It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
In the subtitled video below, from several years back, Brabeck discusses his views on water, as well as some interesting comments concerning his view of Nature — that it is “pitiless” — and, of course, the obligatory statement that organic food is bad and GM is great. In fact, according to Brabeck, you are essentially an extremist to hold views opposite to his own.
His statements are important to review as we continue to see the world around us become reshaped into a more mechanized environment in order to stave off that pitiless Nature to which he refers. The conclusion to this segment is perhaps the most revealing about Brabeck’s worldview, as he highlights a clip of one of his factory operations.
Evidently, the savior-like role of the Nestlé Group in ensuring the health of the global population should be graciously welcomed. Are you convinced?
The U.S. Forest Service has long been allowing Nestle to pipe water out of the national forest from a collection of wells using a permit that lists an expiration date of 1988. The company has been paying the San Bernardino National Forest an annual permit fee of $524, and the water has continued to flow, even as the drought has prompted questions about the potential impacts on a stream and wildlife in the national forest.
The documents — including letters, emails, an audit presentation, and notes of meetings — reveal that officials failed to follow through on plans for a permit review that would have involved assessing the environmental impacts of drawing water from the national forest. During one meeting, some in the agency questioned the legal basis for the company’s use of water from the forest.
But the Forest Service ultimately authorized Nestle to keep using its wells and water lines, and also permitted the company to rebuild flood-damaged pipelines — even as the permit issue was left unresolved.
Nestle runs five bottling plants in California out of a total of 111 bottled water plants that are licensed by the state’s Department of Public Health. Nestle says its business in California uses about 700 million gallons of water a year, some of that drawn from springs. There’s only one place where the company holds a permit to pipe water across a national forest: in the rocky canyon along Strawberry Creek, north of San Bernardino.
The agency, however, has reassessed some other water permits in the national forest. In the mid-2000s, for instance, the Forest Service went through the permits of hundreds of cabins and reexamined their use of water from creeks. In Barton Flats, dozens of cabin owners were told they could no longer draw water from a creek and instead would have to use wells or install tanks and truck in water. Cabin owners spent thousands of dollars putting in tanks.
The price of a litre of bottled water in B.C. is often higher than a litre of gasoline. However, the price paid by the world’s largest bottled water company for taking 265 million litres of fresh water every year from a well in the Fraser Valley — not a cent. Because of B.C.’s lack of groundwater regulation, Nestlé Waters Canada — a division of the multi-billion-dollar Switzerland-based Nestlé Group, the world’s largest food company — is not required to measure, report, or pay a penny for the millions of litres of water it draws from Hope and then sells across Western Canada. According to the provincial Ministry of Environment, “B.C. is the only jurisdiction in Canada that doesn’t regulate groundwater use.”
originally posted by: ignorant_ape
hmm - so the total water abstraction by nestle [ california ] would "irrigate 852 acres "
thats going to make a huge difference to the fate of 25 MILLION acres of californian agricultural land
context is everything i am not making any other claim - but screaming at nestle california is not going to fix californias water problem is it ?
February 16, 2009, Gaddafi took a step further and called on Libyans to back his proposal to dismantle the government and to distribute the oil wealth directly to the 5 million inhabitants of the country.
However, his plan to deliver oil revenues directly to the Libyan people met opposition by senior officials who could lose their jobs due to a parallel plan by Gaddafi to rid the state of corruption.
Some officials, including Prime Minister Al-Baghdadi, Ali Al-Mahmoudi and Farhat Omar Bin Guida, of the Central Bank, told Gaddafi that the measure could harm the country's economy in the long term due to "capital flight."
"Do not be afraid to directly redistribute the oil money and create fairer governance structures that respond to people's interests," Gaddafi said in a Popular Committee.
The Popular Committees are the backbone of Libya. Through them citizens are represented at the district level.
"The Administration has failed and the state's economy has failed. Enough is enough. The solution is for the Libyan people to directly receive oil revenues and decide what to do with them," Gaddafi said in a speech broadcast on state television. To this end, the Libyan leader urged a radical reform of government bureaucracy....
Given the rejection of the Committee, Gaddafi affirmed before a public meeting: "My dream during all these years was to give the power and wealth directly to the people."
originally posted by: ignorant_ape
a reply to: jude11
i have not lost anything - read my post - i did a calc for the total for nestles california operations - as detailed in your op .
the permit is irrelevant - as is the timescale - as your op talks about / year abstraction and per year irrigation needs
like i said - read my post - it does address the issue