Water bottles. And lots of ‘em.

I recently came across my first bottle of Dasani water in the “PlantBottle” introduced last year. CocaCola, owners of Desani, claims the new plastic material is made partially from plants and is 100 percent recyclable.

Some say it is a small step in the right direction.

Others say it’s greenwash and a step in the wrong [...]]]> What’s the one thing aliens (or whomever) are sure to find after this thing we call “civilization” has long slipped into Earth’s turbulent past?

Water bottles. And lots of ‘em.

I recently came across my first bottle of Dasani water in the “PlantBottle” introduced last year. CocaCola, owners of Desani, claims the new plastic material is made partially from plants and is 100 percent recyclable.

Some say it is a small step in the right direction.

Others say it’s greenwash and a step in the wrong direction.

Maybe the real core problem is the idea of putting water in a single-use container in the first place. But if we are going to use plastic water bottles, as we seem to do, then making them from materials with a even a slightly reduced environmental footprint is a good thing. Just don’t think it’s much more than a gesture in the right direction of what is really needed.

What do you think?

Related articles

• Coca-Cola and PepsiCo’s plant-based bottles still damage the environment. (slate.com)
• Coca-Cola ramps up sustainability credentials with global division (mantrameds.wordpress.com)

We were sent this tip from Taryn. On the same day, Taryn received her issue of National Geographic (whose current issue is about global water resources), and in it was this first ad on the left. In Taryn’s mailbox was also her latest issue of Wired, containing within its pages the ad below –  with a remarkably  different message; “jarring” is the word Taryn used to describe her reaction.

While the SaveWaterAmerica campaign is educational and ostensibly leads to a good [...]]]>

We were sent this tip from Taryn. On the same day, Taryn received her issue of National Geographic (whose current issue is about global water resources), and in it was this first ad on the left. In Taryn’s mailbox was also her latest issue of Wired, containing within its pages the ad below –  with a remarkably  different message; “jarring” is the word Taryn used to describe her reaction.

While the SaveWaterAmerica campaign is educational and ostensibly leads to a good cause, could they do more? Why the stark difference in their message between these two ads? Readers of Wired don’t even get to hear about SaveWaterAmerica.

Thanks to Taryn for this tip, if you have a greenwashing ad or PR campaign you’d like us to know about please submit your tip for consideration

National Geographic Ad text:

Bold. Conservation.

Sometimes boldness is about clarity – about know what’s important. For us, it’s a commitment to creating water-saving products people love to use. Visit us online to calculate how much water you can save, and we’ll donate $1 in water-saving products, up to $2 million, in support of Habitat for Humanity’s green building efforts. Together, we can make a world of difference.

SaveWaterAmrecia.com

Do we think these two are concerned about their water conservation efforts, or are encouraged toward conservation by anything seen in this ad? Or is it just a display of indulgence and excess?

Wired Ad text:

KOHLER: As I See It, #87 in a series

“The judges give it a perfect 10″

SHOWER: Multiple shimmering tiles – digitally controlled and beautifully affordable – that give you water, sound, light, and steam