BC to sell groundwater to Nestle for $2.25 per million L

[goatboy]

I think what this is all about is there taking a product that belongs to everyone and making billions off it so the gov always so cash strapped from feeding all the welfare bumbs needs another source of income. These corporations having to pay a pittance for water is nothing at all to them and helps all BC people in one way or another

Well, who really is the one to blame, them or us for buying it? I'm not necessarily defending Nestle but its a free, renewable resource that doesn't cost us anything to create or store, kind of like air. Nestle pays taxes, employs people and makes it stock holders money, that's all helping BC, unless of course you're a corporations are bad kinda guy.

[Smurf]

I just feel it is one of our natural resources and if someone wants to use it to make money they should pay for it. Some day clean water might not be quite as renewable a resource, just ask California.

[django]

Hey wanderingman, I didn't see what you called me and frankly I don't understand how you are allowed to continue being a member of this forum with your constant personal attacks and racist comments. But anyway you are arguing with me on a subject you clearly know nothing about, that water I pointed out is being used in the oilfield it's common knowledge in this area. They also buy water from property owners with dugouts that store water. Last time I had spoken to a property owner selling this water they were getting Several dollars per cube.

[wanderingman]

Hey wanderingman, I didn't see what you called me and frankly I don't understand how you are allowed to continue being a member of this forum with your constant personal attacks and racist comments. But anyway you are arguing with me on a subject you clearly know nothing about, that water I pointed out is being used in the oilfield it's common knowledge in this area. They also buy water from property owners with dugouts that store water. Last time I had spoken to a property owner selling this water they were getting Several dollars per cube.

believe what you want the link you gave was for purified drinking water that can be bought in bulk.Fracking companies are not and never would pay 9-12$ per 220 gallons of water for fracking
In reference to my(quote) racist comments ?? that's simply your personal interpetation ? I feel its just calling a spade a spade

there was over 17 million cu meters used in alberta that's 3 billion 740 millon gallons X12$= 44billion 880millon dollars
somehow I find that extremely hard to believe but as asked of you several times supply a reliable link

[Glacier]

People sure get all bent out of shape over nothing. Water is a natural renewable resource, and there is more than enough to go around. BC is not selling groundwater to Nestle. Instead, they are charging Nestle the cost of government administration associated with monitoring and regulating water use. Everyone wins because Nestle is providing jobs in British Columbia, and that is where the real money comes into government pockets.

[driveangry]

Would be nice if they threw in a few chocolate bars.

[Smurf]

Water is a natural resource just like lumber. They should be paying for it when they are using it commercially. You pay a farmer for his sand, dirt, gravel, whatever why not us for our water.

[Smurf]

Please explain why the government sees it is okay to charge BC Hydro for water that just flows straight through it's dams but doesn't charge Nestle for actually removing and selling the water. Okay I know, it is just another hidden tax the government puts on us, but by then same note why can't they make us a few bucks charging for the water.

[Glacier]

Water is a natural resource just like lumber. They should be paying for it when they are using it commercially. You pay a farmer for his sand, dirt, gravel, whatever why not us for our water.

First of all, if you start charging for it, then water becomes a commodity, which gets people really mad. Second, sand is not a renewable resource. Third, you do not own the sand on your land. I can make a claim for the minerals on your land, and I do not compensate your for the sand, but rather for the use of space on your land. If a water company sets up shop on a person's property, then they will be paying, not for the water but for the use of the land.

As for the hydro comment. Do they? If so, you don't understand how the real world works. If they charge too much for water, then the company will simply move to where they don't change for water, taking the jobs with them. Good luck moving a dam.

Think about what would happen if BC starts charging for water. The Americans (because of Free-Trade) will also be open to buying our water on the open market without our say.

[Smurf]

Glacier wrote:

First of all, if you start charging for it, then water becomes a commodity, which gets people really mad. Second, sand is not a renewable resource. Third, you do not own the sand on your land. I can make a claim for the minerals on your land, and I do not compensate your for the sand, but rather for the use of space on your land. If a water company sets up shop on a person's property, then they will be paying, not for the water but for the use of the land.

As for the hydro comment. Do they? If so, you don't understand how the real world works. If they charge too much for water, then the company will simply move to where they don't change for water, taking the jobs with them. Good luck moving a dam.

Think about what would happen if BC starts charging for water. The Americans (because of Free-Trade) will also be open to buying our water on the open market without our say.

I guess I am a lucky person because i still own the mineral rights to some property and I am paid for the gravel that is removed from it. Lucky me.

If you read above where I( stated that it shows the water charges in BC Hydro's financial statements you would know that they do. I also know for sure that the Manitoba government charges Manitoba Hydro the same way. They calculate the water that flows through the generating stations and charge accordingly.

I also believe you will find lots of areas that charge for irrigation water which would make it a commodity already.

[Glacier]

You are confused. The reason others charge for water is to pay for the environmental damage (in the case of dams) and to pay for the cost of delivering the water (irrigation).

[twobits]

Please explain why the government sees it is okay to charge BC Hydro for water that just flows straight through it's dams but doesn't charge Nestle for actually removing and selling the water. Okay I know, it is just another hidden tax the government puts on us, but by then same note why can't they make us a few bucks charging for the water.

Seems to me to be a rather moot point smurf. Water thru a dam is kinda like a Nestle bottle of water gone thru my kidneys. It is all recycled isn't it? Be it in the toilet or behind a tree, it's still a part of the fixed inventory isn't it?

[westbankkid]

Time for Christy to re-look at their cosy contract with Nestle. Apparently the Nestle plant in California has been drawing water from their wells without a legal permit. It had expired and was never renewed.

Not good corporate citizens. C'mon Christy. Get out of bed with them and charge properly for our resources.
Probably a good portion of Canadian water goes down South and they are making a fortune on it at the expense of the Citizens of BC.

$2.50 per million liters is a joke...Each 500ml bottle sells for .15 cents. 1,000,000 liters gives 2,000,000 bottles @ .15 equals $300,000.00. Hell of a ripoff of BC citizens I would say.

[gordon_as]

interesting

[Ccrider]

Metro Vancouver supplies 2.5 million people with water, and they charge users for every drop. They basically pay the same for their water, as anyone else that legally draws it from our lakes, streams, aquifers, and rivers; that being nothing. Most of the water that these companies put to good use, would otherwise flow into the sea anyway.

So what is it that Nestle has done, other than turn a natural resource into a consumer product, creating jobs and tax revenues? If you don't like what they're doing because you don't think that people should be drinking bottled water in the first place, then that's a different topic altogether, and should not be weighing in with this discussion.