plastic bottles Archives

On May 22, PepsiCo, one of the world’s major plastic polluters, announced on its website that it will be eliminating its reusable packaging targets, while significantly dropping its goals to reduce virgin (new) plastic and recycled content. PepsiCo’s announcement follows a similar move made by top polluter Coca-Cola in December 2024.

In 2022, the PepsiCo company first publicly announced the goal of selling 20% of all its beverages through reusable systems by the year 2030. In 2023, PepsiCo reported that it had made only 10% of its packaging available in reusable formats, the same amount as when it set the goal back in 2022. The company says it now plans to track reusability under the umbrella term of “reusable, recyclable, or compostable packaging,” and aims to extend this to 97% of its products by 2030, down from their original commitment of 100% by 2025.

Additionally, PepsiCo had previously set a goal of using 50% recycled content in its plastic packaging by 2030, which the company has now dropped to a minimum of 40% by 2035. In its new announcement, the PepsiCo company, which sells a wide array of foods and snacks in addition to numerous beverages, also slashed its goal of reducing the amount of new fossil-fuel based plastic it uses by 20% by 2030 down to a dismal 2% each year through 2030.

It is urgent and necessary that companies expand non-toxic reusable, plastic-free packaging and refill systems while eliminating plastic and other wasteful single-use packaging. As one of the world’s most egregious plastic polluters, PepsiCo is shifting its goalposts in the wrong direction. More plastic ‘recycling’ won’t help solve plastic pollution, nor will switching to single-use bioplastics: the answer is less plastic and less single-use of all kinds, not more.

When PepsiCo launched more than 100 years ago, its flagship beverage was initially sold in glass bottles filled locally and as syrups mixed on the spot at soda fountains. The company began using single-use aluminum cans in the 1950s and single-use plastic bottles in the 1970s. Similarly, its earliest foods and snacks were sold in cardboard and wax paper. PepsiCo knows how to eliminate plastic because it has already proven it can sell products in plastic-free packaging.

— Dianna Cohen, Co-Founder and CEO, Plastic Pollution Coalition

By fusing together its packaging categories of reusable, recyclable, and compostable under one umbrella, PepsiCo further obfuscates its performance establishing reuse packaging and systems. And like other giant corporations selling beverages, foods, and snacks, PepsiCo continues to emphasize the industry-friendly narrative of plastic’s potential to be recycled rather than its actual recyclability. In truth, plastic was never designed to be recycled, is rarely recycled, and when used in beverage packaging has been shown to increase the levels of hazardous chemicals in drinks.

What’s more, PepsiCo prefaces these “refined” commitments” with “forward-looking statements” subject to change. Which makes them little more than voluntary goals.

Break Free from Plastic Movement members Greenpeace and Oceana have also responded to PepsiCo’s latest announcement.

The climate crisis coupled with plastic pollution is supercharging the intensity of wildfires—increasing their frequency, temperature, speed, and devastation. Plastic and other forms of pollution are major threats to our health, environment, and drinking water at all times, but especially during wildfires. Here’s what to know about plastic pollution and other types of hazardous pollution that can contaminate drinking water during wildfires—and what you can do to stay safe.

Drinking Water is Often Contaminated During and After Wildfires

An estimated 1 in 6 US residents live in areas with “significant wildfire risk,” and, consequently, an elevated risk of drinking water contamination. While many communities impacted by wildfires have faced drinking water contamination, it was only after California’s super-destructive 2017 Tubbs Fire and 2018 Camp Fire that experts recognized that the toxicity of chemicals found in drinking water after wildfires can be “comparable to hazardous waste.” In areas with minimal damage, drinking water contamination after wildfires can last weeks to months; in harder hit areas, contamination can last for years.

Wildfires and plastic pollution contaminate drinking water in compounding ways.

First, surface water supply can be contaminated by a toxic runoff mixture of ash and flame retardant used to suppress fires, as well as chemicals from burnt structures and plastic items.

Plastic pipes also contaminate drinking water. Plastics—specifically polyvinyl chloride (PVC)—are commonly used in many parts of the water system, including storage tanks, service lines that connect homes to water mains, and water meters. But when these plastic parts start to get hot, even at just 200–250°C (wildfires can reach 1200°C during extreme conditions), they break up and release volatile organic compounds (VOCs) into the water.

For example, after the Tubbs and Camp Fires, drinking water chemical contamination was widespread in the water distribution network but not in the source water after the fire. Later analysis confirmed that plastic pipes directly released toxic chemicals, including VOCs, into the water they carried.

Once VOCs are released into the water supply, there is a long-term threat of contamination. This is because heat-damaged plastic can both leach and absorb toxic chemicals, creating the possibility of recontamination until all chemicals have been flushed out. This process can jeopardize water safety for months.

Contamination can also spread beyond directly impacted pipes due to depressurization. Depressurization often occurs during wildfires for several reasons. First, the extra demand needed from the water system to fight fires decreases pressure. Loss of power can also decrease water pressure. Decreased pressure and overall damage to the water system can cause contaminated water to be pulled into water mains, spreading toxic chemicals into otherwise unaffected parts of the water system.

Chemicals Released Into Drinking Water During Wildfires Harm Human Health

The potential for widespread contamination of drinking water poses serious health risks.

Benzene, a VOC and known human carcinogen, is one of the most common chemicals found in drinking water after wildfires. It is released into drinking water from smoke and soot, as well as burned plastic—especially plastic pipes. Levels of benzene in the drinking water after the Tubbs and Camp Fires reached “8,000 times the federal drinking water limit and 200 times the level that causes immediate health effects,” such as vomiting, dizziness, convulsions, and unconsciousness. Beyond cancer, benzene can cause chronic illness such as blood disorders and reproductive problems. One pediatrician and epidemiologist stated that the levels found after the Camp Fire were “high enough to acutely give a child a blood disorder.”

Benzene isn’t the only threat. Leading researchers warn that more than 100 toxic chemicals have been found in contaminated drinking water after wildfires. All must be tested and accounted for to minimize the health risks to communities that have experienced fires. When contamination is detected, the first action most municipalities take is to issue a water advisory to households connected to public water. Unfortunately, contamination in private wells often needs to be monitored and addressed by the private well owner, but local utilities and health departments may be able to help advise testing and treatment.

What to Know About Water Advisories

Water systems issue different types of advisories after crises contaminate drinking water supply. Advisories are typically categorized as “Boil Water,” “Do Not Drink,” or “Do Not Use.”

A “Boil Water” advisory is issued when boiling water is able to kill the identified viruses and bacteria in contaminated water. Importantly, boiling or filtering water is unable to remove the chemicals released into drinking water after wildfires. An alert from the City of Pasadena, which issued a “Do Not Drink” water advisory after the Eaton fire, stated that “boiling, freezing, filtering, adding chlorine or other disinfectants, or letting water stand will not make the water safe to drink.”

Scientists are clear that only “Do Not Use” water advisories should be issued after wildfires potentially contaminate drinking water, and should not be lifted until comprehensive testing for the more than 100 possible VOCs and SVOCs (semi-volatile organic compounds) has routinely proven that water is safe. Even in minimally impacted parts of the water system, it can require months of testing and flushing to ensure safe water.

Water systems can retain trust during that time through proactive, robust, and diverse forms of communication, as well as a clear issuance of the “Do Not Use” advisory at the beginning of a crisis. A survey conducted after the 2023 fires in Lahaina, Maui, found that all households “expressed concerns or confusion about drinking water safety.” The Maui County Department of Water Supply had issued an “Unsafe Water Advisory,” but many residents were unaware of such a recommendation. After the Tubbs Fire, delayed and incomplete testing caused utilities to change the severity of its water advisory from “Boil Water” to “Do Not Drink,” leading to mistrust and confusion among Santa Rosa residents who were impacted by the blaze. Improper communication can cause that mistrust to last for long after tap water is deemed safe and lead to needless, years-long use of plastic bottled water. Communities must be informed how wildfires damage water quality, and be provided safe alternatives immediately.

How to Stay Safe During a “Do Not Drink” or “Do Not Use” Water Advisory

The first step residents impacted by wildfires should take is to check their local water system for an advisory and find the recommendations for their unique area.

Unfortunately, the default Emergency Drinking Water Supply (EDWS) for communities after water systems issue “Do Not Drink” or “Do Not Use” water advisories is often plastic bottled water. This is partially because filters, which are the safest solution to protect against lead, PFAS, and other pollutants like microplastics in most scenarios, are unable to eliminate the mixture of toxic contaminants often present in water after wildfires. It is important to follow your water system’s local advisory and recommendations for acquiring safe drinking water, even if that means bottled water is your only accessible option after wildfires.

But plastic bottled water has its own serious health costs, releasing microplastics and plastic chemicals into our bodies, in addition to harming the planet. Further, despite bottled water’s institutionalization as the leading emergency drinking water solution, there are safer and less expensive alternatives.

Plastic PET bottles are even more likely to leach toxic chemicals if they are recycled, or are kept in warm environments, are exposed to sunlight, or are reused.
Pallets of plastic water for emergencies are often staged in hot warehouses.
Bottled water takes an estimated 2,000 times more energy to produce than tap water. It also requires between 17 and 35 liters of water to make a single plastic bottle.
The plastic water bottle industry worsens droughts and equitable water access, including in California.
State and local governments buy emergency bottled water at market rates, which are up to 156 times the cost of tap water. This also leaves communities vulnerable to price-gouging.
If state and local governments do not assume the responsibility of ensuring residents receive water, residents are left with the cost of buying enough bottled water to cover their needs.

States and local water systems can make system changes to wildfire preparation and response such that they do not need to recommend or distribute bottled water.

Local water systems can better ensure safe drinking water in emergencies without plastic pollution by:

(1) Considering the Distribution of Hauled and Bulk Water

States and municipalities should consider contracting one or more potable water tanker companies in advance to supply safe water after wildfires. This could be paired with hauling water from nearby water systems if they are determined to be unimpacted by the wildfires.

Hauled and bulk water can be distributed at various sites throughout an affected area in much the same way packs of plastic bottles often are, but municipalities should plan for diverse modes of reach to ensure equitable and accessible distribution.

Though many communities already use bulk water after emergencies, more research is needed on how best to plan and implement its distribution. The successful reach of similarly deployed portable water treatment systems, such as WaterStep’s Emergency Mobile Drinking Water Treatment System (used after Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico knocked out some residents’ water access for months), proves a powerful example for the potential of hauled water. The need for safe drinking water without the health threats of plastic pollution calls for more attention, research, and investment to be put towards this solution.

(2) Installing Plastic-Free Pipes: Stopping Contamination at the Source

States and municipalities must replace PVC and PEX plastic pipes with safe materials, such as copper, that do not release toxic chemicals when exposed to high heat. Plastic pipes are a health threat at every stage of existence.

Manufacturing PVC uses highly toxic mercury, forever chemicals (like PFAS), and asbestos. These chemicals are released into the environment and accumulate in our bodies, causing a range of health problems, like cancer and lung damage. Other toxic substances and probable carcinogens like vinyl chloride and ethylene dichloride are released into the atmosphere during PVC production. Vinyl chloride was the extremely dangerous chemical that burned in the East Palestine train disaster.

Firefighters have urged “developers, builders and code officials to reduce and restrict the use of plastics in building construction,” including plastic pipes, further stating that “there are plenty of safe, sustainable and recyclable materials available today that don’t pose health risks to workers or the public.”

The EPA has echoed this call, as its Incident Action Checklist for utilities to consult after wildfires recommends the removal of all plastic pipes, meter boxes, meters, and tanks and their replacement with “more fire-resistant materials, like metals.”

As municipalities work to replace burnt plastic pipes, it is paramount that they do not replace the problem with its cause.

(3) Taking Additional Measures for States and Municipalities at Risk of Wildfires

Form partnerships with neighboring water systems: Establishing relationships with other utilities in advance can aid in resource, staff, and expertise sharing when emergencies arise. Nearby safe water systems could also help provide hauled water to impacted communities.
Provide housing to impacted residents: For those displaced by wildfires, temporary housing often serves as the primary mechanism for safe and reliable water access.
Isolate contaminated pipes: Utilities can prevent the spread of contaminated water through the installation of one-way valves that can shut off water flow from damaged areas before they reach water mains. This practice could ensure greater use of tap water in nearby areas after wildfires.

Resources for People Affected by the 2025 Los Angeles Wildfires

Wildfires can make water unsafe to use for months after initial impact. As communities begin to recover from the devastating, climate-crisis fueled wildfires that destroyed the lives and livelihoods of millions across Southern California, access to safe, clean water is vital. Below are resources to consult for more information on how the wildfires are impacting water quality in Los Angeles County.

LA ist compiled a “Cheat Sheet” of information on current notices in LA County, types of advisories, distribution sites, and water system contacts.
This Los Angeles County Water Systems Governance Map can help residents find which water system they are under, and is available for use in both Spanish and English.

Take Action

All of us, even those who are not immediately impacted by wildfires, face increasing health risks from our increasingly plastic- and chemical-filled landscape and culture. It is crucial that our government representatives protect people and the planet by holding polluters accountable with better pollution monitoring and regulation, and by mandating a drastic reduction in plastic and chemical production globally. A strong UN Plastics Treaty would expedite this necessary systems shift. Urge the leaders of the world’s biggest plastic-polluting country—the US Government—to support such an agreement to end plastic pollution today.

Sign the Petition

Washington, D.C. — Plastic Pollution Coalition filed a lawsuit in the District of Columbia Superior Court today against Danone Waters of America, LLC, maker of evian bottled water headquartered in the United States, for false and deceptive marketing in violation of the District of Columbia’s Consumer Protection Procedures Act (CPPA). Danone Waters of America promotes evian as “sustainable,” “natural,” and “healthy,” despite these products containing health-harming microplastics and plastic chemical bisphenol-A (BPA), and creating plastic pollution.

An independent laboratory evaluation revealed both microplastics and bisphenol-A (BPA) in evian “natural” bottled water products—and microplastics and BPA are far from natural or healthy. Over the past several years, scientists have detected the presence of tiny plastic particles throughout the human body, and have found their presence linked to fertility issues, heart attack, neurodegenerative disorders, stroke, other serious health problems, and even death. BPA and other bisphenols, which are added to plastics to increase their rigidity, are known to disrupt the human endocrine (hormone) systems, and have been identified as among the most concerning of the more than 16,000 chemicals that are added to plastics.

In addition to touting the “natural” qualities of its water on its consumer-facing website for evian, Danone Waters of America pledges that the brand is “committed to preserving [the environment] through long-lasting sustainability initiatives.” While the corporation boasts that it has “a history of sustainability,” its production of plastic bottled water is inherently unsustainable—and Plastic Pollution Coalition believes that it has not made any significant effort to address the plastic pollution it produces.

Instead, as alleged in Plastic Pollution Coalition’s lawsuit, Danone Waters of America perpetuates misleading industry narratives around plastic recycling by advertising its evian products as “100% recyclable” and including “Made from 100% Recycled Plastic” on product packaging. However, plastic is not designed to be recycled, and most plastic items, including plastic bottles, that are collected for recycling are never actually recycled. Instead, plastics collected for recycling are most often sent to landfills or incinerators, or are shipped overseas, perpetuating plastic production and its resultant plastic pollution, and environmental injustices.

People in the U.S. and all over the world are increasingly looking for products that are better for the environment and their health. Bottled water companies continue to capitalize on the healthiness of water—despite the significant toxic toll that the plastic bottles they package the water in takes on our planet and our bodies. The claims these companies make about their products being ‘sustainable’ and ‘natural’ are inaccurate and misleading to consumers.
— Julia Cohen, Co-founder and Managing Director of Plastic Pollution Coalition

We will continue to insist that corporations, like Danone, be honest with consumers about their products, especially when it comes to human and environmental health. There is nothing ‘natural’ about water containing petrochemical products and there is nothing ‘sustainable’ about single-use plastic bottles.
— Sumona Majumdar, Chief Executive Officer of Earth Island Institute

Danone Waters of America is a subsidiary of French multinational food corporation Danone. According to its evian consumer-facing website, Danone began importing evian Products from France into the United States and Canada in 1978, and the evian brand is now sold in more than 140 countries. In 2023 Danone was the #2 seller in packaged waters worldwide, and its evian bottled water was the corporation’s #2 selling bottled water, after its Aqua brand according to its annual report.

Plastic pollution is an urgent global crisis threatening human and environmental health on a massive scale, from the plastic-producing petrochemical plants that disproportionately impact communities of color and low-income communities to the plastic waste that is often dumped in developing countries to the toxic microplastics invading our bodies, which have been shown to contribute to cancer, neurotoxicity, reproductive issues, endocrine disruption, and genetic problems.

Plastic Pollution Coalition is represented by Richman Law & Policy, which specializes in consumer protection law.

Water filter distribution is critical to provide safe, clean drinking water to U.S. communities during water crises without causing massive amounts of plastic pollution.

Aging infrastructure, natural disasters, toxic contaminants, and a severe lack of funding are just some of the crises U.S. water systems are facing that result in unsafe water for disproportionately Black, Brown, and low-income communities. Without a reliable clean water source, many families have turned to purchasing single-use plastic water bottles for cooking, washing, and drinking in the hopes of protecting their children and family members from polluted water.

However, single use-plastic water bottles are an expensive additional financial cost to families, and filtered tap water is far more affordable. This, in addition to the harmful health costs of consuming water from plastic bottles that can release nano & microplastics into the water, along with toxic plastic additive chemicals. Filters, not bottles, can provide a safe, affordable water solution, especially during the U.S. lead service line replacement.

Filtered Not Bottled Water Could Prevent the Use of Hundreds of Billions of Single-Use Plastic Bottles

Water systems must implement a “filter first” strategy, providing a filter certified to remove lead to impacted households to provide an immediate safe water source. World health experts agree there is no safe level of lead exposure, especially for children who can face irreversible health consequences from even low levels of exposure. While there have been significant advancements in recent years on lead service line replacement (LSLR), it will still be 10 years before many cities replace their last lead line, and over 40 years for cities like Chicago to have clean drinking water.

Providing filters to families impacted by lead service line replacement in the U.S. could provide an immediate clean water source while preventing the use of hundreds of billions of single-use plastic bottles over the course of the project. Supplying the 22 million impacted people in the United States with single-use plastic water bottles for just six months would require over 32 billion water bottles. Ensuring expedient distribution of filters and proper education is critical to provide families with safe, clean drinking water as soon as possible without polluting single-use plastics.

EPA Lead and Copper Rule Improvement Must Go Further with Filters

On November 30, 2023, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released the Draft Lead and Copper Rule Improvement (LCRI), a strengthened version of the Lead and Copper Rule created to control lead and copper in drinking water. As strongly recommended by Plastic Pollution Coalition, the drafted rule requires water systems with consistently high levels of lead to make available filters certified to remove lead from water, rather than single-use water bottles. This is a significant step forward. However, the draft language on filters does not go far enough to provide clean water to impacted communities. The LCRI draft must be strengthened to:

Require water systems to fund the purchase and distribution of filters to customers.
Require water systems to provide in-depth education materials and training on filter efficacy, and filter use and maintenance.
Reduce the number of lead action level exceedances and time period required in order to mandate filter distribution, as well as the time for filter program implementation.

Water systems must actively distribute water filters to lead-impacted homes. “Making filters available” as currently mandated in the draft LCRI is simply not enough. Education materials and training must also be provided on filter efficacy and filter use and maintenance. Community trust in water filters and accurate servicing of the filter is critical to ensure families don’t turn to costly polluting single-use plastic water bottles or improperly use the filters, resulting in exposure to unsafe water contaminants. Proper distribution and education is critical to ensuring customers can access, trust, and properly use their filter, as seen in Denver, Colorado where, with advanced distribution and education measures, Denver achieved 80% filter adoption rates.

The EPA must also minimize the period that families must wait for a filter by reducing the time and number of lead level exceedances required to constitute “consistently high levels of lead” and expedite filter program implementation as any amount of lead exposure is unsafe. A “filter first” approach will ensure families have access to clean, safe drinking water in the many years to come as the LCRI is implemented and lead service lines are replaced.

Additional Measures Must Be Taken

Additionally, Plastic Pollution Coalition, along with Beyond Plastics, calls on EPA to provide recommendations for safe replacement pipe materials such as recycled copper and stainless steel, and advise against dangerous alternatives such as PVC and CPVC plastic pipes, which introduce another source of plastic pollution into peoples’ lives. These materials are an environmental injustice nightmare, as evidenced by the derailment of a train carrying vinyl chloride almost one year ago in East Palestine, Ohio, and can leach dangerous contaminants into the water they transport such as vinyl chloride and microplastics.

We also support calls for EPA to reduce the lead action level from 10 to 5 ppb and require water systems to pay for full service line replacement. This is a critical opportunity for EPA to increase clean water access without the distribution and pollution of toxic plastic bottles and pipes.