Starbucks - to buy or not to buy? The environmental arguements

I'm a coffee shop enthusiast - phew. It's taken me years to come out and say that. I didn't want to be one, but I am. I generally spend too much money on coffee, use too many eco-unfriendly paper cups, pack in too many baked goods calories and while away too many hours staring out of patterned, stickered windows watching busy people pass by.

But what's the problem, why be dubious about admitting a love for coffee shops? First, there's the image of it being an exclusively middle-class "I wanna be spotted looking intellectual" stuck-up book reader's reserve (no longer true - Starbucks is the MacDonalds of the coffee world).

Secondly, I think I saw too many episodes of satyrical sitcoms and cartoons at an impressionable age (i.e that Starbucks episode of South Park). Plus, all of this made an impression before I was even old enough to set foot in a coffee shop on my own.

So, when I came of coffee shop age, I had a pre-programmed vague adversity to Starbucks. Then, I started university and my relationship with coffee shops, local and international, began....aahhhh...

I bought rocky road cakes, blueberry, white chocolate and poppy seed muffins, soya milk lattes, skinny cappucinos, frappucinos, espressos-to-go, lightly salted parsnip chips, millionaire's shortbread, large teas with honey, Christmas cherry moccachinos, choco mint lattes, green teas, New York cheesecakes, chocolate gateaux and large black coffees to stay in.

The best thing about it all for me was bringing a newspaper or some work or a book along and just switching my auto pilot on for an hour or two while stuffing myself with cakes and hot drinks.

In the middle of all this, I noticed I'd been kind of avoiding Starbucks whenever I could and thought about why this might be. I mean, I'd never read any stories personally about Starbucks committing huge traversties/scandals/damaging the environment. They had recycled napkins and gave away coffee grounds for people's gardens - wow! Not massively eco-friendly I know, but I decided it wasn't really sensible to hate something for no reason, so I strode through the Starbucks threshold with a clear head and a hungry belly.

For the last few years, Starbucks was a good option and useful for a lot of reasons. They are all over the place and I visited before uni for a coffee shot to keep me awake before a 9am lecture. I shuffled in like a zombie the morning after a hangover. I wasted time before job interviews and exams sipping coffee and psyching myself up with revision and pre-prepared answers.

Also, as anyone who has upped sticks and moved abroad for an extended time knows, home comforts sometimes feel like a life-or-death necessity. When I was in Japan living in quite a small town, Starbucks was a reassuring resident and on the way to my train station - so take advantage of it I did. My friend and I, who lived an hour from me, often met in Starbucks, talked about everything, did the odd bit of work and ogled at a handsome employee on a regular basis. What could go wrong?

Then, in October last year, a firm confirmation that Starbucks is full of crap when it come to its holier-than-thou image hit the headlines and since then I have not spent a single penny on anything sold, owned or sponsored by the chain.

"US coffee-shop chain Starbucks has defended itself against claims of a serious waste of water by leaving taps running in its stores all day." (BBC, October 2008)

A UK customer, noticing that a tap had been running for the whole time he was in there, asked a Starbucks employee why they hadn't turned it off. The barista then said this is because they are told to leave taps running for the whole 13 hours that the shops are open as it is 'hygenic' and in line with the corporation's health and safety policy. The customer then wrote a letter to the top and received the same reply.

The Guardian reported: "Over 23.4m litres of water are poured down the drains of 10,000 outlets worldwide due to a policy of keeping a tap running non-stop.

It is enough daily water for the entire 2 million population of Namibia in Africa, which has severe droughts, or to fill an Olympic pool every 83 minutes.

A single Starbucks tap left running for just over three minutes wastes the amount of water one African needs to survive for a day in drought conditions."

The boss of the organisation defended this in the press, but there's no way that explanations can really cut it, not when as he speaks, thousands of litres of water, which is an increasingly dwindling commodity, are being wasted at the expense of the taxpayer and those who haven't got access to sustinable or safe supplies.

I'm no preaching environmentalist by any means, but when you think about the water that's being wasted, this is inexcusable from a global firm that has the power to set good examples to smaller companies and the droves of people that love and buy its products everyday (including celebrities, who in turn, influence others). I don't think any of us can really afford to overlook something like this - water is not a never-ending resource (see here for more).

Also, after assuming for some reason that its cups are recycled, I just found out that they aren't.

So, unless Starbucks at least makes some kind of effort to recycle, save water and take responsibility for the fact that things like water and paper will not last forever, I can't really justify buying coffee from it anymore.

PS) This article I read yesterday made me finally write this rant. Here's a brilliant run-down of Starbucks pricing by the author, William Sitwell.

"And you can't even get a small cup of coffee. No. You must order a tall - that's Starbucks-speak for small. Grande - which means big, and Vente which means very big. In reality, these would be more accurately known as Rip-Off, Daylight Robbery and Robbery With Violence."