Coca-Cola's Water Pollution: The Real Cost Of A Soda

Coca-Cola has been the subject of intense scrutiny in recent years due to its impact on water resources and the environment. The company's operations have been blamed for exacerbating water shortages and polluting water sources in various parts of the world, particularly in water-stressed regions. Coca-Cola's water usage and its effect on local communities have sparked protests and campaigns, with accusations of drying up wells and agricultural land. The company has also faced criticism for its plastic waste and contribution to planet-heating emissions, earning the title of the 'world's most polluting brand' in a plastic waste audit. This has led to growing concerns about Coca-Cola's sustainability practices and the accuracy of its reported water record.

Coca-Cola's impact on water resources in India

One notable example is the village of Kaladera in Rajasthan, where Coca-Cola established a bottling plant in 1999. Official government documents reveal that water levels in the area remained stable from 1995 to 2000, but after the Coca-Cola plant became operational, water levels dropped significantly, declining by almost 10 meters over the next five years. This has had a detrimental impact on local farmers who rely on groundwater for their crops, leading to protests and campaigns against the company.

Similar issues have been reported in other parts of India, such as Plachimada in Kerala. Persistent droughts have dried up groundwater and local wells, with residents blaming the nearby Coca-Cola bottling plant established in 1998 for the lack of groundwater. The situation has become so dire that the government has had to intervene by supplying water to the affected communities.

Coca-Cola has also faced accusations of water depletion in the state of Uttar Pradesh, where excessive groundwater pumping led to the closure of the Mehdiganj plant in 2014. Despite the company's efforts to address water depletion through a replacement program, dry monsoons continue to highlight the severity of the issue.

In addition to water depletion, Coca-Cola has been criticized for the presence of pesticides in its products. The Centre for Science and Environment (CSE) in India tested carbonated beverages from Coca-Cola and found a cocktail of pesticides in all samples, raising concerns about public health.

Beyond India, Coca-Cola has been accused of exhausting water resources in other parts of the world, such as El Salvador and Chiapas, Mexico. The company's operations have also been linked to community dehydration, the destruction of local agriculture, and violations of workers' rights in countries like Colombia, Turkey, Guatemala, and Russia.

While Coca-Cola has made commitments to sustainability and recycling, investigations have revealed that the company has exaggerated its water record. The company's plastic pollution has also been widely criticized, with Coca-Cola being named the world's largest plastic polluter in a recent audit.

Coca-Cola's plastic pollution

Coca-Cola has been named the world's most polluting brand in plastic waste audits. The company produces almost one-quarter of the world's single-use PET plastic bottles. Coca-Cola's plastic bottles, caps, and wrappers have been the most commonly found branded plastic pollution in the environment for the last six years, according to Break Free From Plastic Brand Audits. The company's widespread use of single-use plastic bottles has contributed significantly to the global plastic pollution crisis.

Coca-Cola has been taken to court over its greenwashed claims, as they mislead consumers and mask its culpability in plastic pollution. The company has been accused of grossly exaggerating its water record. Coca-Cola's reliance on plastic "recycling" is also problematic, as plastic "recycling" is widely recognized as greenwashing and does not actually solve plastic pollution. Less than 9% of all plastic ever made has been recycled. Coca-Cola and other major plastic-polluting corporations continue to lobby to block solutions that would reduce plastic pollution, actually undermining plastic recycling efforts and instead supporting increased plastic production.

In 2022, Coca-Cola committed to making 25% of its packaging reusable by 2030. However, in a recent announcement, the company dropped its reuse targets and decreased its plastic recycling goals. The company now aims to use 30–35% recycled plastic to make its bottles by 2035 and will partner to collect 70–75% of the equivalent number of bottles and cans produced annually. Coca-Cola's plastic pollution is emblematic of plastic itself. It appears to be clean, shiny, and convenient, but the truth is that plastic is not healthy at all.

Coca-Cola's operations have also been blamed for exacerbating water shortages in regions that suffer from a lack of water resources and rainfall. Coca-Cola's activities are having a serious negative impact on farmers and local communities. The company has been accused of exhausting water resources and taking control of community water resources. Coca-Cola's pursuit of water resources to feed its plants is also drying up farmers' wells and destroying local agriculture.

Coca-Cola's water accounting

Coca-Cola has been accused of polluting water sources and negatively impacting water supplies in several countries. The company has a large water footprint, as it takes nearly three litres of water to produce one litre of Coca-Cola. This has led to accusations of exacerbating water shortages and negatively impacting local communities and farmers, particularly in water-stressed regions.

In response to these criticisms, Coca-Cola has made efforts to improve its water stewardship and has set targets for sustainable water use and recycling. The company has announced plans to recycle 100% of its packaging by 2030 and claims to have achieved water neutrality. However, investigations have revealed that Coca-Cola has been exaggerating its water record and engaging in "water accounting sleight of hand".

The concept of "net green" water use, for example, allows the company to subtract the amount of water that would have been absorbed by natural vegetation if it hadn't been replaced by a sugar plantation or other crop. This method can significantly reduce a company's overall water footprint, even though industrial-scale farming is linked to water pollution and sustainability issues.

Coca-Cola has also been accused of greenwashing, or presenting a false image of environmental responsibility through its marketing campaigns. Despite its efforts to improve water sustainability, the company has been named the largest plastic polluter in a recent plastic waste audit, highlighting the need for a more comprehensive approach to addressing its environmental impact.

To enhance its water stewardship programs, Coca-Cola has recognised the importance of measuring the value of water replenishment and conservation projects. The company has developed tools to assess the additional ecosystem benefits of these projects, such as water regulation, improved habitats, and flood protection. By quantifying and measuring these impacts, Coca-Cola aims to optimise replenishment, drive future investments, and communicate project outcomes beyond simply capturing volumes of water returned to nature.

Coca-Cola's exploitation of water resources in El Salvador and Chiapas

Coca-Cola has been accused of exploiting water resources in El Salvador and Chiapas, leading to water shortages and environmental damage. In El Salvador, the company has been accused of exhausting water resources over a 25-year period in the Nejapa municipality, an ecologically critical zone with one of the country's largest aquifers. Despite the abundance of water resources in the area, locals struggle to access clean drinking water, with companies like Coca-Cola making millions from bottling water and fizzy drinks for distribution. The situation in El Salvador highlights the tension between corporate interests and community needs, as big businesses exploit water resources for profit while locals face extreme water poverty.

In Chiapas, Mexico, Coca-Cola has come under fire for its bottling plant in San Cristóbal de las Casas, which has permits to extract more than 300,000 gallons of water a day from local sources, including the Huitepec volcano basin. This extraction has disrupted water access for locals, who already face water scarcity due to the region's drought conditions. The New York Times exposed how the company's activities have led to citizens being more reliant on Coca-Cola products for hydration, resulting in health complications such as diabetes. Chiapas locals, such as the indigenous community of San Felipe Ecatepec, have to travel long distances to find clean drinking water, highlighting the inequality between their access to water and the abundance available to the bottling plant.

Coca-Cola's operations in both El Salvador and Chiapas exemplify a broader trend of corporate exploitation of natural resources and government complicity. The company's pursuit of water resources to feed its plants can lead to the dehydration of communities, drying up of wells, and destruction of local agriculture. This is particularly detrimental in regions already suffering from a lack of water resources and rainfall, exacerbating existing water shortages and impacting farmers and local communities who rely on groundwater for their crops.

Coca-Cola's response to these issues has been controversial. While the company has acknowledged the importance of water sustainability and set goals for recycling and reducing water usage, investigations have revealed that Coca-Cola has exaggerated its water record. The company's sustainability claims have been questioned, with critics arguing that Coca-Cola engages in "water accounting sleight of hand" to make its water footprint appear smaller than it is. Additionally, Coca-Cola's presence in communities can lead to cultural changes, with the drink becoming embedded in local traditions and religious ceremonies, further complicating efforts to address water access issues.

Coca-Cola's impact on water resources in Colombia, Turkey, Guatemala and Russia

Coca-Cola's impact on water resources has been a highly debated topic, with the company facing accusations of exacerbating water shortages and violating workers' rights in several countries, including Colombia, Turkey, Guatemala, and Russia.

In Colombia, Coca-Cola has been accused of exploiting water resources and engaging in anti-union activities. The company has been linked to the use of paramilitaries to intimidate and torture trade unionists, with eight Coca-Cola workers killed since 1990. The main trade union, Sinaltrainal, is seeking to hold Coca-Cola liable for these actions.

In Turkey, Coca-Cola is facing legal action on behalf of transport workers and their families, who accuse the company of intimidation and torture by special branch police. The company has also been accused of anti-union policies and denying workers the right to organize.

In Guatemala, while there is limited direct information on Coca-Cola's impact on water resources, the company has been accused of violating workers' rights and engaging in anti-union activities. Guatemalan workers have faced challenges in their efforts to unionize and advocate for their rights.

In Russia, Coca-Cola has demonstrated a commitment to sustainable development and water conservation. They have implemented innovative water reuse technology and closed water supply systems to maximize water conservation and return water used in production back into the environment. The company has also invested in purification technologies and water protection projects. However, Coca-Cola has faced protests and criticism in Russia for its anti-union policies and the disruption of local water resources.

Coca-Cola's impact on water resources in these four countries highlights the complex dynamics between corporate operations, environmental sustainability, and social responsibility. While the company has made strides towards sustainable water usage in Russia, it faces ongoing accusations of water exploitation and union rights violations in Colombia, Turkey, and Guatemala, underscoring the need for continuous improvement in environmental and social governance.

Frequently asked questions