I have noticed that there seems to be a large, environmentally conscious presence on campus, perpetually attempting to change policies through campaigns and petitions.  One such petition going around seeks to ban the sale of bottled water on this campus. In my opinion, this is ill-sighted for many reasons.

While seeking to reduce plastic rubbish in a mindset of ecological consciousness is a valiant goal, it is not the best course of action to impose this mindset upon other people. Rather, a better idea would be an awareness campaign against bottled water in an attempt to educate people about the ills of the product. Such a campaign would attempt to make known the very real downside of purchasing water in a bottle, thus discouraging the use of bottled water while retaining the personal choice to purchase it.

While it is true that bottled water damages the environment, and that the product is, on average, no safer or cleaner than tap water, as made evident by studies published in The New York Times and USA Today, there is not a convincing reason to ban the sale of bottled water.

Soda, orange juice and seltzer water all come in similar plastic containers, and are, therefore, just as harmful to the environment.  Unless these products are also sought to be banned, it makes little sense to single out water.

Most illogical of the reasons for a ban, though, is that because water is a basic need of humans, it is immoral to charge such a high mark-up and the practice should be banned all together.

The proponents of such a ban have argued that the bottled water industry should not exist because of the excessive profits for a basic product. However, what the proponents for the ban forget is the principle of the market-based economy in which we live. One person's extraneous absurdity is another person's quintessential need.

For example, I find paying more than about $25 for a pair of blue jeans is unnecessary. However, in our society, one is free to sell his or her blue jeans at whatever price is desired so long as someone wants to purchase the item for that price.

In this system, people buy blue jeans for hundreds, even thousands of dollars. Water, like blue jeans, can come in all different shapes and sizes.

There is mineral water, distilled water, rain water and fluoridated water among others. Water should be the same way, where merchants are free to sell their products at whatever price someone agrees to pay for the water at.

Individuals should be free to purchase more expensive water in a bottle. Their rationale might be a desire to have the taste of crisp, mineral water, or perhaps fear of fluoride and other foreign substances. Whatever one's reasons may be, it is not the place of an authority, whether that be the government or a college's administration, to prohibit these transactions from occurring.

The ecological and financial downsides to bottled water are very real and good reasons to not use it, and much good can be done if these reasons persuade students to reduce their overall consumption of bottled water. Instead of a blanket ban upon water in a bottle, it would be far more effective, and pragmatic, to embark upon an awareness and education campaign.  

In my opinion, most people, if given the facts about the very real downside of bottled water, will choose to mitigate his or her consumption and use of the product.

Instead of forcing students to give up bottled water, a far more effective approach would be to convince students to choose not to use bottled water, making that personal decision on their own.

For example, even though I am strongly opposed to this proposed ban or any variation thereof, I have been making a conscious effort for many years to use as little bottled water as possible.

This is because I recognize the many ills of bottled water, such as its environmental impact to produce once disposed of the packaging. Only through a positive campaign, such as education and awareness, as opposed to a negative action, such as this proposed ban, may we solve such problems.

Accordingly, a prohibition of water in a bottle would not solve the problem: only education can do that.
*