1. Beware of generalized claims
Virtually all of the arguments you hear are general in
nature. They apply to plastic in general, trash in general, or bags in general.
This is a very sly trick that is used repeatedly in this argument, because your
brain assumes they are talking about the specific topic at hand and you often
will not catch the nuance of what they are saying. You will see quotes for
numbers of “bags” used by people, but rarely specific numbers for plastic
grocery bags. Or arguments about a “great Pacific garbage patch” in the ocean
with a higher density of smaller plastic particles, yet no evidence that any of
those particles are plastic grocery bags. Or trash on the beaches, or pieces of
trash in the waterways, or bags that jam recycling equipment. Yet very few claims (if any) provide specific references to only the grocery-style plastic bags targeted by the bans.
For example, one of the most repeated statistics used at city council meetings are the number of plastic grocery bags used in California. Yet the city council has no jurisdiction over California! They aren't deciding on bags for California, or for the United States, or the entire world, but only for their citizens!
In another example they will claim that plastic bags fill the creeks, catch on trees, and blow around their city, yet when asked to take you out and show you exactly where this is a problem in their city they cannot do it!
2. Ask logical questions first
When a problem is presented, the normal thing to do is to ask logical questions. If plastic grocery bags are in the creeks, then
how did they get there and who put them there? If plastic grocery bags are on
the side of the road, wouldn't it be reasonable to investigate garbage trucks for littering issues? If
plastic particles are found in the ocean, then ask for their composition and how they
got there. All logic seems to go out the window with bag bans, and generalized hand waiving
about various issues immediately point to the illogical conclusion that only
one particular type of plastic bag must be banned from perfectly normal law abiding citizens. How is a person who receives a plastic bag at a store, reuses it as a trash can liner, then properly disposes of it in their garbage can responsible for plastic bags in the creek?
3. Evaluate the statistics and evidence
Bag ban supporters often like to throw out numbers that
sound large and impressive are supposed to be shocking. But evaluate the
numbers, particularly in relation to the bigger picture. For example, millions of bags sounds
like a lot, but how many million other articles are consumed daily? How many tons of garbage are collected every day? And for all of these numbers, what percentage of the general issue is the particular bag that is targeted by this ban?
4. Ask these specific questions: How will a plastic grocery
bag ban solve the problem presented, and why are plastic grocery bags singled
out?
This question forces the bag ban supporter to justify the
illogical conclusion to ban bags. In virtually every case, they are
overlooking much larger problem contributors and focusing in on a single
limited type of plastic bag without a logical reason. They will state "it is just the beginning", which is almost a more shocking revelation than anything else.
5. Demand results and measurements
For every bag ban proposed, demands should be made to
specifically do the following:
a) Determine the exact problem caused by plastic grocery bags
b) Determine how the impact of a plastic grocery bag ban will be
measured and tracked
c) Determine a “minimum improvement” required to justify an
ongoing plastic bag ban
Plastic carryout bags are “single-use” bags, or plastic
carryout bags are only used for 12 minutes on average.
Facts: Retail stores purchase plastic carryout bags for a single purpose: to
enable shoppers to carry their purchases home. But as with many other items,
that does not make it “single-use.” Everyone
knows that these bags can be reused for hundreds of other purposes.[i] In fact, the irony of targeting grocery bags
for a ban is that they are likely the MOST repurposed and reused product that
people bring into their home! People use them for everything from trash can
liners to disposal of used diapers to containing wet bathing suits after a swim
to storing leftover parts.
Plastic Carryout Bags should be banned because few are
Recycled.
Fact: The recycling rate is less than 5% using the
State of California statistics for the In-Store Recycling Program[ii]
and about 14.1% using statistics from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).[iii] What bag ban proponents conveniently
forget to tell you is that according to a life cycle study by the UK
Environment Agency that 76% of all plastic carryout bags are reused and that 40.3%
are reused as waste bin liners and to pick up pet litter. In addition, the study claims that reusing a
plastic carryout bag as a trash bag is actually beneficial to the environment
because it avoids the manufacture and purchase of another plastic bag. [iv]
Littered plastic carryout bags are carried by storm water
into storm drains, the river, and end up in ocean where they harm marine
wildlife.
Fact: It is widely accepted that 80% of all plastic
debris, including plastic carryout bags, comes from land based sources and is
conveyed to the ocean via storm drains and rivers.[v] What bag ban proponents fail to tell you is that
communities are already spending hundreds of thousands of dollars
installing full or partial capture devices in storm drain catch basins, inlets,
and outfalls so that the vast majority of littered bags can be stopped. These devices will prevent all trash,
including plastic bags and plastic debris, harmful to marine wildlife from
flowing into creeks and rivers and making its way to the ocean.[vi] Efforts should be made at stopping,
capturing, and collecting ALL litter, not drastic solutions like completely
banning a product because a tiny percentage end up in streams.
Plastic bags must be banned because they are littered.
Fact: Plastic bags are part of the litter. However, the basic premise of the
argument is that EVERYONE should pay because SOME people litter. This is an
illogical conclusion. Most of the bag ban arguments revolve around dealing with
littered plastic bags. It is a litter problem they are trying to solve. No
efforts are made to try to determine the cause of the litter (such as homeless
camps, people visiting a beach, or uncovered garbage trucks), but they jump quickly to the conclusion
that all plastic grocery bags must be banned. If banning was the solution, then we would need to
ban virtually everything, including tires, mattresses, plastic bottles, trash
bags, and everything else anyone finds in the creek.
Littered plastic carryout bags blow around easily.
Fact: True; however this very fact also makes
plastic bags one of the easiest pieces of litter to capture and collect. Windblown
plastic carryout bags have a large surface area and therefore a very high
probability that the bag will get caught on a tree, shrub, stick, rock, fence,
or other obstacle before it is swept downstream. In fact, it is virtually impossible for a plastic grocery bag to make it all the way down a creek to the ocean. Therefore, the probability of a windblown
plastic carryout bag ever flowing down a creek or riverbed to the ocean is very
low.
Plastic carryout bags kill 100,000 marine animals and a
million sea birds every year.
Fact: This allegation is false. The claim originated with a misinterpretation
of a 1987 Canadian study that concluded between 1981 and 1984 that more than
100,000 marine mammals including birds were killed by discarded fishing
nets. The study did not mention plastic
bags. In fact, both the United Nations
and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) identified “derelict fishing
gear, including monofilament line, trawl nets, and gill nets” as one of the
greatest threats to marine life and sea birds.[vii]
Plastic bags are a commonly
littered item and account for 14.6% percent of wildlife entanglements.
Fact: The statement is misleading. According to the Ocean Conservancy 2010 Report[viii]
a total of 336 wildlife animals were found entangled in Marine Debris worldwide
in 2010. Out of 336 only 49 or 14.6% were entangled by plastic bags
including 6 amphibians, 19 birds, 11 fish, 6 invertebrates, 6 mammals, and 1
reptile. The largest cause of
entanglement was fishing line with 126 or 37.5% and fishing nets with 82 or
24.4%. The 49 entanglements out of 336 should
be kept in perspective with the half-million birds including protected species
that are killed each year by “green energy” wind turbines.[ix]
The Pacific Garbage Patch is
twice the size of Texas and consists of floating plastic debris.
Fact: False. The Pacific Garbage Patch is neither a patch nor a huge mass of plastic
debris floating in the ocean. Angel
White, an assistant professor of oceanography at Oregon State University states
that the patch is about one tenth the size of Texas and consists of small bits
of plastic that float beneath the surface.[x]
Furthermore, the garbage patch consists of small hard plastic pieces, and no
plastic bag pieces have been found. In other words, plastic grocery bags have
nothing to do with the garbage patch.
Plastic
carryout bags are made from oil.
Fact: False. Domestically manufactured plastic bags are made out of polyethylene. Ethylene is made from ethane
which is a waste by-product from refining natural gas[xi] and oil[xii]. Ethane must be
removed from the natural gas in order to lower the BTU value of the natural gas
to an acceptable level before it is delivered to homes and businesses for
fuel. Ethane burns too hot if allowed to
remain in natural gas and if not used to make plastic (ethylene) it will
have to be burned off, resulting in greenhouse gas emissions.[xiii] By converting ethane into plastic
greenhouse gas emissions are reduced. “Using
the ethane to make plastic does not in any way reduce the amount of fuel
available for transportation or power generation or increase our energy
imports.”[xiv]
The Polyethylene needs to be used and discarded in some manner, and plastic
grocery bags is actually a very excellent and useful method of using up the
polyethylene by-product.
Plastic
carryout bags are responsible for severe flooding in Bangladesh in 1989 and
1998.
Fact: True and False. The severe flooding that put most of the
country underwater was blamed upon plastic carry out bags that had blocked
drains and sewers. A careful examination
of the issue will show that other factors are responsible. In many areas of
Bangladesh people live in slum like conditions. Trash is deposited in makeshift dumps, along the road and in drainage
ditches. Drainage ditches and canals are
filled with trash. Less than 50% of all
waste in urban areas is collected and disposed of in landfills.[xv] Hence, plastic bags were not the cause of
flooding but an inadequate infrastructure for trash disposal and flood control.
Plastic carryout bags can plug up storm drains and cause
flooding.
Fact: True but rare. What plastic bag ban proponents do not tell
you is that storm drain catch basins are maintained on a regular basis where
all trash is removed from catch basins and trash excluder devices and properly
disposed of in the landfill. In addition, in the event of heavy rains, flood
control personnel are on duty to handle situations that may come up. And they ignore the major source of storm
drain plugging: leaves! We should be banning trees instead of plastic bags to
keep storm drains clear!
Californians use 20 Billion Plastic Carryout Bags per year
(500 per person).
Fact: No one knows
how many plastic carryout bags are used by residents of California per year. The 20 billion number is derived from the
estimated weight of plastic carryout bags in California landfills by dividing
the estimated weight by the weight of a single grocery bag. The weight is corrupted by the inclusion of
dry cleaning bags which are heavier than grocery bags. Also, since the size and weight of plastic
carryout bags from different retailers vary, the method used to calculate the
number of bags will result in erroneous data. Using this same method of calculating plastic bag quantities from the
weight of plastic carryout bags distributed and reported by stores to the State
of California under AB 2949/SB 1219 results in only 9 billion[xvi]
plastic carryout bags! In addition, common sense should be applied. Is it
believable that an average family of 4 uses 2000 plastic grocery bags per year
(40 per week)? It is more likely about half that number.
Plastic carryout bags do not decompose in landfills and
will last thousands of years.
Fact:
True, but what is not mentioned is that nothing much else decomposes in
a landfill either. Modern landfills are
tightly compacted to create a low-oxygen environment that inhibits
decomposition. Modern landfills act like
vast mummifiers. [xvii] Because plastic bags do not decompose in
landfills means that they do not produce greenhouse gases during the
decomposition process like paper bags will. Hence, that is an environmental benefit.
Plastic carryout bags take up space in landfills.
Fact: False. Plastic carryout bags used
as trash bags or to dispose of litter take up less space than traditional
plastic garbage bags. Plastic carryout
bags that are empty should have been recycled rather than discarded in the
landfill. Also, paper bags and reusable
bags take up more space and landfill volumes that the plastic bags they replace.
And as mentioned previously, if the polyethylene is not used for plastic
grocery bags it will be used for something else, and still end up in landfills
in some form.
Plastic Grocery Bags are a significant part of litter and
money will be saved.
Fact: Not quite true. City, county, and state governments spend
millions of dollars every year to clean up litter. What bag ban proponents don’t tell you is
that plastic carryout bags make up less than 1% of all litter and will not
result in an appreciable reduction in litter and therefore litter cleanup
budgets cannot be reduced. Every dollar
spent by jurisdictions to implement a bag ban and every dollar spent by
residents to purchase carryout bags is basically wasted, since the amount of
litter is not significantly reduced. In
fact, it can be quickly shown that all of the cost to implement and comply with
bag bans ends up costing well over $10,000 per plastic bag saved from the
litter stream. This money could be used much more efficiently in a broad based
litter removal effort rather than trying to ban single items.
Bag bans are good for the environment.
Fact: False. Banning plastic carryout bags results in an increase in paper bags usage
from about 5% to 30%. Paper bags weigh
more, cost more to manufacture and transport, are seldom reused, and take up
more space in landfills than plastic carryout bags. Furthermore, factors such
as extra trips home to pick up reusable bags, or more frequent trips to the
store because the consumer does not have enough bags, or the energy to wash
reusable bags are never considered.
People are exposed to higher bacteria levels in the home
than are present in reusable bags. [xviii]
Fact: True, but that is not the point.
The point is that bacteria and E. coli in a
reusable bag transfers to a packaged food item on the way home, and when the
package is opened, the bacteria transfers to your hands and to the food item
such that when ingested could make you ill.
Most people prepare food items not on the kitchen counter but on a
cutting board or plate or pan that has been washed in the dishwasher and
sanitized.
[xix],[xx] Reusable bags must be washed and sanitized on
a regular basis, as recommended by the Centers for Disease Prevention and
Control (CDC).
[xxi]
Also, when is it logical to compare sanitation concerns with the worst possible
case? One always wants to be as safe as possible around food items.
The people are too stupid to see things our way, so a law
is required to restrict them.
Fact: Millions of people freely choose to use
plastic bags on a daily basis. No one forces anyone to use a plastic bag.
Businesses are not forced to offer plastic bags. Bag ban proponents feel that
the public has not freely accepted their “the sky is falling” arguments against
plastic bags and that everyone should give them up because of the bad few
people who litter them, and therefore seek to curtail the rights of individuals
and force them to comply to their lifestyle. Plastic grocery bags could
disappear tomorrow if they could convince everyone it is needed. But they
can’t, so they seek to forcefully regulate the people against their will. This
is the basic fact of bag ban laws.
San Jose saw an 89% reduction in plastic bag litter after
the bag ban.
Fact: Misrepresented. First of all, the areas surveyed were
actually different between the survey
years. Also, non-plastic grocery bag trash also was reduced by 30% in those
survey areas, which was unexplained. Furthermore, they only measured the number
of bags cleaned up, NOT the number of bags that remained in the
environment after cleanup. Thus it is not a valid measurement of impact to the
environment. But in reality, OF COURSE plastic grocery bags were reduced, the
city banned 1 million people from getting them! The main question is the
cost/benefit analysis. For the millions of dollars in personal costs to the
people of San Jose to comply with a bag ban, they could have hired an army of plastic
grocery bag collectors whose single job was to go out and pick up only plastic
grocery bags every day!
Bag Bans are sweeping across the state, and everyone is
getting on board.
Fact: Bag bans are being implemented by city officials on
their people. City council members are under pressure to look as “green” as
other cities around them. Yet the people NEVER GET TO VOTE on this issue. Bag bans
are being passed by city council members who “feel” it is the “right” thing to
do, or simpley to make a statement, and they ignore the facts or cost to their
citizens. Public comments and private conversations with people show a huge
percentage of the population (typically about 60%) oppose bag bans and hate
them. This is not a popular movement, only a political movement.
Anyone opposing bag bans works for the plastics
industry or “big oil,” or hates the environment.
Fact: This is completely false. There are
multiple citizens groups that oppose bag bans. People in those citizen groups
care about the environment, never litter, take and use only the plastic bags
they need, and reuse virtually all of the plastic bags they bring home. Online bulletin
boards are filled with citizens decrying bag bans. People oppose bag bans
because they do not make sense, the cost/benefit analysis does not add up, and
it is an example of nanny-state government at its worst.
[vii]
Macfadyen, Graeme, Huntington, Tim, Cappell, Rod. FAO and UNEP 2009. “Abandoned, Lost or otherwise
Discarded Fishing Gear”
[xv] Enayetullah,
Iftekhar and Hashmi ,Q. S. I., “Community Based Solid Waste Management Through
Public-Private-Community Partnerships: Experience of Waste Concern in
Bangladesh”. Presented at 3R Asia Conference, Tokyo Japan, 30 October to 1
November 2006. Available at: http://www.env.go.jp/recycle/3r/en/asia/02_03-3/06.pdf
[xvii]
Rathje, William and Murphy, Cullen. 1 March 1981. RUBBISH! The Archeology of
Garbage, University of Arizona Press.