Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Both, probably. Both plastic and the cost of shipping scale roughly with the cost of petroleum.



CO2 is irrelevant, even if production is switched to biodegradeable plant-based oils and shipping is done over short distance with a renewable energy source, people will still complain about bottled water.

They complained before global warming was even thought about, and they're just using fantasy CO2 statistics to bolster their claims. In fact, in some areas with low access to water, governments spend millions merely pumping water up elevations. I know where I live they have to do it, and we're only slightly up hill from the supplier. I wonder how much CO2 they're putting into the atmosphere by using vast quantities of power to pump water up a gradient, which is less efficient than merely moving it.


This is not some competition to show the wrongness of the other side. These are questions for action.

I'm having trouble seeing how one could design a pumping system so poor that it's cheaper to ship water via truck in miniature plastic bottles produced in industrial parks on average thousands of miles away. Even an Archimedes screw is close to optimal energy efficiency if you have a gear system.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: