Go to
Dr. Pepper
| Brand Ratings -> Beverages -> Dr. Pepper |
|
Category: Soda Cost for 20 oz: $0.88 Greenopia Environment Achievement:
|
|
Green Efforts: Dr. Pepper group has begun to incorporate some basic elements of green building design in some of its plants and in the process of evaluating its transportation network to find efficiencies. Dr. Pepper has also reworked some of its packaging to be smaller (and therefore more efficient to produce) and has some recycled content in most of its containers. Dr. Pepper also touts a solid water consumption per liter of beverage rate of just over 2 liters of water per liter of beverage. Amongst the major beverage companies, this is the best number that is reported. Green Issues: Dr. Pepper doesn’t seem to be as far along as the other major brands in areas such as green building design and renewable energy sourcing. Dr. Pepper is also still in the early phases of greening its transportation fleet, but to be fair only a few companies have already made a firm commitment in this area. We would also like to see Dr. Pepper go after alternative packaging types like some of their competitors have done. Ingredient Analysis: Dr. Pepper’s products contain the standard assortment of not super healthy substances such as corn syrup, yellow 5, caffeine, and benzoate compounds. With the exception of the benzoate compounds (which allegedly can leach benzene under certain conditions), these ingredients are safe for most people in moderation. Greenopia Verdict: Dr. Pepper gets a leaf in this year’s update of our beverage guide because of its improved transparency and water efficient production. We hope to see them continue to improve in the future. Environmental Violations: This company has been accused of environmental violations because of some of its production methods (typically water pollution and/or consumption). We did not capture these alleged violations in our scoring (because of the difficulty in comparing one violation to another), but encourage you to research the issues surrounding these accusations. We felt it was not fair to lower the score of companies who were making significant efforts because of events that may or may not have been beyond their immediate control. Having said that, we don't condone their actions, but this also should not completely erase the progress that they have made. Thus, we encourage you to find additional information to add to the quantifiable environmental data we have analyzed here. |
|
|
