What goes wrong between the source and tap?

Bottled water has become an essential part of everyday life, and discarded plastic water bottles now form a large part of our garbage output. Thailand’s drinking-water market is worth an estimated Bt19 billion annually and growing. All major beverage and soft-drink makers also sell bottled water. In addition to a handful of major drinking-water manufacturers, there are many other producers in the form of small and medium-sized enterprises. 

Bottled water is sold at about Bt10 per litre, compared to Bt0.01 per litre for tap water. That is a difference of 1,000 times. If people consumed less bottled water in favour of tap water, it would be good not only for their own finances, but also the environment. 

Consumers appear to trust drinking water in bottles and other containers more than tap water, despite repeated attempts by the water authorities to convince them that tap water is drinkable. Since 1999 both the Metropolitan Waterworks Authority (MWA) and the Provincial Waterworks Authority (PWA) have repeatedly assured the public that their tap water meets the World Health Organisation’s standard and therefore can be consumed straight from the tap. However, the ever-expanding drinking-water market is proof that the authorities’ attempts have largely failed.

This seems to be a global issue, even in developed countries where the tap-water pipe network is more reliable than in Thailand. In the United States, according to Annie Leonard, an American proponent of sustainability and a critic of excessive consumerism, people buy about 500 million bottles of drinking water every week, even though a third of bottled water in the US actually comes straight from the tap. Leonard presents such facts in her brief documentary “The Story of Bottled Water”.

The documentary says the US bottled-water industry manages to create “manufactured demand” by misleading consumers about tap water and seducing them towards bottled water. It says the industry scares people with its marketing tactic, the suggestion that tap water is unsafe for drinking, while creating a fancy image for bottled water. “When we’re done, tap water will be relegated to showers and washing dishes,” the documentary quotes a top industry executive as saying.

According to the quality-assurance methods used by the MWA and PWA, which are respectively responsible for supplying tap water in the Bangkok metropolitan area and the provinces, their water is safe enough for drinking without boiling or filtering. They test the quality every month, which is more frequently than many producers of bottled water. But consumers still suspect that tap water can be contaminated somewhere in the large network of pipes, many of which are ageing and situated underground. For peace of mind they boil tap water before drinking or use expensive filtering devices. 

The MWA has come up with a new plan to encourage more people to drink tap water. In addition to supplying drinkable water, the MWA vows to supply “good-taste tap water” within two years, timed to coincide with the advent of the Asean Economic Community. Advanced treatment methods, such as adding ozone or activated carbon, might be used, but the cost of supplying it will be three times higher. Nevertheless, the enhanced tap water will remain much cheaper than bottled water.

Why do consumers trust bottled water more than tap water? Is it because of concern about quality? Is it because of the bottled-water manufacturers’ success in creating “manufactured demand” for their products? Or is it because of the water authorities’ failure to convince people that tap water is safe for drinking? 

The answer could lie underground, in the vast network of tap-water pipes. It appears that people don’t question the quality of water at the plant of origin, but rather the way it comes out of the tap. To gain more trust from consumers, the authorities should constantly maintain their pipes and replace old ones. Also, they need to inform the public that they do so regularly.