Starbucks 'wasting 23 million litres of water a day'

Celticfire

Starbucks has today been accused of wasting more than 23 million litres of water every day.

The coffee chain, which prides itself on being green, has a health and safety policy of leaving taps running in all of its 10,000 branches worldwide it has been revealed today.

The company policy prohibits staff from turning off a cold tap behind the counter called a 'dipper well'.

This means that Starbucks is wasting roughly 23.4 million litres of water on a daily basis. That's enough water to quench the thirst of the entire population of drought-stricken Namibia.

In Britain where there are just fewer than 700 branches of the coffee shop, 1.6 million litres are wasted every day.

Starbucks bosses claim that the flow of water stops germs from festering in the taps.

Peter Robinson of environmental charity Waste Water told The Sun: "Leaving taps running all day is a shocking waste of precious water. And to claim you are doing it for health and safety reasons is bonkers."

But they give you their used coffee grounds for your compost heap for free so that balances everything out.....

BendiBus

Celticfire wrote: »

But they give you their used coffee grounds for your compost heap

Best place for Starbucks coffee if you ask me :pac:

KTRIC

I'm going to go out and kill some people tonight because it will offset my carbon footprint with less people on the planet.

Macha

KTRIC wrote: »

I'm going to go out and kill some people tonight because it will offset my carbon footprint with less people on the planet.

In Munich? Nah, you'd do more good over here. Or the US :pac:

Celticfire

BendiBus wrote: »

Best place for Starbucks coffee if you ask me :pac:

+1

Macha

Actually, they do this in Ben & Jerry's icecream places as well..at least in the cinemas I've been to.

Jimkel

Celticfire wrote: »

But they give you their used coffee grounds for your compost heap for free so that balances everything out.....

its not wasted buddy, it evaporates and returns to our oceans.

Jemmy

I couldnt believe this when i heard it this morning, its ridiculous.

This really annoys me, its like the people over the summer in the town where i work with sprinklers on!

HELLO did they not see the bloody rain falling all summer? No need for them!






All for the water charges here!

Celticfire

Jimkel wrote: »

its not wasted buddy, it evaporates and returns to our oceans.

well thank goodness for that, I just thought it went into a hole in the ground never to be seen again :rolleyes:

Jimkel

So you agree. so whats the issue?

kmart6

No wonder my shower pressure has been low recently!!

barnicles

kmart6 wrote: »

No wonder my shower pressure has been low recently!!

Lol!!

Del2005

Jemmy wrote: »

I couldnt believe this when i heard it this morning, its ridiculous.

This really annoys me, its like the people over the summer in the town where i work with sprinklers on!

HELLO did they not see the bloody rain falling all summer? No need for them!

Last time I was in the States it was the start of summer. We used to be walking in p!ssing rain and have to dodge sprinlers soaking the road/sidewalk/carpark and the area they where watering wasn't that big.

All for the water charges here!

Since most other countries already charge for water adding charges here won't stop them running taps in the USA or anywhere else.

Jemmy

Del2005 wrote: »

Last time I was in the States it was the start of summer. We used to be walking in p!ssing rain and have to dodge sprinlers soaking the road/sidewalk/carpark and the area they where watering wasn't that big.

I cant believe peoples stupidity. I mean i wouldnt be a real eco person, i recycling what i can and the like. But using a sprinkler when its already lashing down 90% of the time is just ridiculous. :eek:

Del2005 wrote: »

Since most other countries already charge for water adding charges here won't stop them running taps in the USA or anywhere else.

Well it might make a bit of a difference. I know it will where im thinking of! :rolleyes:;)

Wertz

Jemmy wrote: »

All for the water charges here!

I would be to an extent...after a generous and sustainable personal allowance is applied for every person in the land.
As for in this case? Starmucks would have already been paying for the water they were "using" in this country since they'd be renting a commercial property and treated as a business...

Cookie_Monster

Jimkel wrote: »

So you agree. so whats the issue?

The cost to collect, treat, pump and distribute it....

robtri

A few people here seem to have a problem with Starbucks doing this, has anybody here rang starbucks HQ and asked them about it?????

lostexpectation

i wish they'd ask somebody in the industry before there put out press releases on this.