[creato]

You aren't paying for the water, you are paying for the treatment of the water, and the infrastructure to get it to you. Nestle isn't using any of that treatment/infrastructure.

Don't get me wrong, I think bottled water is largely a huge waste (though it does have some uses as well, I don't think the whole industry should disappear). I just don't think this argument (that Nestle gets "free water") is compelling. These deals aren't comparable to tap water pricing, they're probably more comparable to agricultural use, and Nestle's usage is likely a rounding error in comparison (as pointed out by someone elsewhere in this thread).

[heisenbit]

How anyone spending a few mental cycles can believe the bottled water industry is anything but a rounding error of the agricultural industry is beyond me. But I guess that is the point: Distraction.

[creato]

You're kidding right? I would expect all drinking water combined to be a rounding error next to agriculture, and bottled water is a subset of that.

[ac29]

In Florida, drinking water [0] uses approximately as much water as agriculture [1]. By far the biggest use of water in Florida is "thermoelectric power" (burning things to generate steam, presumably), which is more than domestic and irrigation combined.

[0] There is no distinction between potable water that is ingested as opposed to used for showering and washing dishes, though.

[1] https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2018/3035/fs20183035.pdf