Yes, the water in the area is limited, and Nestle seems to be sucking up* quite a bit of it. One use of the taxes would be to counteract the effects of removing that much water from the area.
I can't walk into a national forest to cut trees for my firewood. Why should Nestle be able to take as much water as it wants for free? Taking public natural resources for the benefit of a single company requires some sort of payment by that company back to the public.
* the article introduced me to my new favorite phrase: leaky aquitard.
Bookmarks