« The Week in Green | Main | Why the China excuse is getting old »
Who's in the right in the plastic bag ban conundrum?
Why is nothing in the world of green business ever simple?
Take London's plans for a ban on all free disposable carrier bags. At first glance this is a surely A Good Thing: almost two thirds of Londoners support the idea; a ban on plastic bags has proved highly successful in the Devon town of Modbury; most of the supermarkets are already pushing reusable bags as an alternative; and it would strike a blow against one of the most visible symbols of consumer waste.
But as soon as you start investigating the proposals everything starts to get confusing.
Despite the proposal's popularity the government - whilst committed to phasing out single use plastic carrier bags through its waste strategy - seems strangely unwilling to endorse a ban.
Spokespeople for both Defra and the Treasury are quick to cite the supposedly poor example of Ireland, which introduced a tax on plastic bags in 2002 with a similar goal of slashing the number of bags in circulation. They argue that far from slashing the use of plastic bags the move simply resulted in a surge in sales of heavier reusable bags and bin liners, which require more energy to manufacture and transport.
The UK Packaging and Industrial Films Association (PIFA) even claims to have uncovered Irish customs and excise figures show that while the use of thin plastic bags in Ireland plummeted following the introduction of the tax the total weight of plastic bags being imported into the country has increased as people buy alternatives.
Meanwhile, Irish shops have reportedly simply started handing out paper bags, which (almost incredibly)some argue have a greater environmental impact than plastic bags as they release carbon dioxide as they decompose.
All this sounds so counterintuitive it is easy to imagine a well organised plastic bag lobby has simply constructed an argument to suit its own ends and both the UK and Scottish governments, which shelved plans for an Irish style bag levy, have fallen for it.
This is certainly the view of a spokesman for the Irish department for the Environment, Heritage and local Government, who argues that evidence claiming overall use of plastic bags has increased is anecdotal, that use of plastic carrier bags has plummeted 90 per cent and that use of reusable bags has soared.
He also points out, not unreasonably, that Ireland has now stuck with the ban for around five years and earlier this year increased the levy to ensure it remains effective – a strange thing to do if it was not delivering a positive environmental impact.
The intuitive position remains that the Irish government must be in the right and the plastic bag lobby is attempting to muddy the waters of the debate.
It stands to reason that any tax or outright ban on carrier bags, such as that proposed in London, will lead to the increased use of heavier reusable plastic bags and bin liners – after all people still need to carry their shopping home and line their bins, but it is hard to believ this increase offset the environmental gains from a full ban.
For example, I have been using a small rucksack and three reusable plastic bags to carry shopping back from my supermarket for the last year; they are all still going strong and there is no way they are heavier than all the disposable bags I would otherwise have used. This would surely be the default position if a ban was enforced with more reusable bags being used, far fewer disposal bags being used and overall demand for plastic bags falling.
And yet, some observers maintain that the evidence from Ireland is to the contrary.
If the Irish government is as proud of its plastic bag policy as it appears then it owes it to every other national, state, city and local government currently considering a bag ban to put this debate to rest one way or another and commission a full audit into the overall environmental impact of its levy.
Perhaps then the decision for MPs voting on the London councils proposals would prove simple after all.
Nice to see a balanced response. Just a few notes about Ireland. the original government claim justifying the need for action was that plastic shopping bags made up 5% of litter. That number was, in fact, a misreading of the government's litter statistics which indicated in 2002 that these bags made up just 0.75% of litter. The latest statistics show that this number is 0.53% - after millions of pounds of tax takings!
Why has the litter nymber not dropped 90% like the supposed drop in bag numbers? Because that number is also fictional. It was derived from an assessment of total bags pre tax - and then on the basis of tax takings. Obviously if there is less than 100% compliance with the tax - tax takings are low - leading to an eroneous conclusion re low residual bag numbers. A subsequent improvement in compliance led government to believe that bags use was increasing and they increased the tax.
Spin, spin and more spin - but poor policy all the same.
Let's come at the issue from a different angle. Let us assume that everyone had re-usable bags for all their shopping. These bags are then stored in the car boot because you don't wwant to leave them at home. Given thet they weigh considerably more than the plastic bag variety - how many thousands of additional tons of material are we then collectively transporting - burning more fuel in the process.
Typically, when it comes to environmental issues - simple 'solutions' don't appear to be solutions at all.
Gerard, Sydney, Australia
Posted by :Gerard van Rijswijk | November 14, 2007 12:55 AM
Gerard is the one spinning fiction.
He must think that the Irish are pretty stupid to fall for something like what he imagines.
If the Irish disliked the plastic bag ban then they would get rid of it.
What has happened in reality is that the Irish like the ban and have gotten rid of the plastic.
Also, heavier plastic bags are not the only substitute for plastic bags. Cloth bags are one substitute. I use them over and over again.
Posted by :Jen | November 19, 2007 1:44 AM
Reusable bags are an alternative to plastic bags but they don't carry their weight.For example,if you have a cold or the flu and you are constantly interacting with the bag,it will pick -up and store the germs.A reusable bag is a personal item and can act as a transporter for germs.It takes electricity,water and chemicals to clean and disinfect the item.How is that green?Also,given the American Holiday of Thanksgiving, a household of four will require many reusable bags to transport.One might as well cart around an extra cart full of reusable bags for a party of eight or more.Or they can burn gas by making a couple trips?Reusable bags are Ephemeral items and trends come and go.When the bag becomes less desirable it will become a very durable form of waste.Not to mention it might be a little more challenging to convert the mass male population to carry reusable bags on consistent basis seeing how hand bags are traditionally womens items.Also many of the purchases consumers make might be impulse buys... its a good thing they still have plastic when you need it.
Paper bags cause seventy percent more atmospheric pollution and use three hundred percent more energy to produce and transport.Paper has very unpleasant organic waste.Plastic makes life better.Easier,convenient,cost efficient.The best end of waste option is OxO-Biodegradable Plastics.
Posted by :Reusable bags are an alternative to plastic bags but they dont carry their weight | November 20, 2007 8:50 PM
Reusable bags are an alternative to plastic bags but they don't carry their weight.For example,if you have a cold or the flu and you are constantly interacting with the bag,it will pick -up and store the germs.A reusable bag is a personal item and can act as a transporter for germs.It takes electricity,water and chemicals to clean and disinfect the item.How is that green?Also,given the American Holiday of Thanksgiving, a household of four will require many reusable bags to transport.One might as well cart around an extra cart full of reusable bags for a party of eight or more.Or they can burn gas by making a couple trips?Reusable bags are Ephemeral items and trends come and go.When the bag becomes less desirable it will become a very durable form of waste.Not to mention it might be a little more challenging to convert the mass male population to carry reusable bags on consistent basis seeing how hand bags are traditionally womens items.Also many of the purchases consumers make might be impulse buys... its a good thing they still have plastic when you need it.
Paper bags cause seventy percent more atmospheric pollution and use three hundred percent more energy to produce and transport.Paper has very unpleasant organic waste.Plastic makes life better.Easier,convenient,cost efficient.The best end of waste option is OxO-Biodegradable Plastics.
Posted by :Reusable bags are an alternative to plastic bags but they dont carry their weight | November 20, 2007 8:52 PM
Reusable bags are an alternative to plastic bags but they don't carry their weight.For example,if you have a cold or the flu and you are constantly interacting with the bag,it will pick -up and store the germs.A reusable bag is a personal item and can act as a transporter for germs.It takes electricity,water and chemicals to clean and disinfect the item.How is that green?Also,given the American Holiday of Thanksgiving, a household of four will require many reusable bags to transport.One might as well cart around an extra cart full of reusable bags for a party of eight or more.Or they can burn gas by making a couple trips?Reusable bags are Ephemeral items and trends come and go.When the bag becomes less desirable it will become a very durable form of waste.Not to mention it might be a little more challenging to convert the mass male population to carry reusable bags on consistent basis seeing how hand bags are traditionally womens items.Also many of the purchases consumers make might be impulse buys... its a good thing they still have plastic when you need it.
Paper bags cause seventy percent more atmospheric pollution and use three hundred percent more energy to produce and transport.Paper has very unpleasant organic waste.Plastic makes life better.Easier,convenient,cost efficient.The best end of waste option is OxO-Biodegradable Plastics.
Posted by :Reusable bags are an alternative to plastic bags but they dont carry their weight | November 20, 2007 8:52 PM
Lets everyone go cut down some trees!!!
I don't see the problem with plastic bags under the ground. Thats where the material to make the bag came from in the first place and the bags degrade alot faster that 1000 years. Has anyone buried a plastic bag and then dug it up 1000 years later. Stupid!
Posted by :Jeffrey | November 21, 2007 9:19 PM
Instead of reusable bags, why not let city, state or government officials implement recycling for plastic bags? Or the use of compostable plastic bags instead of paper bags? I want the option of using plastic bags especially when it rains or when I'm buying wet goods. Also, whoever said about impulse buying is correct especially when you live in the city where stores are just around the block.
Posted by :Doris | November 30, 2007 6:33 PM
Since the bulk of the bags we use are from our regular supermarket shop, we therefore allow ourselves to be guided by whatever options the supermarkets offer. If they withdrew the free disposable bags [no doubt with their self-congratulatory fanfare about being 'green'] obligating us to buy the more expensive reusable bags[hopefully made from recycled plastic] it would'nt take long for us to make that extra bit of effort to have a few bags ready for such use: after all,who likes wasting money on endless bags!? No doubt the lazier members of society might grumble initially but I'm sure they'll get over it.
Bit by bit we can help ourselves..we surely don't need the nanny state to boss us about yet again.
Posted by :Adam H | December 3, 2007 12:12 PM