[ECP] NetHappenings 3.25.19 water

WATER

Poland Spring accused of defrauding consumers by peddling water from ‘phony’ springs
“Not one drop” of Poland Spring water is spring-fed, claims the 325-page lawsuit on behalf of consumers from Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania and Rhode Island.

A federal judge in Connecticut on Thursday gave the green light to a class-action lawsuit claiming the bottled water company’s owner, Nestle SA, defrauded customers by filling their bottles with ordinary groundwater

The Science of Flint’s Water Crisis
https://youtu.be/BAIXmt58iBU
In 2015 and 2016, headlines throughout the United States were captured by a human-made water crisis in Flint, Michigan: a chain of events that resulted in the city’s approximately 100,000 residents being exposed to dangerous levels of lead contamination in their tap water due to financial decisions made at the state level.

A DIY Groundwater Model
https://www.sciencefriday.com/educational-resources/diy-groundwater-model In many places, water for municipal and household use comes from underground aquifers. If the groundwater in such a place became contaminated, the consequences could easily affect entire cities or more.

National Drinking Water Alliance https://www.drinkingwateralliance.org Readers interested in learning more about water safety and policy in the United States may want to check out the National Drinking Water Alliance (NDWA). This network of organizations aims to “ensure that all children in the U.S. can drink safe water in the places where they live, learn and play” and describes its website as “the nationwide clearinghouse for essential drinking water research and resources.”

The Center for Great Lakes Literacy https://www.cgll.org
North America’s Great Lakes account for approximately 20 percent of the world’s surface freshwater an excellent educational resource.

2016 The Resnicks’ Kern County Water Bank water deal.

A legal cloud has long shadowed the Resnicks’ water deal. The Kern County Water Bank was originally acquired in 1988 by the state to serve as an emergency water supply for the Los Angeles area—at a cost to taxpayers of $148 million in today’s dollars.

In 2014, a judge ruled that the Department of Water Resources had turned the water bank over to the farmers without properly analyzing environmental impacts.

A new environmental review is due next month, and a coalition of environmental groups and water agencies is suing to return the water bank to public ownership. Adam Keats, senior attorney at the Center for Food Safety, describes the transfer of the water bank to the Resnicks and other farmers as “an unconstitutional rip-off.”
And here’s a key fact to consider against this backdrop: The Resnicks aren’t just pumping to irrigate their fruit and nut trees—they’re also in the business of farming water itself. Their land came with decades-old contracts with the state and federal government that allow them to purchase water piped south by state canals. The Kern Water Bank gave them the ability to store this water and sell it back to the state at a premium in times of drought.
http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2016/04/lynda-stewart-resnick-california-water

2016 Resnick’s bought H2O $28 sold $196 to CA during drought $30 million profit.

According to an investigation by the Contra Costa Times, between 2000 and 2007 the Resnicks bought water for potentially as little as $28 per acre-foot (the amount needed to cover one acre in one foot of water) and then sold it for as much as $196 per acre-foot to the state, which used it to supply other farmers whose Delta supply had been previously curtailed. The couple pocketed more than $30 million in the process. If winter storms replenish the Kern Water Bank this year, they could again find themselves with a bumper crop of H2O.  Meanwhile, the fight between farmers and smelt has plodded on, with the Resnicks becoming prominent advocates for pumping even more water south to farms. In 2007, a group called the Coalition for a Sustainable Delta began using lawsuits of its own to assign blame for the estuary’s decline to just about everything except farming: housing development in Delta floodplains, pesticide use by Delta farms, dredging, power plants, sport fishing, and pollution from mothballed ships. The coalition’s website doesn’t mention the Resnicks, but it originally listed a Paramount Farms fax number, and three of the four officers on its early tax documents were Resnick employees. http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2016/04/lynda-stewart-resnick-california-water

Nearly a Quarter of US Now in Drought

http://www.courthousenews.com/2016/08/12/nearly-a-quarter-of-us-now-in-drought.htm

2014 State failed to analyze effects of water bank, judge rules
A court ruling issued Wednesday could throw up obstacles to operation of a Kern County groundwater bank that has helped billionaire Stewart Resnick build a nut empire in the southern San Joaquin Valley. In the latest development in a two-decade legal fight, a Sacramento County Superior Court judge found that the state Department of Water Resources didn’t properly analyze the environmental impacts of the Kern Water Bank, which is partly controlled by Resnick’s Paramount Farms enterprise.

Meet the California Couple Who Uses More Water Than Every Home in Los Angeles Combined How megafarmers Lynda and Stewart Resnick built their billion-dollar empire.

Lynda Resnick and her husband, Stewart, also own a few other things: Teleflora, the nation’s largest flower delivery service; Fiji Water, the best-selling brand of premium bottled water; Pom Wonderful, the iconic pomegranate juice brand; Halos, the insanely popular brand of mandarin oranges formerly known as Cuties; and Wonderful Pistachios, with its “Get Crackin’” ad campaign. The Resnicks are the world’s biggest producers of pistachios and almonds, and they also hold vast groves of lemons, grapefruit, and navel oranges. All told, they claim to own America’s second-largest produce company, worth an estimated $4.2 billion.

Billionaires Behaving Badly: Lynda and Stewart ResnickWhen a Mother Jones reporter was in the country writing an expose on Fiji Water, she was snatched up by police from an internet cafe and detained.

Robert Thomas Zephyrhills Natural Spring Water Company

Crystal Springs Preserve owner Robert Thomas speaks during the unveiling of WaterVentures, Florida’s Learning Lab at Crystal Springs Preserve in partnership with Zephyrhills Brand 100% Natural Spring Water on January 9, 2013 in Crystal Springs, Florida.

Zephyrhills, population 14,000, has long made its name on water. But it was when the bottling plant south of town began filling 4 million to 5 million bottles of water every day.

Every day, 30 million gallons of water gush from the Floridan aquifer into Crystal Springs. Nestled in what is now a 525-acre wildlife preserve, the springs are almost alien in their beauty: impossibly clear, perpetually cool and, in spots, the same turquoise color as the Zephyrhills label.

Florida springs have been suffering in recent years due to pollution such as fertilizers and nitrates. “They convinced us that this water was somehow better than the water in our taps even though it’s no better, and then convinced us to pay 1,000 or 10,000 times more for it,” she said.

Nestle Waters

Nestlé Waters North America, Inc.  corporate giant Nestle, which also owns Perrier and other bottled water brands.  Based in Stamford, Connecticut with 7,500 employees nationwide.

What If All The Ice Melted On Earth? ft. Bill Nye

WATCH ‘The End Of The Arctic’

SIGN THE PETITION: http://bit.ly/arcticasap

 

 

 

Women With Axes: Looking Back at World War II ‘Lumberjills’

Meet Rosie the Riveter’s British cousins. NYT

When even the women’s request to keep their uniforms as the only mementos of their services was denied — among other indignities — Lady Gertrude Denman, who had led the Women’s Land Army through two world wars, resigned in disgust. “Blow, blow, thou winter wind,” wrote contributors to Land Girl Magazine, “thou art not so unkind as man’s ingratitude.”

The Scientific Method

Atheism Is Inconsistent with the Scientific Method
The 2019 Templeton Prize winner does not pull punches on the limits of science, the value of humility and the irrationality of nonbelief.

Place his essay in relationship to Mythology and Science; Or, What Do We Want From Popular Science?
Gregory Schrempp , Contributor Associate Professor, Department of Folklore & Ethnomusicology, Indiana University (Bloomington)

 

 

Amazon (sub)Prime? allows any third party to supply inventory into commingled stock. By Izabella Kaminska

Amazon (sub)Prime?

By Izabella Kaminska
Mar 20 2019
<https://ftalphaville.ft.com/2019/03/20/1553085361000/Amazon–sub-Prime-/>

The following is the first in a two-part post about Amazon’s dependence on an obscure process known as commingling, which has become essential to underpinning its instant fulfilment services, especially its Prime offering.

If you work in finance, the concept of commingling and its cost benefits will be instantly recognizable. But so will its risks.

And it’s these sorts of risks that are now creeping into the entire Amazon system due to the online retailer’s open-ended fulfillment structure, which allows any third party to supply inventory into commingled stock.

Not only is commingling becoming a means by which a huge number of sub-par or counterfeited goods are entering the Amazon network, it’s arguably the reason why Amazon is being forced to take increasingly extreme steps to take control of its suppliers.

As it does so, it turns itself back into a conventional vertically-integrated retailer like Tesco or Walmart, losing much of the scaling, and cost advantages, associated with its “Fulfilled by Amazon” model (FBA). This also forces an ever greater “unapproved” seller network to deal in the increasingly cut-throat dynamics of its wider marketplace offering. 

The consequences of all this, as we will explain, are glaring.

Unless you make your money from selling stuff on Amazon, chances are you won’t have heard of an FNSKU. The acronym stands for Fulfilment Network Stock Keeping Unit and represents a location identifier for products sitting in Amazon warehouses. This, to all intents and purposes, equates to an Amazon barcode. 

If you’re a seller on Amazon’s marketplace who has chosen to be fulfilled by Amazon’s warehouse system (a scenario which sees Amazon dispatching the seller’s products on their behalf from its warehouses) you will always need an FNSKU.

Apart from the times you don’t.

At such times all you need is a manufacturer code. And it’s these instances, sellers tell FT Alphaville, that are introducing a counterfeiting vulnerability into the Amazon system.

Not using an FNSKU is appealing for sellers. It means products sourced from manufacturers do not have to be relabelled, ensuring they can be sent into Amazon’s network directly, saving time and money. Sellers who have chosen to be fulfilled by Amazon otherwise add an additional logistical layer into their operations if they have to relabel the goods independently. 

Using manufacture bar codes also means products are more likely to qualify for Amazon Prime classification, pushing them higher up the search rankings.

Sellers tell FT Alphaville that, as it stands, the Amazon system seems to structurally incentivise the use of manufacturer codes over FNSKUs as a result. Indeed, Amazon itself promotes the fact that the process speeds up delivery in its own literature:

If multiple sellers have inventory with the same manufacturer barcode, Amazon may fulfil orders using products with that barcode when those products are closest to the customer.

This happens regardless of which seller actually receives a customer’s order. We use this process to facilitate faster delivery.

COMMINGLING

But there is an important downside. Not using FNSKUs turns sellers’ products into cold, hard commodities which are treated as fungible with equivalent products sent into the system. This happens because of a process called commingling.

How does commingling work and why is it important to the Amazon Prime model?

If you have ever wondered how it is possible for Amazon Prime to guarantee 24, or 48, hour delivery for a hugely diverse range of products, the answer is commingling.

In its simplest and idealised form, commingling allows sellers to share inventory to the mutual benefit of all, especially with respect to speed of dispatch.

The larger the geographic area, the more effective commingling becomes. In the US, for example, a seller who supplies an Amazon warehouse in Florida can — thanks to commingling — fullfil a customer living in Minnesota as easily as customers in their home state.

To explain, consider that the time it might ordinarily take to deliver to a Minnesotan from Florida is bound by the physical limitations of travel. In other words, there’s no way a parcel can arrive more quickly than via a plane. That’s its effective speed of light limit.

However, if the buyer’s parcel can be dispatched from an equivalent commingled stock just around the corner, this theoretical speed of light limit can be broken.

<SNIP>

<If you label your commingle units by printing labels from your inventory page, and ship them with labels where you said to commingle, Amazon will likely delay your items being received and provide a warning to you about shipping items with labels when you said you want to commingle your inventory.>

<There are some inherent risks involved with using the stickerless commingled inventory option.  The main risk is the loss of control of the item that the end customer receives.  In addition to this there is the risk that there are counterfeit products that were sent in by other sellers, or sellers that are trying to pass off items as new that should be listed as used.  The problems arise when one of these counterfeit items or less than new items are sent to a customer that orders from you.>

<august 12, 2017
I ordered the top-rated eclipse glasses on Amazon a few months ago and they were counterfeit. If you put them on during daytime you can see indirect sunlight and even my kitchen light. They were shipped from China despite having “Made in the USA” markings and all the proper ISO certification fine print. I haven’t received any communication from Amazon, so people who haven’t heard from them should not assume their glasses are safe (contrary to Amazon’s statement). I contacted Amazon support and they were quick to initiate a refund. For some reason Amazon rejected my review warning that items from third party sellers may be counterfeit and explaining how to tell.
Here are a couple photos of the counterfeits>