Conclusions: An Unforeseen Ending

I embarked on this project several weeks ago because it was a topic that I personally care about. As an athlete, I drink anywhere from four to six naglene-sized water bottles per day. Thus, finding out what was in the bottle I religiously slurped from seemed like a good project to explore. I embarked upon my journey hopefully, perhaps expecting the company that in part fueled my athletic exploits would be forthcoming and as health-conscious as I am. I wanted to not only discover what comprises the nalgene and how it affects me, the consumer, but I also wanted to uncover its environmental impacts. I wanted to learn about the nalgene’s “secret life” and share my findings with anyone who read my blog.

I initially believed that I would be able to uncover exact environmental impacts in a “cradle to grave” approach. I thought it would be possible to gather complete information about material obtainment, manufacturing, packaging, shipping, and disposal and then analyze the environmental impacts of each of these processes. It was a struggle to find information about the material and manufacturing process because, surprisingly, companies were unwilling to share. I found myself wondering, “what do they have to hide?” I frustratingly found myself hitting dead-end after dead-end, being hung up on by secretaries and put infinitely on hold much more often than I was able to talk to anyone who could give me real information, but was ultimately able to piece together a mostly-complete narrative with the information I managed to gather. Some of the other stages required liberal inference, while some provided clear answers to my question of environmental impact.

The process of writing this blog attuned me to the corporate hoodwinking and “greenwashing” we have discussed in class. The use of a reusable water bottle is widely thought to be helping the environment, but I found many harmful affects throughout the entire life of the nalgene. The information that I was unable to find was perhaps the most interesting part of the experience, as I often got the impressions that companies did not want the consumer to have access to information that possibly pertains to their health, the environment, or could jeopardize the image of the company. I feel like a better-informed consumer after this project and am now galvanized to undertake more “secret life” quests—I want to know what the real story is behind the products that fuel our economy but perhaps hinder our ecology.

Ultimately, at the beginning of this project I stated that I would present a recommendation to you of what you should do to make an environmentally conscious decision regarding the use of water bottles. Throughout this project, I was a bit turned off from Nalgene’s because of their unwillingness to share this information. However, the environmental impacts of a reusable water bottle are still drastically less than that of disposable water bottles. I encourage you, as a caring environmentalist, an avid athlete, or simply a curious consumer, to try to discover the environmental wake and secret life of other water bottles or products you care about. If everyone steps up to demand this knowledge, as Rachel Carson did during the 1960s, companies will be forced to reveal their processes and then we can work together to to transform their negative environmental impacts into something that can positively benefit our entire world.

Disposal: The Grave

On a daily basis, we are told over and over to recycle. Although we may not always be conscious of it, signs such as the one above are located everywhere, and it is hard to come across a trash receptacle at Brown that does not have recycling bins adjacent to it. It is common knowledge to recycle disposable water bottles and if provided with the opportunity to do so via recycling bins, nearly everyone in our community and probably throughout the country does so. The recycling symbol printed on each bottle is a sign of the ability of something to be recycled as well as a reminder to the consumer to recycle the bottle upon completion. However, what about reusable Nalgene water bottles? Can they be recycled? Where do they end up at the end of their life? I was at first unsure of this and polled 12 of my friends to determine if others were unsure as well. My results showed that knowledge about the recyclability of the Everyday Nalgene is far less common than that of single use water bottles.

Poll Results:

Nearly everyone recycles single use water bottles

Only one person recycles a reusable water bottle, whereas most throw it out or lose it

Consumers are unaware of where their reusable water bottle (I generalized the poll to use a reusable water bottle as opposed to just the Everyday Nalgene because some people used other water bottles such as Camelbak) should go at the end of its life.

The Everyday Nalgene is indeed recyclable, although many are unaware of this fact. Look closely at this picture of the bottom of an Everyday Nalgene from the Brown Bookstore:

#7 plastic

You can see the recycling symbol, along with a number 7 inside of it. Upon researching this, further, Nalgene’s website confirmed the recyclability of their Everyday Nalgene. The number 7 is part of the resin identification coding system that helps organize nationwide recycling. Number 7 indicates that multiple resins were used or a resin other than the common 1-6 resins, but does not indicate that it cannot be recycled.

If people do not realize this so do not recycle and either throw out their reusable water bottle or lose it, in Rhode Island their water bottle’s “grave” is located at the Johnston Landfill. All trash in Rhode Island ends up at the Rhode Island Resource Recovery Corporation, which includes recycling facilities, commercial composting, as well as the sanitary landfill. The Landfill spans 230 acres and is approximately 200 feet tall and the area it consumes will perhaps never return to its natural state. When one throws out the reusable Everyday Nalgene, they are contributing to an ever growing problem on our planet of where to put all of our trash. Our planet is a finite space-we can only hold so many people, so many trees, so much water, so much trash. Rather than sending a Nalgene to landfills, as most do, at the end of its productive life, it must become common knowledge that we need to recycle our Nalgene bottles.

Shipping-Transport From Factory to Consumer Sites

One of the thousands of trucks constantly hitting the roads to bring items from one region to another

This is going to be one of my shorter posts, because most people are well aware of the negative effects of vehicle emissions. I don’t want to bore you with information you already know so I’ll get straight to the point. Both City Sports and the Brown Bookstore could testify that their Nalgene’s are delivered by the large stereo-typical tractor trailer trucks. Simply put, it takes a lot of gasoline or diesel to drive Everyday Nalgenes from Rochester, NY all across the country to various stores where they are sold. I touched on this topic in the manufacturing post in terms of the environmental impacts of transporting Tritan copolyester resin pellets from the Eastman manufacturing site to Nalgene’s manufacturing site. The fossil fuels used to power the tractor trailers that barrel across our nation’s highways are major contributers to a host of environmental problems, such as global warming due to green house gas emissions, environmental degradation due to resource mining and acquisition, and air pollution.

Rochester to Providence = 387 miles

The exact amount of transportation impact varies based on one’s location relative Rochester, NY. Let’s say that you purchased your Nalgene at the Brown Bookstore, located 387 miles from Rochester, NY. Again, assuming a tractor trailer mileage of about 6 mpg, 64.5  gallons of gasoline are burned to drive a Nalgene to where you can buy it. This is a relatively small impact compared to the transportation impact of those who live even farther away from Rochester. If we could purchase locally produced goods instead of goods made all over the world, we could prevent huge amounts of fossil fuels from entering the atmosphere. Also, better technology to increase gas mileage would help solve this issue as well.

Packaging: Copious Cardboard

Rather than trying to force information out of the Nalgene corporation yet again, I decided there must be a better approach to learn about the packaging system of the Everyday Nalgene that allows it to be shipped safely from the Nalgene factories to retail outlets. I visited two stores on Thayer street that sell Nalgenes to try to get a glimpse first hand of how Nalgenes are packaged and shipped.

Stop #1: City Sports

Thayer Street City Sports

City Sport's water bottle collection

A recent shipment to City Sports

At City Sports I spoke with the manager, who informed me that all products sold at City Sports franchises are sent directly from manufacturers, including Nalgene, to the two City Sports warehouses, located in Boston and Washington D.C. At the warehouse, items are sorted in order to be distributed to

A wide variety of goods shipped all together from the warehouse in Boston to the Providence City Sports

individual franchises. The Warehouse reuses boxes sent by the manufacturers to ship a hodgepodge of items to the franchises. For example, a box printed with The North Face logo may arrive in Providence with a mixture of Under Armor spandex, New Balance running Sneakers and reusable water bottles. Once the items are unpacked and displayed in the store, City Sports recycles the cardboard. City Sports seems to be taking steps in the right direction by reusing cardboard sent from manufactures and recycling it at individual franchises. Despite the fact that they are reusing and recycling, the amount of cardboard produced is vast. Even though it is recycled, 100% of it cannot be transformed back into fresh cardboard (a process that requires much energy). As we all know, trees supply the main ingredient for cardboard, so it is important to realize that deforestation is in fact an environmental impact of Nalgene water bottles that is often forgot about.

An employee only section of City Sports. Although it is tempting to believe that reusing and recycling is a fail proof solution, there is still much waste generated.

Stop #2: The Brown University Bookstore

Brown Water Bottles

The Everyday Nalgene imprinted with the Brown logo

The cardboard packaging of mugs, resembling that of the Everyday Nalgene

By speaking with a worker at the bookstore, I learned that Brown’s water bottles arrive in a different method that that of City Sports. Because they are personally monogrammed, Brown Everyday Nalgenes are shipped directly from the Nalgene factory to the Brown Bookstore, in cardboard boxes printed with the Nalgene logo. The worker did not have a box of Nalgene water bottles available for me to see at that time, but she did show me a similar packaging system of coffee mugs, pictured at right. This coffee mug packaging it much smaller than that of the water bottles, as she explained to me that Nalgenes arrive in a box about ten times the size of this coffee mug one. Despite the size difference, the general set up is the same in that cardboard dividers separate each bottle to prevent scratching and thin sheets of paper separate the rows of bottles stacked on each other. After the bottles are unpacked from the box, the University recycles the cardboard. As with City Sports, this means that huge amounts of cardboard must be produced to supply the Nalgene factory with shipment boxes and the divider components. Cardboard equals deforestation, plus even more negative environmental impacts, such as those made by the factories needed to make the cardboard itself. Perhaps rather than simply recycling shipment boxes, the shipment boxes could be returned to Nalgene for reuse. If the material characteristics of cardboard prevent this from being possible, perhaps a reusable shipment system could be built into the trucks that transport Nalgene bottles from the factory to retail outlets. This is a good lead into the next issue contributing to environmental impacts that I will address in the next post, transportation and shipping.

Manufacture

It is necessary to open this post with a caveat: it may end in similar fashion as the previous post. Although I may not be able to determine the exact manufacturing procedure of the Everyday Nalgene or the precise environmental impacts of this process, I can address the topic to my full capacity in a way that allows important conclusions to be drawn.

As stated in the last post, I learned that Nalgene purchases Tritan copolyester from Eastman by speaking with a worker at Nalgene. She informed me that Eastman ships the copolyester via trucks, but did not know where exactly the copolyester came from. I assume that it comes from West Elizabeth, PA, which is home to the Eastman manufacturing site that is closest to Nalgene’s primary factories in Rochester, NY. According to Google Maps, 301 miles separate West Elizabeth and Rochester. I found several different numbers of mpg for both diesel and gasoline powered tractor-trailer trucks or eighteen-wheelers, but most ranged from four to eight mpg. Assuming that on average the trucks that deliver Tritan copolyester from Eastman to Nalgene get approximately six mpg, over the 301-mile trek, about 50 gallons of gasoline or diesel are consumed by one truck delivery alone!

The 301-mile delivery route that brings Tritan copolyester resin pellets from Eastman's manufacturing site in West Elizabeth, PA to Nalgene's factories in Rochester, NY.

The Tritan copolyester is shipped to Nalgene in the form of resin pellets. The Nalgene worker unfortunately could not tell me the manufacturing process that transforms the resin pellets into the Everyday Nalgene for legal reasons (which is why this information was not on Nalgene’s website). However, she was a bit more helpful than Ms. Odham of Eastman by informing me the Nalgene employs the injection blow model process to produce their bottles and recommended doing a Google search to learn more about this method, and thus the environmental impacts it generates.

injection blow molding process

Injection blow molding is used to manufacture large quantities of hollow plastic objects, such as the Everyday Nalgene. In the case of the Everyday Nalgene, the process begins with the melting of the copolyester resin pellets. A nozzle injects this molten form into a hollow mold with a core rod in the middle. The core rod then rotates and opens which sends air into the mold to inflate the bottle into its final shape. Once the bottle has cooled, the rod rotates again so that it can be ejected and the bottle can stand freely on its own.

By learning the steps of this process, as well as keeping in mind the “bottle manufacture” component of the graphs pictured at the end of the last post, I have learned that it takes a large amount of energy to produce a Nalgene. Lots of energy must be used to melt the copolyester resin pellets, as well as during the cooling process. Machinery operations, such as the rotation of the core rod, also require energy. I spoke with several Nalgene workers in attempts to learn about Nalgene’s energy provider, but each worker either said that they were unaware of the issue, could not release that information, or connected me to another voicemail. Regardless, I think it is probable that the Nalgene factories use a mixture of traditional fossil fuels, mainly those used to generate electricity, as well as heating oil. If Nalgene invests and uses sustainable energy sources, such as wind or solar powered electricity, I’m sure that they would be eagerly sharing it in attempts to get more customers. For example, their website’s “responsibility” section would have publicized this information with pretty pictures of windmills and phrases such as, “Here at Nalgene, we are fore-leader in the use of renewable energy sources.” However, there is no material of this kind.

Not only is the energy use a component of the environmental impact of the actual manufacturing process, but the land affected by the factories is also a major issue. When a a factory is built it eliminates land that could remain in its natural ecosystem state. Animals and plants are either displaced or killed in the process. After it is built, it continues to have a ripple effect on the surrounding environments as well. For example, it will release toxins and other pollutants into the air, as well as emit runoff into nearby water systems. It is important to note here that although there are government regulations of factory pollution, they are only regulations, not complete restrictions. There are limitations set on the amount of pollution generated, which in itself implies that there are vast impacts caused by the pollution. Also, the limitations are not very stringent and we have a long way to go to reduce, or hopefully eliminate entirely, pollution generated by America’s business industry. A step in this process would be providing the information about the environmental impacts generated and the processes that generate them to the public, rather than keeping it shrouded in secrecy. Despite the secrecy, keep in mind that the manufacturing process still has major environmental effects.

Corporate Confidentiality: Privacy or Propaganda?

Copolyester scores 10 out of 10 in every category

This post was initially going to enlighten you about what exactly copolyester is and where it comes from. However, while trying to research this matter I came across several matters of greater importance, mainly the fact that companies are actively hiding the exact information I was searching for.

Copolyester seems to be Nalgene’s upcoming favorite material. As showcased in these “nutrition facts,” Nalgene provides ample information highlighting the great qualities of copolyester. However, it fails to provide information about its production process or the materials used to produce it.  Even, Nalgene Choice (www.nalgenechoice.com), a website designed specifically for consumer awareness of materials, was extremely unhelpful.

Nalgene Choice repeats information presented on http://www.nalgene.com and uses pictures to try to make it seem otherwise. http://www.nalgenechoice.com seems to be "greenwashing."

Nalgene Choice did not have any supplement information to Nalgene’s original website, and in fact seemed to be similar in nature to “green washing.” Because of this inadequacy of information online, I called Nalgene’s customer service hotline (1-800-625-4327) in attempts to find answers to my questions:

1. Does Nalgene synthesize their own copolyester?
   1. If yes, please describe the production process in as much detail as possible. What raw materials are used? How are they combined to create copolyester?  What byproducts are produced during the process?
   2. If no, what supplier does Nalgene purchase copolyester from? How does Nalgene manufacture the Everyday bottle once it receives copolyester? Are additional materials mixed with the copolyester, such as coloring dyes?

After speaking to several individuals I was connected to the Technical Support division where I talked with a surprisingly helpful worker. She informed me that Nalgene does not manufacture their own copolyester. Instead, they purchase Tritan copolyester in the form of resin pellets from Eastman, a company that manufactures chemicals, fibers and plastics used in a variety of products worldwide. Similarly to my efforts with Nalgene, I struggled to uncover relevant manufacturing information from Eastman’s website. I hit another dead end when I called their Corporate Headquarters (1 (423) 229-2000). I was connected to their “Education Initiatives,” but ended up reaching a voicemail. Equipped with my previous experience of failed returned calls, I decided I needed to contact them in a different way. I filled out the following product request form:

product request form

I’ll admit I stretched the truth a bit on the form by implying that I was an academic employed by Brown University, but the form required all fields to be completed. I received a less-than-enthusiastic response in the form of the following email exchange:

Email 1: this first email appeared to be an automated reply. I had already searched http://www.eastman.com thoroughly so I replied with the email below in attempts to get more information. 

Email 2: I thought this was a pretty polite email and I was expecting a helpful response answering my questions or directing me on the path to find answers. However, this was not the case.

Email 3: Shutdown

Email 4: Although I asked for help again, I received no reply in response to this email.

I was accused of propriety! This was not anything I had planned on encountering during my research process and it seemed that it would be impossible for me to learn any information about the manufacturing process of copolyester. To top this off, the woman I spoke with at Nalgene told me that she also could not tell me the details of Nalgene’s manufacturing process because of legal reasons. At this point my panic began to rise rapidly. How was I ever supposed to trace the environmental impact of a Nalgene without being legally able to obtain any information about its composition or manufacturing process? Why would they not share this information with me? I told them I was a student doing a research for an environmental science project; I was not going to steal their production method and start up my own factory. I was only curious.

In addition to offering factory tours, Ben and Jerry's provides an extensive explanation of their manufacturing process all the way from "cow" to "cone." Each of the ice cream scoops in the above screen shot represent one step in the process, such as cows at family farms, a factory overview that includes video footage of their factory in action, the pint filler, and quality assurance. Eastman and Nalgene offer nothing like this online or elsewhere.

This raises an important question of what these companies are trying to hide. A great proportion of commonly used products have simple manufacturing processes that are freely shared or that we are already aware of. For example, as a child I visited the Ben and Jerry’s factory in Vermont, where I received a full tour that detailed where their ingredients came from and allowed us to observe the production and packaging processes. When I called Nalgene to ask where their factories were located, as well as if they offered factory tours, I spoke to several individuals who were clueless about the issue before being connected to a voicemail again. Nalgene and Eastman do not offer anywhere near the information Ben and Jerry’s and some other companies do their consumers. Why not? In my opinion, because Ben and Jerry’s is a good company that uses quality ingredients from local farmers in a safe, efficient and clean environment to produce a well-loved product. Showing customers the production process does not detract from the enjoyment one gains from eating a dish of Cherry Garcia; rather it enhances it.

This could not be farther from the truth of the copolyester in my Nalgene. I think that the manufacturing process of copolyester and Nalgenes is not necessarily a pretty process. What are these companies trying to hide? Eastman has tons of what seems to be propoganda avidly supporting the use of Tritan copolyester, but it refuses to share how they make it.

The propoganda of Tritan Copolyester:

Eastman tries to seem like it is a conscious company.

Eastman believes Tritan copolyester is perfect!

Using Tritan copolyester will save iguanas!

Eastman Tritan copolyester is the best!

Sure, Tritan copolyester is a winner, but where exactly is the Tritan copolyester in this advertisement? Is it used to produce the helmet, the water bottle or something else?

This reminds me of the "nutrition facts" created about the Everyday Nalgene. Similarly, the product being judged received 100% ratings.

How can there be so much of this support of the use of Tritan copolyester without any actual information about the product? My frustration was rising rapidly as I uncovered more and more pretty pictures and surface information about the benefits of Tritan copolyester, yet could not find a single bit of information about the manufacturing process or even the raw materials used to produce it. For example, the only relevant information from a press release regarding the creation of Tritan was, “Tritan™ is a result of unique chemistry based on a new commercial monomer.” Things initially looked hopeful when I came across the “Tritan Copolyester EX401” data sheet. It included many sections, such as hazards identification, compositions/information on ingredients, first aid measures, exposure controls, physical and chemical properties, toxicological information, ecological information, disposal considerations and transportation information. I’ve highlighted the data from the most important sections below:

1. Composition/information on ingredients

Chemical name	Concentration	Additional Identification	Notes
copolyester	>90%	proprietary
modifers/additives	<10%	proprietary

*All concentrations are percent by weight unless ingredient is a gas. Gas concentrations are in percent by volume.

This section of the report emphasizes my already found knowledge that Eastman is simply not going to tell me what copolyester is made of, because of proprietary.

2. Information on Toxicological effects

toxicity to humans

toxicity to humans

toxicity to humans

Why did I include this long list of information with repetitive results of “no data available?” To showcase the point that not only does Eastman not share information with its consumers, but their own knowledge of their own products is extremely limited. This immediately brought to mind an important theme in Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring and our class discussion of the book. Carson addressed our country’s widespread use of many pesticides, specifically DDT, despite a lack of knowledge regarding its effects on humans or our environment. She implored the American public to force industry and government to investigate all of the consequences of chemicals and make this information widespread knowledge in order for appropriate decisions about the proper use of these materials could be made.
This copolyester data reveals an eerily similar lack of knowledge and makes me wish there was another push to investigate all of the consequences of this material so that it can be used appropriately. It is unacceptable that there is “no data available” regarding every single toxicological effect of Tritan copolyester! Does it cause cancer? Eastman admits they have no idea! (or worse, they are refusing to share the actual information because it would negatively impact their business) Does it cause reproductive problems? Again, not a clue! In addition to this lack of knowledge regarding the effects of Tritan copolyester on humans, there is an absence of information about an even more relevant component of this report: its environmental effects. Does this product effect animals such as fish? “No data available.” Is copolyester biodegradable? Either Eastman does not know or it will not share.

Ecological and environmental toxicity

What does all this lack of information boil down to for this report? I’ve fallen into the river of failure. The obtainment of copolyester is going to remain a mystery for me, for you and for all of the world locked behind the Berlin Wall of the Eastman. Although the use of Tritan copolyester is highly recommended by both Nalgene and Eastman, information regarding this substance’s composition and production is hidden from the public for legal reasons, while its broader effects have not been thoroughly researched. Despite my admittance that I will be unable to teach you about the obtainment and manufacture of this product, I can confidently say that this does not mean that there is a lack of environmental impacts of this. For example, Eastman has 21 manufacturing sites spread globally in places such as Brazil, China, the United States and Estonia. These factories require large quantities of land and energy that thus eliminates natural ecosystems and contributes to global warming. Additionally, even though copolyester is produced synthetically, there must be natural materials that need to be obtained due to the property that matter cannot be created or destroyed. Although I cannot pinpoint the exact effects of these, that does not mean that they do not exist. As a matter of fact, Eastman has analyzed the environmental impacts of the material production of Tritan copolyester when used to produce sport water bottles (such as the Everyday Nalgene or Camelbak). The graphs below show the breakdown of impacts during different stages of a bottle’s life, including bottle material, bottle manufacture, coatings and decoration, and end of life. Focus on the left bar of each graph for now, as that represents Eastman Tritan copolyester, whereas the others represent stainless steel and aluminum based water bottles.

 As you can see from these graphs, material production clearly contributes the largest environmental impacts in all three categories of energy input, global warming impacts and smog formation. These graphs show that on a large, worldwide scale, our use of Tritan copolyester water bottles contributes vast environmental impacts. It is time to address another cause of these impacts, represented by yellow in the graphs and addressed briefly at the beginning of this post: bottle manufacture.

BPA: Should we be concerned?

A simple Google search of “BPA Nalgene” yields about 2,570,000 results (0.13 seconds). Some of the first results include:

1. “Don’t Buy A Nalgene Water Bottle Until You Read This” –www.treehugger.com (April 16, 2008)
2. “Bottle Maker to Stop Using Plastic Linked to Health Concerns” –New York Times (April 18, 2008)
3. “Nalgene Buckles To Consumer Pressure: Recalling All Water Bottles With BPA” –www.blogher.com (April 20, 2008)
4. “NALGENE BOTTLES & TOXINS” –www.livestrong.com (June 18, 2010)

These articles and websites showcase the wave of controversy that began in 2008 when the Canadian government declared Bisphenol-A (BPA) to be a toxic substance. BPA is a chemical used to produce polycarbonate plastics, which are found in a wide variety of everyday items, such as electronics, medical equipment, CDs, baby bottles, bike helmets, and, of course, Nalgene water bottles. Polycarbonate plastics were extremely popular due

BPA is s seemingly simple molecule composed of hydrogen, oxygen and carbon, yet there has been much controversy over its safety

to their lightweight, yet durable quality, as well as their ability to not effect the flavor of a substance stored in them. Nalgene water bottles became famous because of the  unbreakable and clear characteristics that polycarbonate, and the BPA it contained, allowed them to have. Even though it was inexpensive, my Nalgene was easy to use and never broke when I dropped it hundreds of times. Because of this, I, like many, used my Nalgene daily. However, in 2008, with the eruption of the BPA scandal I threw my Nalgene away and bought a Sigg aluminum water bottle instead.

Many people became frightened by the announcement of potential harmful health effects of BPA on children and all humans

Should I have thrown that bottle out? I saw a few news headlines, similar as those listed at the beginning of this post, but I realize now I did not have nearly enough knowledge of the matter to make an informed decision. At the onset of the controversy, animal studies revealed that BPA increased the rate of puberty (by effecting the hormonal system), as well as brought about a risk for cancer, heart disease and diabetes. Not only this, but it was thought that the level of exposure to humans may bring about neural and behavioral effects in fetuses and children. Keeping these initial findings in mind, I set out to find out whether there was truth behind them, or whether further research proved to be more accurate.

To begin my research regarding the current effects of BPA, I looked to Nalgene’s website, where I expected to find large amounts of information due to the huge publicity surrounding the issue of Nalgene’s use of BPA. However, I was surprised to instead find an extreme lack of information written directly by Nalgene. The only statement Nalgene directly makes is:

“As a responsible manufacturer of polycarbonate consumer products, Nalge Nunc International has monitored scientific research concerning the safety of our products including Bisphenol-A for many years. Based on the findings of the Food and Drug Administration, The Environmental Protection Agency, The American Plastics Council and other reliable sources from around the world, we continue to firmly believe in the safety of our products. Nalge Nunc International also believes in providing its customers with the most factual information currently available on this subject. You can view the most up to date information here.”

This “up to date” information includes three statements and articles published in 2008 by the FDA, EFSA (European Food Safety Authority), and George Mason University. I wanted to find current information regarding the safety of BPA so I looked further into the small print at the bottom of the page listing additional references for those wanting more information. One of the more helpful websites I found was http://www.bisphenol-a.org/, which provides a general overview of BPA as well as developments and publications regarding BPA, although these were a bit dated as well. An important publication to consider is a one made in September 2010, by the American Chemistry Council in response to an announcement by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA).  The EFSA conducted a review of over 800 studies, and again confirmed (for the third time in three years) that BPA is safe in products used for food or drink storage. The BPA intake levels due to the products are well below the safe intake levels set for humans of all ages.

I was still curious as to the American research and opinion on BPA’s safety (after all, Nalgene is an American company), so I looked to another website recommended by Nalgene: The U.S. Food and Drug Administration at http://www.fda.gov/. I initially attempted to find their current stance backed up by recent BPA research but after a while realized that would be similar to being able to find a needle in a haystack. I never realized how many issues the FDA deals with! Instead of continuing to sort through their website, I found the phone number of a specific division of the FDA, the National Center for Toxicological Research (NCTR). I was connected to their Freedom of Information Office and transferred to Rose Huber. Unfortunately, she did not answer, but I left a message inquiring about the FDA’s current position on BPA, where to find current information, and whether there is anticipated future research. I have yet to hear back from her, but will of course update as soon as I do.

The Everyday Nalgene

What does all this BPA information boil down to? Essentially, it seems the BPA controversy was just a scare that expanded out of control before the facts were backed up. Further research has found the amount of BPA found in everyday items to not be nearly enough to be harmful for humans. Despite this, there still is a hesitance in many to use products containing BPA. To respond to this consumer demand, Nalgene offers products made from a wide variety of materials that both contain BPA and are BPA free. The most popular, traditional Nalgene (known as the “Everyday”) is now made not of polycarbonate, but rather a BPA free plastic known as copolyester. This “Everyday” Nalgene is the specific water bottle I will trace the impact of from here on. Perhaps copolyester does not carry the controversy of polycarbonate, but it of course may have some issues of its own, especially in relation to the environment. Copolyester is on the list for my next post, so get ready to delve into the impacts of the current Nalgene.

Nalgenes: Helping or Hurting the Environment?

Bottled water is bad! Reusable water bottles can save the environment!

Brown University's Beyond the Bottle Campaign advertisement discouraging the use of bottled water

Time and time again these mantras are presented to convince us of the environmental and economic problems surrounding bottled water. Not only is bottled water expensive compared to free tap water, but the waste it creates to is detrimental to our environment. A movement away from bottled water is sweeping across our country at all levels. A main aspect of the solution to reduce consumption of bottled water is a shift to instead use reusable water bottles. Why throw away, or even recycle, many water bottles when you can use the same one over and over? It’s a fail-proof fix; a perfect solution.

Nalgene is one of the main companies capitalizing on this point, even using the logo, “Your bottle for life.” Although it has been mired in controversy regarding BPS health issues, Nalgene has been a very successful company that produces one of the most popular water bottles ever. I personally have owned several Nalgenes throughout my life and have witnessed both adults and youth using them for years. I think it is safe to say that many people feel good drinking from them because they feel that it is a way they can make a difference in the environmental movement. However, are Nalgene reusable water bottles really that great? Despite the fact that they are reusable, like any product, they still come equipped with a host of environmental impacts. Materials are gathered for their production, energy is consumed in factories churning them out, gasoline is guzzled transporting them to retail stores and ultimately where do they end up when we can no longer use them? Now, I’m not saying that reusable water bottles are bad compared to disposable water bottles, but I think they may not be quite as environmentally friendly as our world sees them to be.

A thriving company with a wide variety of products to offer!

With that in mind, I have set out on a mission to uncover the secret life behind Nalgene water bottles. Over the next few weeks I am going to find out as much as I can to determine where your Nalgene comes from and the effects it has on the environment throughout its life. Here’s my game plan:

A. History Before delving into the current Nalgene I’d like to go back briefly to explore the Nalgene bottles of the past. Specifically, I am interested in the controversial BPA issue that brought about panic regarding the safety of the materials used to produce Nalgenes and other plastic products. Why was BPA used and is now a human health concern? Are their environmental effects of BPA besides the effect on human health?

B. Current Impacts What impact does your current Nalgene have on the environment? This will be investigated in stages:

1. Raw material obtainment
2. Production
3. Packaging
4. Shipment and transportation
5. Disposal

C. Recommendations Taking all of my newfound knowledge into account, are Nalgenes an environmentally friendly product we should be supporting as consumers? Are there better alternatives?

Take this road map with a grain of salt—it’s subject to change at any point. There are going to be dead ends and new paths to follow, but this is my initial itinerary to be used as a guideline for my research. I’ll post my research on this material as I find it to keep you up to date and informed. Check back soon and stay tuned to find out the environmental wake of your Nalgene!