Foxconn plans to sharply limit water use at its plant in Mount Pleasant.

Bergquist, L. (2018, June 19). Foxconn plans to sharply limit water use at its plant in Mount Pleasant. Retrieved November,
2018, from
https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/2018/06/19/foxconn-announces-plans-sharply-limit-water-use-its-plant/7
14503002/

Foxconn Technology Group announced that they’d be investing $30 million to build a system to recycle water. Their goal is to prevent taking water from Lake Michigan while still allowing their manufacturing plant to function. They believe technology will reduce water intake by more than 3.5 million gallons per day. Their system will eliminate manufacturing process waste water by distilling it, recycling it, and reusing it.
Companies are beginning to consider the triple bottom line more and more. Foxconn will ultimately benefit themselves economically, the environment, and hopefully the people creating their product. Despite reducing water intake, the tech system they want to create is sure to need a lot of energy. This allows us to question if technology is really as beneficial as it is said to be. Their $10 billion factory “would employ up to 13,000 employees. The project would be the largest private development in Wisconsin history — a deal made possible with $3 billion in state incentives.” In hopes of following the values for their Taiwan-based company they want to exceed all the set regulations.

5 thoughts on “Foxconn plans to sharply limit water use at its plant in Mount Pleasant.

  1. It’s really interesting to see how the world is slowly changing by subtle acts like these. In the end, nothing is more important than the sustainability of the planet. As if living on the planet becomes unsustainable, there will be no more companies.

  2. Wow! I think that this is a great step towards helping conserve more water? Is there a way that this method can be used by other countries as well?

  3. What will this water be used for? Is the company only going to filter enough water for itself? And if not, would it be privatizing a population’s source of drinking water?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *