Santos explains that the environmental issues “date back to the nineteenth century, when trappers, fishermen, and naturalists campaigned against the unrestrained exploitation of American’s pristine environmentals,” (Santos, 1999). Can we really give a date that this became a problem? All we know is that it has been an issue for many years. Most Americans do not realize that pollutants can harm our senses like sight, smell, and even taste. It can also cause health hazards.
The one question when thinking about water is what type of water will you drink? Many people in the world today are switching from drinking tap water to drinking bottled water, but I rather prefer tap water than bottled water. Bottles water is usually simple water from various sources which have been filtered. First, Bottled water is about 1,900 times more expensive than tap water according to the Environmental Working Group. Second, bottled water is harmful for human being and the environment according to the Environment Working Group.
“Cause and Effect” is a tool that David Suzuki prominently utilizes throughout his essay. This style of writing is appropriate for the essay because it points out the things that we take for granted and exposes the possible repercussions that may occur if we carelessly consume the finite resources our planet offers. Two examples of “Cause and Effect” are highlighted through our sewage systems and consumption of energy. Suzuki mentions that people often flush waste down the toilet without a single thought about where it may end up. The waste we flush away flows into streams and beaches that make it difficult for aquatic creatures to sustain life.
Running head: ORGANIZATIONAL ETHICS MBA 5211 Ethical Analysis of The Columbia Packing Company Heather A. Hill MBA 5211: Organizational Ethics Concordia University Texas, Austin TX January 2012 Faculty Assessor Dr. Barbara W. Scobey Summary. This paper explores the ethical dilemma that exists with the Columbia Packing Company, in which the company claims to have no prior knowledge of its many health code violations found by City officials. Part One of the paper provides a brief history of the company, as well as the company's initial statement regarding its alleged code violations. Part Two explains the discrepancy that exists between the company's public image and mission versus the unethical actions it has taken. Part Three discusses the recommendations and solution options.
Because all aspects of the production are dependent on this resource, from the company’s perspective water is the key component of profitability. 2/5 went into finished beverages and the rest went into the manufacturing process: to wash bottles, clean equipment, and provide sanitation for employees. The company used very large quantities of water as part of its operations, and there were concerns that it was operating in a non sustainable manner that was leading to depletion of water, shortage of which was becoming a critical issue across the world. However, Coca-Cola’s extensive use of water adversely impacted the surrounding communities - The Center for Science and the Environment, a think tank in India, charged that Coca Cola products there contained dangerous levels of pesticide residues. -Activists in India charged that the company’s bottling plants used too much water depriving local villagers of supplies for drinking and irrigation - Primary Stakeholders: Coca-Cola, local villagers, non-governmental organizations and India’s government - Expectations v. Performance: There were multiple concerns raised by stakeholders such as environment and government bodies, and various organizations that were creating awareness against the company due to the above discussed issues.
This prompted them to sell a drink which was good and healthy for Americans, water (Leonard, 2011). In doing so they had to manufacture a demand for bottled water; this was accomplished “through the use of scare tactics, seduction and misrepresentation” (Leonard, 2011). First they told us tap water was not healthy. It contained contaminants and toxins which scared Americans. The chairman of PepsiCo’s North American Beverage and Food division, Robert S
Assignment 2: The Coca-Cola Company Struggles with Ethical Crises Laurie Robin Dr. Jack Brown HRM522: Law, Ethics and Advocacy for HrPro February 3, 2012 The Coca-Cola Company Struggles With Ethical Cases Abstract The Coca-Cola Company is one of the most valuable brand names worldwide and has generally excelled as a business over its long history. However, the company has had difficulties meeting its financial obligations and has faced numerous ethical issues. Some companies have lost faith in the company. For example, Warren Buffet, a board member and supporter resigned from the board in 2006. Coca-Cola has been accused of unethical behavior in several areas such as product safety, anti-competitiveness, racial discrimination, channel stuffing, distributor conflicts, intimidation of union workers, pollution, and depletion of natural resources.
The company has historically received plenty of criticism regarding its treatment of employees, suppliers, and economic impacts on communities. Feminists, activists, and labor union leaders have all voiced their beliefs that Wal-Mart has engaged in misconduct in order to provide low prices. However, Wal-Mart has been turning over a new leaf. New emphases on diversity, charitable giving, and sustainability have contributed to Wal-Mart’s new image. Walmart has taken sustainability policy for being a greener company to address its environmental stakeholders.
Jesse Nichols Liza Wilcox Eng102-13 1/31/2012 Assignment #1: Argumentative Essay Bottled Water: More Harm than Good Water, one of the most essential things to life, has now become a product that companies can bottle and sell to consumers. These companies claim that bottled water has benefits that tap water does not. Do these companies discuss how much waste is produced or how good America’s tap water already is? There may be some benefits to drinking water from a bottle, but the costs are too much to continue supporting it. The out of pocket cost of drinking bottled water for the recommended 8 glasses a day would shock the average person.
This crude product is an approximately 25% solution of hydrofluosilicic acid and a highly toxic hazardous waste of the phosphate fertilizer industry. ii. The proper disposal of this chemical would have been extremely costly to the industry so the proposal that it could be used as a substitute for the originally favored chemical sodium fluoride, opened the door to the practice of administering it to the general public in the water supply under the guise of medication. B. At the heart of this debate is whether or not fluoridated water can be considered a medicine, thereby making it subject to strict government regulations and standards.