Readers: Ban Plastic Bags
Last week readers voted in the poll and supported a ban on plastic shopping bags. Nobody has proposed such a ban but there is some support. The question is how it would play with the general St. Louis population?
Los Angeles will become the largest city in the United States to impose a plastic-bag ban, with some 7,500 affected stores and nearly 4 million residents. The city council vote, which took place Wednesday, sets in motion a months-long process including an environmental review, enactment of an ordinance, and a phase-in period that affects larger stores first, according to news reports. (Christian Science Monitor)
It’s time for St. Louis to actually take real action toward sustainability, not just have events to make it look like politicians are actually doing something meaningful.
Only 1 percent of plastic bags are recycled worldwide — about 2 percent in the U.S. — and the rest, when discarded, can persist for centuries. They can spend eternity in landfills, but that’s not always the case. “They’re so aerodynamic that even when they’re properly disposed of in a trash can they can still blow away and become litter,” says Mark Murray, executive director of Californians Against Waste. It’s as litter that plastic bags have the most baleful effect. And we’re not talking about your everyday eyesore. (Salon)
Here are the poll results from last week:
Q: Plastic shopping bags are banned in 75 jurisdictions in the US, should the City of St. Louis also ban their use?
- Yes 82 [59.85%]
- No 40 [29.2%]
- Maybe 9 [6.57%]
- Other: 4 [2.92%]
- Unsure/No Opinion 2 [1.46%]
The four “other” answers were:
- Stores should charge for bags and not give them away free.
- wouldn’t paper bags blow around like plastic bags?
- Stores should be encouraged to charge money for plastic/paper shopping bags.
- F*ck no, Steve. C’mon, man; what the hell is wrong with you? (I edited this to make it less offensive to some)
When stores try to do things on their own they get pushback from customers. Other than a ban cities could require stores to charge for bags. The stores would like to recoup the expense since bags aren’t free. Paper bags are heavier than plastic and thus don’t blow around as easily. A paper bag will break down quickly whereas a plastic bag takes thousands of years.
I ask that everyone keep their language here PG.
– Steve Patterson
Rant alert – you (and apparently others) want “St. Louis to actually take real action toward sustainability, not just have events to make it look like politicians are actually doing something meaningful.” If so, let’s look at what’s making up the garbage stream going into our landfills and ending up alongside our city streets, and “fix” the real problems! What I see is cigarette butts and paper bags filled with cardboard and styrofoam fast food containers, plastic-coated paper and styrofoam beverage containers (along the streets) and massive amounts of cardboard, foam and plastic packaging, used to sell and ship everything from i phones to cereal, batteries to CFL’s (both ecological problems, themselves), laundry detergent to milk, diapers to beer, plus all the stuff sold by Amazon.com, Zappos, Target and Walmart (headed to the landfill). What I DON’T see is a lot of empty plastic bags!
Yes, plastic bags can blow around and, yes, some do, and, yes, they’re not great for the aquatic environment. Yes, bringing your own bags is better for the environment than using plastic (or paper) bags, and we all should do so. But, in the bigger scheme of things, most plastic bags do end up in landfills, taking up less space than paper bags, and taking up far less space than all the other packaging that went into them as they left the stores that “gave them away” in the first place! Most people wait until they get home with the stuff that’s inside the bags (duh!), they’re not randomly throwing them out of their car (or streetcar) windows on the way home! In contrast, Starbucks uses/”gives away” relatively few of these dreaded plastic bags, but generates a whole bunch of other, far-bulkier, waste in the form of all their “disposable” cups and lids, that does end up in places they don’t belong.
The real problem we face is that, except for aluminum and corrugated cardboard, there really is not much of a market for most recyclables (like plastic or paper bags). Unless we (via “the government”) are willing to outlaw ALL pre-packaged items AND we (via “the government”) are willing to force all retailers to sell their items in bulk form AND we (via “the government”) are going to tell all consumers that they MUST trade convenience for environmental correctness, outlawing just plastic bags is the epitome of “mak[ing] it look like politicians are actually doing something meaningful” while doing very little to actually address the issues of consumer waste and recycling!
You state that “When stores try to do things on their own they get pushback from customers. . . . The stores would like to recoup the expense since bags aren’t free.” Aldi’s seems to be doing fine charging for bags, unilaterally, while most other stores seem little concerned about the “cost” – Sam’s Club sells plastic bags in a box of 1,000 that costs less than $15 (including tax) – that’s less than 1.5 cents per bag! That’s a (very small) cost of doing business, and it’s what the vast majority of customers expect. There’s also a trade-off in checker efficiency with plastic bags – working with customer-provided bags is simply slower, which carries its own costs (“time is money”).
If we (via “the government”) really want to “do something” to “protect the environment”, I’d focus more on a) making it illegal to sell soft drinks in plastic bottles or disposable cups – aluminum cans or customer-provided containers, only; b) making it illegal to sell beer in disposable bottles – aluminum cans, growlers or kegs, only; and c) making it illegal for restaurants to sell any food in “to-go” containers of any sort – all food must be consumed on premises and any waste must be composted. Will this ever happen? I seriously, seriously doubt it. But we already make it illegal to litter, and it’s rarely enforced. Passing “feel-good” laws is a waste of time. Passing laws should also be a last resort. Education and persuasion are MUCH more effective. If WE want to “help” the environment, WE each need to trade some convenience for more effort. WE all need to CHOOSE packaging that is both the bare minimum required AND will actually be (not just “can be”) recycled. AND, WE all need to purchase a lot more recycled products, we need to support the market!
You can’t see the real problem? Billions of these bags are produced, used once, and discarded. That’s a real problem in my book. I’m all for banning the other items you list as well. I hate that servers bring me a straw when I’m drinking water from a glass — big waste.
Do you use AC in summer and heat in winter? Much bigger waste.
I use very little HVAC but I don’t consider it a “waste” like using bags once then discarding them. I bake more in the winter so they heat adds warmth without wasting the heat used to cook my food.
The oil/coal which powers your HVAC is used once and its waste is discharged into the atmosphere where you breath it. At least the bags are mostly buried somewhere where they don’t affect anyone. And believe it or not, it is possible to use a plastic bag more than once, I speak from experience!
Hmmm, methinks you forgot about all of the energy which was used to extract that oil from the ground, transport it, refine it, convert it, then transport the resin to a manufacturing facility, then the energy used to power the extruders, then transport the bags to a warehouse, then to a retail outlet. Actually, considering that the processes by which most synthetic petroleum-based resins (complex polymers, actually) are manufactured incorporate some very toxic and hazardous chemical compounds, all but the most vital plastics manufactured today should be banned. Not going to happen, but essentially inferring that plastics are relatively harmless is just a wee bit disingenuous.
Preventing heat stroke or freezing is equal to being too lazy to carry your own bag?
Being too spoiled to put on a coat while at home is equal to having a bag available at the store if you forget to bring one for whatever reason.
I rarely use heat in the winter. I have three floors above me and three below me so my place stays comfortable but a bit chilly.
The problem Jim, is not so much that there is no market for recyclables. There is, and it is huge. Billions of dollars a year huge. No, the problem is that we have given over these decisions to a fabricated “market”, which favors manufacturing of new products out of raw materials, rather than production from recycled material. This is massively wasteful, since the energy used to re-manufacture something from recycled materials is much less than that used in production from new materials. Nearly every product manufactured today can be recycled into something else–especially aluminum and steel, and most other metals. Aluminum is eminently more recyclable because it is an element, whereas steel is an alloy. Plastic resins can be recycled, too, though not as many cycles of re-manufacturing as metals. Unfortunately, there is an extant and massive infrastructure already in place, held by many different corporate supranationals, which uses that capacity for its own narrow interests. Profit being the primary one, of course. There is significant capacity and capital which is not about to let that investment be neutralized by efforts to make recycled materials the primary “raw” material. As we have seen, a large portion of that capital is also diverted to buy the influence and political power to ensure that the gravy train is maintained. Citizens United (see: buying influence), and the “corporate personhood” seed inserted into a Supreme Court brief by a former railroad company employee/cum law clerk 100 years ago didn’t help either.
Profit which comes at the expense of both human and animal life is both immoral and unethical.
Intellectually, I agree, to a point. When it comes to packaging, both manufacturers and retailers want the most bang for the buck. If recycled is less expensive than virgin, recycled WILL be used. Look at the humble beer can. I’m old enough to remember when they were steel and you needed a “church key” to open them. Coors and A-B didn’t switch to aluminum cans because they’re easier to recycle, they switched because they’re cheaper, weigh less and get the job done! Are there conspiracies to “protect turf” and limit new (and likely better) options? Absolutely! But there’s also that catering to consumer preferences and demands (that keeps one in business). The brown beer bottle makes little economic sense (compared to aluminum cans), yet the bulk of our beer comes in the brown bottles. Why? Because that’s what most beer consumers CHOOSE to buy! Yes, part of it is marketing, but a lot of it is personal preference, based on both direct experience and on peer pressure. If you want to view that as some giant conspiracy, go ahead, but I don’t see it that way . . .
Paper bags don’t actually decompose in landfills (http://environment.about.com/od/recycling/a/biodegradable.htm), and they take up much more landfill space than plastic. Like JZ71, I haven’t seen a problem with plastic bag litter. So I don’t really get the motivation here.
Correct link: http://environment.about.com/od/recycling/a/biodegradable.htm
There are other issues with plastic bags beyond the litter/landfill issue. Plastic bags are a petroleum product which has external costs well beyond what we actually pay for a barrel of oil. Furthermore, these bags are produced in factories that often times consume natural gas and produce noxious fumes and endanger the health of their neighbors.
I believe that charging a nickel per bag would be a great way to encourage the use of re-usable bags.
Target already offers a 5 cent per bag discount if you bring and use your own bags.
http://pressroom.target.com/pr/news/target-launches-recycling-stations.aspx
The real issue here is the carrot or the stick question – should government mandate or should consumers demand? EVERY consumer product has environmental impacts, from production through distribution / transportation to final disposal after its useful life. Are we better served, as a society, if the government, as the nanny state / surrogate parent, decides what we should or should not do? Or, are we each better off, if each of us, individually, makes informed choices based on our own needs and desires?
I wish companies would do a production to sale review and reduce all the packaging they can. Plastic, whether it be bags, 6pack liner, and a million other items, is expensive to produce, takes forever to decompose, and way too much ends up in the oceans and forests.
I say…cut the bags. hell most cashiers over use them anyways (putting a sack of potatoes in one or a gallon of beverage). But expand it……stop the freaking water bottles. Then again, with St. Louis having been documented as having the best water in the Country, I would be all for bottling it and selling….think what that could do for the City budget?????
I reuse every plastic bag I get. I use them in the trash cans of the kitchen and in the waste paper baskets around the house. If I didn’t have the plastic bags I’d have to BUY PLASTIC BAGS for use int he kitchen and waste paper baskets. How is that better for anyone? The nanny-state is getting quite annoying. (BTW, I don’t know anyone that throws out plastic bags).
Why do you need a bag for waste paper baskets? Just dump the waste paper straight into your recycling. Most people do throw out their plastic bags. And they accept far more bags than they could ever reuse, even if they have a dog. They are totally unnecessary.