A spokeswoman says: "Dipper wells use a stream of continuous cold fresh-running water to rinse away food residue, help keep utensils clean and prevent bacterial growth. The dipper well system currently in use in Starbucks retail stores ensures that we meet or exceed our own and local health standards." She said the company is considering using dishwashers instead of the dipper wells and introducing a more water-efficient way of cleaning spoons. || Starbucks denies it wastes water (BBC)
Regardless of the reason that Starbuck uses to explain why we use dipper wells it still ignores the fact that we really do waste water and until they change this, we will STILL waste water.
Posted by: est | October 06, 2008 at 01:17 PM
This just in...
The average local coffee hut down the street a) doesn't use dipper wells and b) doesn't have a dishwasher.
It's possible to save water AND be healthy.
Those coffee huts are under the exact same scrutiny as all other food venues (sbux included), too, btw.
Posted by: truth | October 06, 2008 at 01:20 PM
Starbucks are NOTHING MORE THAN SPINDOCTORS- they NEVER admit any guilt and always spin the facts. A joke for a GREEN COMPANY!
Posted by: givemeabreak | October 06, 2008 at 01:24 PM
givemeabreak:
From you. Spin doctors? "Yes, we do waste water. It's a good reason, but we are looking into better ways."
SUCH a big spin! Damn, Starbucks, and your way with words.
Posted by: bf | October 06, 2008 at 01:43 PM
bf,
From a company that "claims" to be "green" or at least environmentally aware, they are a joke. No spin here! A "green" company thinks outside the box and trys to eliminate wastes & recycle where and whenever posible. Not wait until they get some bad press and react. The have been w/o a TRUE recycling program since day-one. The water issue has ALSO been going on since day one. In order to be "green" you need to THINK GREEN and ACT. (We're looking into it is unacceptable at this point)
Posted by: givemeabreak | October 06, 2008 at 02:02 PM
I really honestly think the dipper well is the much smaller problem. In my 1st 3 months with Starbucks I had the opportunity to work in 18 stores (I was in DM training and my RD thought this would be a good idea). I was SHOCKED that every single one of those stores, overseen by 3 seperate DM's, kept the sink on the floor running almost non-stop to rinse steaming pitchers. The partners just dropped the pitchers into the sink and hoped some water would splash into them. I made every attempt to get them to stop this terrible behavior, but once I left after a few days it started up again. I was only successful in the 2 districts I ran in the last 2 years to get that practiced eliminated.
I venture a quess that this is a wide=sread problem.
Also, what about the overflow pipe on the mop sink? Water just running out non-stop all day as well. And the backflow valve on the water heater and R/O water filter? Lots and lots of water down the drain.
H2Oh No!!!!
Posted by: sneaky | October 06, 2008 at 02:17 PM
Re: Water Well: It's a DRIP. Yes, it does use water; but not nearly as much as constantly washing spoons or using the dishwasher. Without the drip well system, we would be continuously using the dishwasher or your Mochas would taste like pumpkin, etc.
Pitcher Spray: It works like a faucett with a sprayer. ONLY IT DOES NOT LEAK LIKE A HOSE. It only uses water when your pressing on it to clean a pitcher. So, it does not waste any water at all.
So, whoever is complaining, doesn't understand the situation.
Posted by: spence | October 06, 2008 at 02:46 PM
Is this a real issue, or do people always need something to complain about? Something amazing happens to water when it goes down a pipe. It travels to a water treatment plant where it is filtered and purified by means of aeration and digestion. The water is then released back into the environment at a level of 98-99% purity, depending on your locale. The water then seeps into the ground, back into the water table, where it is used by plants and other life until drawn upon again for human use. It's not called a water cycle for nothing.
Posted by: Patty | October 06, 2008 at 03:10 PM
It looks like the environmentalists are bored now that obama has a 6 point lead and are looking for some other fake problem to bring up and complain about. Great.
Posted by: SoCalBarista | October 06, 2008 at 04:18 PM
Yup. There is another way. Using tons of chemicals. Or disposable spoons.
Seriously, people.
Posted by: badgerista | October 06, 2008 at 04:45 PM
It's taken until now to highlight this?
I emailed Starbucks six months ago...
http://phurphuxake.blogspot.com/2008/03/whatta-waste.html
Posted by: Phurphuxake | October 06, 2008 at 05:00 PM
Socalbarista,
I have a feeling that we work in the same district. Is your dm Toni?
-------------
People are always looking for stuff to complain about.
"Never mind what haters say, ignore 'em till they fade away"
Posted by: StarbucksBarista90 | October 06, 2008 at 05:21 PM
I just stopped working for starbucks like a month ago, because I went back to school and didn't have time. But we changed DMs in august and I never met the knew one.
Posted by: SoCalBarista | October 06, 2008 at 05:34 PM
Ah, ok, was the old one Melissa? Because that's around the time when we got our new one as well.
Posted by: StarbucksBarista90 | October 06, 2008 at 06:03 PM
There is nothing green about Starbucks....no recycling at all, trash bins overflowing.
Not that customers would be responsible enough to sort it all...
Posted by: GlenFeliz Regular | October 06, 2008 at 07:03 PM
Melissa might be our new DM, I know its a female
Posted by: SoCalBarista | October 06, 2008 at 07:43 PM
Actually, the new DM for our district is Toni Sanger and the reason I asked is because a while back you posted that she was offered a demotion from RD to DM in the Black Tuesday thread. And yeah she's a female.
Posted by: StarbucksBarista90 | October 06, 2008 at 08:17 PM
I do not work for Starbucks, but have worked as an ice cream scooper in various stores/theme parks. All dipper wells, whether in a coffee store, ice cream store, or anywhere else must have a continuous stream of water running. This is mandatory for most municipal health codes through out the US and Europe. It is backed by environmental health science.
Anybody objecting to this stream of water, go to college and take organic chemistry and environmental health sciences. Or better yet, look at a microscope of a dipper well wit ha running stream and one without.
Posted by: Mark | October 06, 2008 at 10:19 PM
Just about every restaurant has these dipper wells in their kitchens too at their saute stations. I also worked at one where they didn't have a dipper well and frankly it grossed me out because they just kept their spatulas and tongs in stagnant water that just kept getting dirtier and dirtier as day went by. Think about all the water you waste when you have to keep flushing the toilet because of the food poisoning you got from the restaurant without a dipper well.
Posted by: EX-SFbuxmgr | October 07, 2008 at 01:00 AM
Who are the DM's in the Boston area?
Posted by: BOSTON STARBUCKS REBEL | October 07, 2008 at 04:40 AM
Once again Starbucks takes the wrap as the Big Bad. I don't disagree with the argument. I'm just saying it goes well beyond Starbucks...
Posted by: Mike | October 07, 2008 at 05:32 AM
Other coffee chains seem to manage to maintain hygiene without the use of these 'dipper wells'.
So why does Starbucks need to waste water?
Just a bad habit maybe, like the habit of some to water their lawns at the height of the day when the water just evaporates as soon as it hits the ground, to leave the sprinklers running so long that the water runs off down the street?
Some areas of the US have not seen rainfall for several years and reservoirs are down meters - Lake mead could run dry in as little as 13 years!!!
Yet you still leave the taps running.....
Posted by: Phurphuxake | October 07, 2008 at 06:18 AM
Lake Mead is a man made lake in the middle of a desert.
Posted by: | October 07, 2008 at 09:09 AM
"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."
That's interesting, but not directly related. If Starbucks stopped using any water at all, it wouldn't suddenly create a safe drinking water infrastructure in Africa. As far as I know, Starbucks isn't buying up all of Africa's water. That would be some expensive water to transport.
Posted by: Marcus | October 07, 2008 at 09:13 AM
Interesting how so many people claim other coffee shops can deal without the well while others rightfully stated more than once that it is a municipal food safety requirement. I wonder if these other shops just plain ignore the health code, if they don't deal with steaming milk or what their secret is. I do understand a 7eleven doesn't need a well because they don't steam milk. But a real coffee shop? Maybe they rinse their spoons every time under the regular faucet. That safes a lot of water, sure...
Actually, I've been at a local store the other day and they kept their spoon just on top of the bar and rinsed it every now and then. I decided to go with a cold drink which didn't need any spoon. I thought it was gross.
To sneaky: Are there really stores that do that? This I would actually consider a scandal. There is really absolutely no need at all to let the tap run all the time. This is why we have pitcher rinsers and dipper wells.
Unfortunately my DM asks us to let the tap run while draining leftover coffee. To save the pipes... I refuse to do it. I rather dump a venti spoon of ice into the sink and drain the coffee over it. This is really avoidable waste.
Posted by: Me | October 07, 2008 at 10:06 AM
In all the stores I've visited, I have NEVER seen a tap in the rinse sinks continuously running. My store has never left the rinse sink tap running for more than a couple of minutes. Where are all these stores that never turn off the faucet? For these stores that do exist, it is the fault (laziness) of the baristas and management, not Starbucks as a company.
As many have pointed out, most health codes require that dipper wells have a constant drip or small stream of water.
I think Starbucks shouldn't have commented on this "story." It's an article written with no real information or fact.
Posted by: Stacy | October 07, 2008 at 10:10 AM
No company admits that they do anything wrong. What a completely rediculous system.
Posted by: Joefucious | October 07, 2008 at 11:49 AM
The tap never runs continuously. That's bullshit. There is a stream of water that runs at low pressure in the dipper well to keep the foam and stir spoon sanitary, but that's about it.
Do you people think it is possible to wash utensils more than once a day during peak periods? Sure, we can turn the little stream off when the store dies down, but for most of our stores, Starbucks has lines out the door constantly. So to ensure customer safety, we need that dipper well to run so that caked on whipped cream and hot milk residue can wash off between uses -- which by the way, happens every 0.10 seconds.
In order to understand why we "waste" water, you need to understand what the hell it's there for. It's there to keep the health inspectors off our asses. It's there to keep the customers happy to see that the spoon I use to scoop their steamed foam is clean.
I understand that not all stores are busy and they have no excuse to waste water, however my store makes a little over 6,000 a day. Most stores don't even make that in a week. We have NO CHOICE but to run those water spouts in order to combat the everyday complaints about potential bacteria.
No matter what we do as a company, there's always going to be an esoteric group of no-life criticizers waiting to find a flaw with the most credited coffee chain in the world.
Posted by: Rina | October 07, 2008 at 12:30 PM
The less we talk about this "story" the sooner it goes away -- what with all the financial news and such.
On the positive note, Starbucks will see an increase in "conservative" customers -- as they are the ones sensible enough about the whole enviro/green thing ;)
Posted by: LEGENDARY OR BUST | October 07, 2008 at 01:36 PM
Fact: "Running water" is NOT legally required in any state or local health code in washington.
Fact: The entire southeast US has been battling drought conditions for the past 12 months.
This is not an 'africa problem' as many of you have said. It's right in your own backyard.
Posted by: truth | October 07, 2008 at 01:39 PM
Here's a bit of FACT for you, truth--
Preventing Contamination from Equipment, Utensils, and Linens
3-304.11 Food Contact with Equipment and Utensils.*
Food shall only contact surfaces of equipment and utensils that are cleaned as specified under Part 4-6 of this Code and sanitized as specified under Part 4-7 of this Code.
3-304.12 In-Use Utensils, Between-Use Storage.
(See Supplement)
During pauses in food preparation or dispensing, food preparation and dispensing utensils shall be stored:
* (A) Except as specified under ¶ (B) of this section, in the food with their handles above the top of the food and the container;
* (B) In food that is not potentially hazardous with their handles above the top of the food within containers or equipment that can be closed, such as bins of sugar, flour, or cinnamon;
* (C) On a clean portion of the food preparation table or cooking equipment only if the in-use utensil and the food-contact surface of the food preparation table or cooking equipment are cleaned and sanitized at a frequency specified under § 4-602.11 and 4-702.11;
* (D) In running water of sufficient velocity to flush particulates to the drain, if used with moist food such as ice cream or mashed potatoes;
* (E) In a clean, protected location if the utensils, such as ice scoops, are used only with a food that is not potentially hazardous; or
* (F) In a container of water if the water is maintained at a temperature of at least 60°C (140°F) and the container is cleaned at a frequency specified under Subparagraph 4-602.11(D)(7).
Source: http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/fc01-3.html#3-3
Posted by: Stacy | October 07, 2008 at 02:00 PM
Truth and Espressoblend are like cousins.. Both of you spout BS every chance you get without actually looking at or reading what you or anyone else is saying... Jim, I thought Espressoblend was given the choice of upping his tone or being banned.. is this still in effect?
Posted by: Nerfebarista | October 07, 2008 at 02:21 PM
Please, don't ban espressoblend. He's as hilarious as a sad clown painting at the dentist. You can practically hear his boss yelling at him about his TPS reports and him complaining to his cat about how they took his red stapler...again. With the antagonistic baiting vitriol he spews I can almost guarantee that he is far more miserable than any of us think we are. Take pity on him. He's the Andy Rooney of Starbucks Gossip & it wouldn't be the same without his desperate attempt to inject class warfare into every single issue.
Posted by: B&N Barista | October 07, 2008 at 03:13 PM
You've made my point exactly, with your Palin-esque wandering off from the facts presented. Just because you can rattle off some federal reg (outdated btw) doesn't change the facts.
First, running water is NOT required/mandated. It is simply one method that is legal, albeit wasteful.
And second, state/local guidelines supersede federal regs.
My points still stand. State and local food handling laws DO NOT require running water. Period.
Posted by: truth | October 07, 2008 at 03:26 PM
Do you know health code regulations for all 50 states? What about the laws of each county/parish within the states? You cannot possibly answer that question with a yes therefore you have no point or proof that running water is not a requirement everywhere. Sure, it may not be a requirement in Washington (which is an example you used) but it very well could be in Texas or Vermont. Starbucks takes the strictest laws from all the states and adopts that as their policy.
According to you, Starbucks is the Antichrist. We got it. Time to get a new mantra. I'd be willing to bet that you tell anyone who will listen that the Earth is flat too.
Posted by: Stacy | October 07, 2008 at 04:48 PM
Like I said, you are clouding the issue with extraneous data.
There are much more water-friendly and legal options than running water all day in the store.
Using your logic, all Starbucks stores world-wide would be recycling since the city of Seattle requires it. That's now the real world works.
Posted by: truth | October 07, 2008 at 05:27 PM
Re Toni Sanger
She was my DM for a while-when she got promoted to RDO we had a string of 5 DM's in 2 years!!!
BIG SURPRISE that Starbucks is in trouble!
PS. I liked Toni but she didnt seem to be out in the field very often. Maybe it wasn't possible-I don't really know what RDOs do-so I don't want to put her down. In fact I was upset to hear she'd been demoted and I hoped it wasnt too bad a thing in her eyes.
Anyone recall Robin or Dan from that district???
Posted by: Moved on... | October 07, 2008 at 05:52 PM
How exactly am I clouding the issue? I am not denying that there are more green options we could have. What I am denying, however, is your "fact" that running water is not required anywhere and I proved your information to be wrong.
No one here is arguing against the fact that we are using more water than necessary. We are arguing against the useless information and lack of research spouted by the original article.
Posted by: Stacy | October 07, 2008 at 05:59 PM
Moved on... :
Ohh ok, well she comes in to our store more often than our previous DM, I see that Toni comes to our store at least once a month and other times she comes to our store for meetings with management.
Do you still work at Starbucks? What district?
Posted by: StarbucksBarista90 | October 07, 2008 at 06:09 PM
Stacy: Am I reading that list wrong? Because the way I read it, it dictates A or B or C or D or E or F based on the situation. You highlighted D, but there's nothing I read there that said F wasn't an option. The only place in either that a specific foodstuff was mentioned was in the one you highlighted--D--and that was ice cream or mashed potatoes, neither of which I have seen in my local Bux. (Unless I should be braced for the upcoming release of the Mashed Potato Macchiato?)
So why isn't F an equally legitimate option?
Keep a container of water warmed to the minimum temperature and clean at the regular frequency (specified in another part of the code) and that's an alternative for cleaning spoons, the way I read it, that doesn't require constantly running water.
Now I'm truly curious.
Posted by: Belle | October 07, 2008 at 06:17 PM
Starbucksbarista90:
That's good that she drops by! She used to use my store for all her meetings since she lived nearby. Like I said, I liked her. I hope she goes back up to RDO soon. :)
I left Starbucks this year. Now I work half as much and make 2-3X more. AS much as I was dedicated to Starbucks while I was there, I'm so much happier now that I've let it go. But that's just me...
I was in the Toni/Miguel/Robin/Alicia/Dan district. Don't know what it was called. Maybe it's Toni's again?...
I hope it works out well for you!
:)
Posted by: Moved on... | October 07, 2008 at 06:27 PM
Gee, I wonder how many of these 'wasting water is no big deal' bloggers are hired guns. How many of you out there are aware that companies like this often hire marketing firms who in turn pay bored, broke web 2.0 fanatics to post such things. Viral marketing is such a sneaky and vile trick. If you're being paid to 'discount' this issue publicly you should be ashamed of yourselves.
Here's the deal folks:
Forget global warming- clean, drinkable WATER is the real threat to mankind. Here are some key 'FACTS':
WATER-
Less than 1% of the world's water is drinkable.
The U.S. consumes 450 BILLION Gallons of water per day. We flush more than 40% of it down the toilet. (not counting Starbucks!)
The number one cause of death on the planet is due to waterborne diseases. 5,000 children a day die from waterborne diseases."
-Allen Hershkowitz
Ph.D. National Resources Defense Council
"Clean, drinkable water is going to be as valuable in the future as oil is today."
-Allen Hershkowitz
Ph.D. National Resources Defense Council
One ton of paper creates up to 16,000 gallons of contaminated waste water
One ton of virgin paper creates about 9,000 gallons of contaminated waste water
Starbucks uses a LOT of virgin AND recycled paper. Do you have ANY idea how much water they waste in their printing alone? And they think that using recycled paper is enough?! Starbucks HAS been presented with alternatives such as stone paper, which uses no water but they won't go for it, probably because it costs a few bucks more. Shame on them.
I generally try to stay neutral and I've been found to defend corporate America more often than not but today's news sickens and saddens me.
Posted by: jeff salisbury | October 07, 2008 at 09:55 PM
To defend Stacy and everyone with poor or compromised immune systems, yes F) is an option, but it is a very poor choice for Starbucks or any other coffee house type operation. The only circumstance I have *ever* seen option F) used in (or be recommended for) are professional hot food kitchens where ladles, spoons & other tools are kept in a pan/bain marie of just off the boil water on the same stove as the adjacent pots of food they are to be used in. That is a satisfactory sanitary solution in that application when it is permitted by local ordinance. The reason Starbucks would use the dipper well configuration is because it is a simple solution with few critical control points and therefore less vulnerable to human error (you know, errors that make people sick & put small children in the hospital or can even kill them).
There are lots of opportunities for Starbucks to save water. Low flow toilets & flow controlled sinks in the bathroom are the first things to come to mind.
Food sanitation & public health are not the places to cut corners in order to save the earth, money or anything else. It's the cost of doing business. Hearing about the baristas who don't use the dipper well, or worse, don't even know why it's important (WTF? who trained them?) makes me feel like vomiting. Take a food sanitation course and learn about public health issues before you kill someone. There is no way possible that I'm the only manager on this board with a professional food service background who knows the answer to these, frankly, terrifyingly uninformed questions. And, FYI, health ordinances are local, not federal. The FDA Model Food Code are recommendations for adoption at the local level but not required. The county I work in is far stricter than the FDA or even NSF standards, just as I know that some counties/municipalities are looser.
For every person who is concerned about this issue - call your local health dept & ask them what they think of the dipper well in use at Starbucks & if there is a less environmentally impactful practice that could be instituted within their jurisdiction that they would *recommend*. The key word there is recommend. If there is then right on, power to the people, down with the Man. Tell the local Starbucks regional office you want them to change to the less harmful method. Until later, peace, love & lattes...
Posted by: B&N Barista | October 07, 2008 at 10:00 PM
SPENCE nailed it.
Water is not destroyed once it goes down the drain. The environmental nut cases criticize any use of water that doesn't involve saving salmon.
I would rather visit a shop that cares more about health issues than one that cares about looking good at the expense of safety.
Posted by: presto | October 07, 2008 at 11:41 PM
Moving on... :
Yeah she seems nice. I really don't know what my district is called or whatever; I know for sure that she's our DM.
Thanks! Good luck to you as well. :)
Posted by: StarbucksBarista90 | October 08, 2008 at 02:41 AM
Stacy,
So what about all the countries OUTSIDE the US? They do not fall under FDA regulations, as much as you might want to think they do.
Starbucks has to conform to the health regulations of the country they operate in.
I personally can't see any advantages in having utensils sitting in dirty, milky water under a cold stream of water as a 'health requirement'. I cringe every time a barista pulls a spoon out of what resembles a primordial swamp to spoon the foam onto my coffee!!!
As they have now stated that they will investigate alternative methods, the pouring of millions of litres of clean water down the drain in countries outside the US may well be over...
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/article1775825.ece
Posted by: Phurphuxake | October 08, 2008 at 07:16 AM
I would rather throw my spoons in a dipper well, in a manner that conforms to health regulations, than have to waste customers' and my time running to the back every 5-10 minutes to wash off a steaming spoon so that your drink doesn't taste like something else you can't quite place.
And as stated in the other thread about this issue, I'd rather keep your spoons in running water than a stagnant pond with no water circulation, and then have to possibly come bring you flowers in the hospital.
Just sayin' is all. I understand people's concerns but the only reason this is really an issue is that it's Starbucks doing it, and not any other company.
Posted by: Tim | October 09, 2008 at 10:45 AM
All you water savers,
please stop going to the loo,
a dump in the wood will do
and save some water, too.
And stop drinking coffee altogether, because the preparation of coffee takes a lot of water as well. And stop eating meat, they use water to prepare it. Stop eating rice, they actually use water to wash it. This could go on and on.
Please use water responsibly, but some issues are just more important than others...
Posted by: Me | October 09, 2008 at 11:32 AM
So, the Palin comment went unnoticed? I take offense at the abuse of her name. If one can throw her name around, can I throw Obama or Biden's name around?
Posted by: LegENDARY OR BUST | October 09, 2008 at 02:06 PM
This isn't a political forum.
Posted by: STARBUCKS GOSSIP WEBMASTER | October 09, 2008 at 02:12 PM