are expensive, they don't think about the 'yuck' factor, and the water tastes ok, is free of sediment and color, and exceeds standards.

It would be really nice if we could come up with composting toilets or some other type of toilets that are suitable for urban areas and don't use water or don't use so much water, and if we could come up with good greywater systems that are feasible for urban use. It really seems stupid to be pissing and worse into purified city water and then sending it off for re-purification. It also seems wasteful to be using drinking-quality water for purposes such as showering and watering lawns, and then sending this water into the sewerage system. There's got to be better ways.

I know in rural areas people devise various greywater systems for their own property, and outhouses and composting toilets are still in use. I'm talking about urban applications.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

That's part of the problem....
Posted by: jeffrey7 on Sep 20, 2008 9:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Folks have been drinking 'recycled sewage' in LA for generations. Back in the 70's it was almost 90% recycled tap water,hence the diarrehea.
What's needed is a better way of recycling this water. Current methods are noneffectual. Cryptosporidium can no longer be killed with chlorine and other problems are brginning to come along. We need to implimenmt constructing artifical wetlands if we are to recycle sewage properly. Sent into worm beds in the wetlands,the worms will eat what's harmful and leave us with cleaner,safer water than any treatment plant could deliver.
We must recognize the fundamental importance of how wetlands purify water and how we can use it to insure safe water supplies to growing cities. We can win a battle to recreate natural water purifying wetlands and provide safe drinking water for all our cities and towns. Without safe water,we won't battle anything except dehydration.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Water
Posted by: GreyFoxThree on Sep 20, 2008 9:18 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I know my cat loves drinking water from the toilet and he never gets sick so I guess it cant be that bad.

JIff
Ultimate Anonymity

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Water Posted by: Joni50
» RE: Water Posted by: Dboy
Being part of the solution ...
Posted by: stellabloo on Sep 20, 2008 9:26 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Good article and very valid from a utility operator's POV.

Some more interesting facts: drinking water facilities are usually designed around a set population using about 400 QUARTS PER DAY PER PERSON. Obviously we are not drinking that much; most of the water goes to flush the toilet, wash the dishes and the clothes, down the bathtub drain, and even more goes to water the lawn.

One of the more pressing problems is the need to treat all water to drinking water standards even though it is being used to wash the car. There are many ways that the average consumer can reduce their water demand to alleviate strain on overburdened and aging facilities.

There are also options for local or personal grey-water (shower and washwater) recycling sytems, including those that treat grey water for recycling to non-potable standards. In theory, you could be using your treated shower water to irrigate your lawn.

As pointed out, many communities are virtually drinking toilet-to-tap water anyway. A classic example is Okanagan Lake which has a retention time of 60 years. That means it takes SIXTY YEARS for water to flow through the length of the lake. Every bit of pollution, from unregulated septic systems to leaking gas from motor boats to agriculture runoff from orchards and stockyards, will be in that lake for 60 years to come. Unsurprisingly they had a massive cryptosporidium breakout 10 years ago, despite their advanced water treatment technology. If you never heard of Okanagan Lake, that's no surprise either; this is a mostly rural environment.

As far as disinfection goes, ghiardia and cryptosporidium can be eliminated through micro-filtration and UV radiation. A small chlorine residual is usually left in the tap water to prevent regrowth down the line, but this can removed entirely with any countertop water pitcher containing activated carbon (which removes any volatile organics and chlorine by physical adsorption, not a chemical reaction).

Better treatment for drinking water will come only when consumers realize that we are already facing the toilet-to-tap issue. Until then, we naively assume that bottled tap water is infinitely preferable to straight tap water and we will continue handing over millions of dollars to private for-profit companies instead of investing it back into our public utilities.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Problem-OVERPOPLUTION Answer- Birth control
Posted by: sirios on Sep 20, 2008 9:40 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Greed, control, power etc. are all powered by fear. Fear of not having enough, fear of undefined boundaries, fear of weakness, all of these and more are based in fear of death or the perceived need to protect the physical entity from danger or extinction. Over population exacerbates this condition into a subtle or not so subtle [war] panic. Birth control would create a condition of relative abundance,resulting in a calmer and more rational state of mind and emotion in which to attend to the problems of greed ,control and power. even if the world continues in the same greedy manner, having less people to provide for will increase the possibility of having enough clean water and other resources for the few who don't succumb to the above limitations.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Very Much ON-TOPIC Posted by: Last Chance
» RE: Very Much ON-TOPIC Posted by: Last Chance
» Commitment to Immediate Solutions Posted by: stellabloo
Hate to tell you this
Posted by: DrSuess on Sep 20, 2008 11:19 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...but if you are in 90% of the US this is happening already. City A gets water out of the river, uses it- and sends the "purified" stuff back into the river just a short distance downstream of where they got it. City B which is downstream of City A then gets its water out of the river, and sends it through the city water system. I can tell you that City A's purification system is not usually as good as this proposed system. Sometimes City A's purification methods are just shy of medieval. So be aware that this has been the state of affairs in America for a long time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» On the other hand --> Posted by: Last Chance
In view of your article about drinking from the toilet bowl...
Posted by: jvaljon1 on Sep 20, 2008 12:35 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...being the best way to deal with water shortages--don't you want to re-think your exhortation that we the public should start using TAP NOT BOTTLED water???

I used to live in NY City and I drank from the tap all the time. The water was pristine. When I moved to upstate NY I filled up bottles from a spring along Rte 17 that later had to be capped because the Chemical Company 10 miles down the road had allowed "seepage" which they were supposed to eliminate, but of course didn't--to kill our beautiful water spring.

Realizing that, if the chemical effluvia from the Company was seeping into the ground in enough quantity to kill our spring,--that of course it was getting into the groundwater that supplied our city's water--that was when I turned to bottled spring water. I made sure that what I bought carried the seal of a certified spring--and then for good measure, I chose spring water from states known for their environmental policies, such as Arkansas, Oregon, Maine, etc.

And I have been doing that ever since. A good thing, since subsequently I moved from upstate NY to the Dallas/Ft Worth Texas area. I still find good bottled Spring water to use--only not from Texas, thank you! I get my Spring water from Maine, Vermont, Arkansas, or Oregon.

I'm a healthy hearty 40-years-younger-looking 70. It's a little late to tell me that I should start "drinking out of the toilet bowl"--that in fact, with "toilet to tap" that's what I'll be doing soon whether I like it or not. Courtesy of "the water crisis".


That's EXACTLY why I drink bottled spring water ONLY. I think that the extra expense has paid off in my health.

Not to mention that, some of these places that I've lived in--I wouldn't let my DOG drink out of those toilet bowls! If I had a dog...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Right wingers constantly
Posted by: GuitarBill on Sep 20, 2008 3:34 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
suck the sh*t out of Bush and Cheney's ass, so I guess "toilet to tap" should suit them just fine.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's the Plastic & the Chlorine Worth Worrying About
Posted by: Liberty G on Sep 20, 2008 7:28 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We are fanatically good at killing bacteria and viruses - so much so that antibacterials are causing their own problems.

However, plastic has some nasty chemicals in it, (endocrine disrupters),so all that "filtering" through plastic doesn't reassure me a bit.

Moreover, chlorine is associated with by-products that are not at all user-friendly.

I use a Britta or Pur filter on my sink faucet, and a shower filter for bathing.

Unfortunately, I believe that really pure, clean water on this planet is a thing of the past, fondly remembered but never seen again.

For some info about that, check out: www.toxicsinfo.org/TIPS_environment.htm
at my organization's website. Some of the many articles on plastic may be found elsewhere on the site.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

reaching the limits?
Posted by: phindrup on Sep 20, 2008 9:25 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First thought is what happens when the aquifers become contaminated?
Second is perhaps we are looking at this issue from the wrong end. Why are we mixing water and excrement, in the first place?
Yes, we have been for a couple of centuries, at least that is the position of the wealthy/privileged. That is no reason for not deciding it is past time for a rethink. I can hear the screams of resistance. The expense! The (perhaps/potential) inconvenience!
For how much longer can we expect to get away with pouring our waste into the waterways/oceans? Already the acidity of the oceans is rising. Rising acidity threatens the viability of plankton. The oceans produce over half the earths oxygen.
Water, oil, what else is there that we have stretched to the point of depletion?
Will we chose to change, or will change be forced upon those who survive some catastrophe?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wow, I'm really surprised...
Posted by: lightwing1 on Sep 21, 2008 11:19 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
at all the negativity on this board. I would think that an innovative strategy such as the one outlined in the article would be hailed by left-wing environmentalists. Personally, I think it's great that Orange County has come up with a sustainability solution that other cities are looking at to potentially solve water use crises.

Didn't anyone catch the statement in the article that 1/5 of California's energy is used to move the water from North to South? Reusing sewage water is one way to save energy and create a renewable resource.

Regarding the people who initiated a snarl-fest over population issues - yes - higher consciousness about how we reproduce is desirable, but it is a long term solution (if it is to be a humane reduction). We need to address issues that face us now with innovative solutions like this.

Finally, for all of you people who cling to bottle water as the solution - there is a better way. For over 5 years now, I have been using a Nikken Aqua Pour water filter (Also, in pre-rebuttal to all who will say Nikken is a pyramid company and PiMag water is a fraud - maybe it is. But their water filter is great and whether it's PiMag water or not - it IS clean drinking water. I don't care about the rest of it.) to filter my tap water and I fill reusable, safe-plastic water bottles every day, put them in my fridge and Voila! Cold, purified drinking water for very low cost - and no hit on the environment by buying water that needs to be filtered, transported, et al. I put the bottles through the dishwasher about once a month and change the filter every 1.5 to 2 years. It is incredibly low cost and very low impact. It is a great solution for urban bound persons who wish to get off the "bottled water" bandwagon.

I pack the bottles with me everywhere - to concerts, business meetings, road trips, and even fill my bike bladder with the filtered water.

It is such a simple solution that I'm surprised that a more environmentally conscious group like Alternet posters hasn't discovered it yet.

Stop arguing over the how's and at least give credit to those who are trying to find solutions to the toxic mess we are in. For pete's sake...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

do you have a picture of this?
Posted by: cyr3n on Sep 22, 2008 8:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Pretty interesting.. I own a handheld UV pen to make grey water potable but haven't heard of this sort of contraction. Do you have any pictures?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Distilled water with alkaline supplements
Posted by: cyr3n on Sep 22, 2008 8:46 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There are tons of DIY distillers out there.. why can't we just drink distilled water with alkaline supplements?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Distillers are widely available Posted by: stellabloo