Plastic bag ordinance needs a rewrite

fake rolex If you enact a pro fake rolex environment ordinance, you shouldn’t leave out a big piece of what makes it pro environment.

But that’s what the City Council is poised to do Wednesday when it will take up a measure to ban plastic retail bags in major stores by next August and smaller stores the year after that.

The ordinance, which is backed by Mayor Rahm Emanuel, should be rewritten to require consumers to pay 10 cents to get a paper bag. Otherwise consumers and stores will be tempted to switch from plastic to paper bags, which are not an environmental improvement over plastic.

fake rolex Paper degrades more quickly in landfills, but paper bags require more energy to produce, and it takes seven truckloads of paper to replace one of plastic. Transporting paper bags burns more oil and releases more greenhouse gases.

A small fee on paper bags would not be a financial burden, but it would encourage the use of reusable bags. Of the more than 100 local governments in California that ban plastic bags, all require a paper bag fee except for two, which ban paper bags, too, according to the advocacy group Environment California.

Many people already own reusable bags, but they have to be encouraged to use them. A cotton bag must be used 131 times and a non woven bag must be used about 27 times before they have an environmental advantage over plastic, according to Hilex Poly Co., a plastic bag manufacturer. Reusable bags don’t help if they are just riding around unused in someone’s trunk.

The city is right to address the problem of plastic bags, which take years to break down in landfills and which cost money to remove from sewers and the Chicago River. Plastic retail bags also litter the urban environment when they get stuck in bushes and trees.

But banning plastic bags will impose costs on retailers and, ultimately, consumers. There’s no point to a plastic bag ban that does not discourage the use of paper bags as well, fake rolex if the aim is to be more environmentally friendly.

Plastic bag or reusable bag

So we have been talking about life cycle analysis in class lately and I just want to do a comparison between plastic bags and reusable bags as I am still conflicted between the two. Like someone mentioned in class last time, if a company decides to market its product as sustainable, there will always be more criticism against its attributes or even the operations of the company itself than if the company had not introduced the sustainability notion of its business. So why did I mention this?

Well in the beginning when reusable bags were introduced, it was only offered in one or two stores and not everyone had them. Then BOOM BA DA BANG, all of a sudden it was flooding in every store, in every consumer hand, and in every household. And then comes the criticism reusable bags use more plastic than plastic bags itself, reusable bags take longer than plastic bags to fully disintegrate etc. So what the verdict?

Reusable bags vary widely in their composition; some are plastic, some are canvas and some are cloth. They last way longer than plastic bags; but they also take way longer to disintegrate if they are made of plastic. Like I said, when they were first introduced, I only saw them in a couple of stores. However, they are now sold in every single retail location generally for $0.99 a unit.

The argument here is that although reusable bags encourage repeated consumption, the popularity for them and subsequent explosion in demand has dramatically increased the production and subsequent supply of them. For example, I have 3 in the trunk of my car, 2 in my various purses, another few in my family car, and well over 10 lying around all over my house. The main reason why I have so many is because companies are either making them free with purchase (which undoubtedly I, as a consumer, have to accept as it is well, free), or they are making these bags too cute to resist at a meagre price of 99 cents.

The concept of reusable bags has basically just transformed from being a sustainable product to another profit opportunity for money hungry companies. So besides the fact that some reusable bags themselves may not be as sustainable as we think they are, considering how much energy was used to manufacture them compared to producing plastic bags, companies are also exploiting their popularity by churning out more and more of them.

The plastic/reusable bag debate is a really interesting one! I agree with all your points, it seems like the reusable bag is actually becoming less sustainable because it is turning into more of a fad, and companies are exploiting this and producing fake rolex more and more, and people are buying more!

The New York Times published an article about several safetly concerns with reusable bags as well. Apparently several bags have been found to contain unsafe levels of lead (a lot of companies had to recall th fake rolex eir bags). Also the risk of bacteria growth (if the bags are used over and over, the potential for contamination is quite high) So then, if you have to wash them frequently, you using fake rolex up water resources and it becomes a similar issue to the disposable/reusable diaper debate.

I guess one solution would be to purchase bag fake rolex s made out of virgin materials like hemp. So materials that haven been treated by paint or any other synthetic materials. And certain foods like meat should be carried separately. This was a result of not washing the bags. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates at least 2000 Americans are hospitalized and about 60 die every year as a direct result of E. coli infection and complications.

BUT, I think that despite this study, reusable bags are still better than plastic ones. We need to reduce out consumption and production of plastic because most of it ends up in land fills or in our oceans. We just need to be a lot more careful about how we reuse our products and make sure to keep everything sanitary. :).

Plastic bag opponents try new gambit to win over Oregon Legislature

Back to Main MenuBusiness News HomeFront PorchIt Only MoneyOregon the EconomyP fake rolex laybooks ProfitsSilicon ForestWindow ShopStock Market ReportBusiness Public BlogBack to Main MenuVideos from the OregonianVideos from The Beaverton LeaderVideos from the Hillsboro ArgusVideos from The Forest Grove LeaderYour VideosRoss William Hamilton/The OregonianConsumers carry a mixture of bags on a street in Portland.SALEM Supporters of a bill that would ban single use plastic checkout bags in Oregon, recognizing that they don’t have the votes to get through the Legislature, are trying a new approach.Instead of seeking an immediate ban, they are instead proposing to set stiff recycling standards for the plastic bag industry.Under the new proposal, 80 percent of the single use checkout bags would have to be recycled by 2015. If those goals weren’t met, a ban on the plastic bags would take effect.The amendments were drafted by Rep. Vic Gilliam, R Silverton, a House sponsor of the proposed plastic bag ban, Senate Bill 536. They are also supported by Sen. Mark Hass, D Beaverton fake rolex , chief sponsor of the bill.”I don’t see any reason why this isn’t a game changer,” said Gilliam, noting that the industry itself has said it wants to focus on boosting recycling of plastic bags instead of banning them.But an industry spokeswoman said that the proposed recycling rates are unrealistically high and that the industry should have been included in discussions about the new approach.Anna Richter Taylor, who represents plastic bag maker Hilex Poly, said the amendment sets “unrealistic recycling goals that even Oregon bottle bill hasn’t met.”Gilliam said he would be willing to negotiate recycling rates with the industry. His amendments would also include one other major change fake rolex from the initial legislation.To satisfy the grocery industry, the initial bill required a five cent fee for consumers who wanted to use a paper bag instead of their own recyclable bag. Grocers said they didn’t want to absorb the added expense if consumers just shifted from plastic to paper bags.The amendments say that if the recyclable goals aren’t met and single use plastic bags are banned, a deposit would be charge for paper bags in the same fashion a deposit is now levied on many bottles and cans. The amount of the deposit would be set by the Department of Environmental Quality.Critics of the flimsy plastic bags used by grocers and other retailers say that they are a particularly unsightly litter and also often clog sewer and storm drains. Recyclers also complain that the plastic bags are often mistakenly mixed in with paper and metal recyclables and gum up their machinery.The plastics industry has run advertising against the campaign and joined forces with anti tax groups that have particularly opposed a five cent fee fake rolex on paper bags. Lawmakers have heard from many constituents who say they find the plastic bags convenient and note that they also re use them for such tasks as lining their garbage cans or picking up pet waste.