To me, there can only be 1 culprit can be behind it. That culprit would be the makers of the plastic bags themselves! I mean really, bringing your own bags to the market can now make you die! Ecoli virus among countless others!!!
Well, I tell you what……I myself have been using my own reusable bags going on my 5th year.  In all my carries,  eggs, poultry, vegetables, and anything else i may buy I have never, not once, even had a spill of any considerable size in one of my reusable bags!   If i did, I would simply take out the bottom plastic insert and wipe free any “contaminates” that may be there and we would then be free and clear of the problem.  If it were that bad, i would wash my washable reusable bag in cold water and line dry. 

Problem fixed.

It is clear to me that the makers of the plastic bags are acting purely from greed and cash money is their objective.  They do not care that coral reefs are dying by plastic bag strangle hold.  They do not care that the los Angeles River looks like the trash dump from the original movie Star Wars!  They don’t care that  plastic bags waive from trees in Central park like Christmas ornaments, they do not care that CA spends $30,000,000 dollars per year on trying to contain their plastic disaster and barely scrapes the top of it.

plastic bags have a strangle hold on our seas!

The bottom line is that plastic bags are one of our great plagues in the world and slowly but surely people are being made aware of it.  As rap group “Public Enemy” once said, “Don’t Belive the Hype!”  Its propaganda, and it simply isnt true.

If the plastic bag manufacturers had any real amo they would be showing us all the bacteria and sickness’s that have arose from places like Ireland and Austrailia who are bothworking on 10 years free of plastic bags.  If there were any truth in any of this they would maybe start there.

Bottom line, plastic bags hurt the Earth, stay strong, keep bringing your reusable bags, and dont believe the Hype!  It simply isnt true!

Why is the fee 25 cents?

* To effectively deter the use of single-use bags and encourage consumers to switch to reusable bags, the fee must be set high enough to have a real impact on consumer behavior. Ireland’s current bag fee is set at the equivalent of 33 U.S. cents. The policy was so successful that it significantly reduced plastic bag litter by over 90%.

Is this a tax?

* No. This is a regulatory fee under Article XIII A of the California Constitution because the amount and nature of the fee have a fair and reasonable relationship to the environmental, public health, and societal burdens imposed by the use of plastic and paper carryout bags.

This bill could be huge — one of its strongest points is that it doesn’t let paper bags off the hook, curbing the plastic industry’s cries of biased treatment and holding paper plants equally accountable for wasteful production and unsound ecological policies. But this bill needs your help. Do you believe in a less wasteful tomorrow for California? Then send Assemblymember Brownley a letter and let her know you support the cause! It only takes a few minutes, and it’s an uphill battle for these sorts of bills. We already sent ours! Take the time today — the environment will thank you for it.

With all of the anger built up around disposable plastic bags and the hype built up to get them off the market, it isn’t hard to make a leap to the assumption that paper bags are the eco-savvy answer. Not so fast — the production process of paper is, in truth, just as costly and pollutant as plastic, and it’s only getting worse. The big bonus for paper is supposed to be its superior recycling properties, but according to the BBC, its effectiveness is dwindling as prices rise due to a combination of poor technique and crumbling economies in the overseas markets on which we have relied.

At warehouses around the country giant stacks of recycled paper were piled high at the end of 2008 as the global downturn led to a slump in demand.

Much of our “mixed” paper – which could be contaminated with other materials – is shipped to China and the Far East to be recycled in giant mills. But this market suddenly dried up in November and December as China’s economy slowed.

Last September, when recycling prices peaked, a tonne of mixed paper fetched between £65 and £75. But today that has fallen to just £15. Paper that has been separated and is not contaminated peaked at between £90 to £115 a tonne. Now it is worth about £40.

It could mean problems for any councils which have based budgets on the higher prices.

The back-up of resources and dwindling costs have led to very real thoughts about some unsavory methods of alternative deployment to avoid the worst-case scenario:

A spokesman for the Local Government Association (LGA) said in November a quarter of councils had had to find extra storage space for unwanted paper, plastic, glass and metal.

And the economic downturn could force authorities to look at alternative ways of dealing with recycled paper, he said.

“I think we will have to look at all manner of scenarios. We may need to look at incineration of paper.

“What councils want to avoid at all costs is sending [paper] to landfill.”

Incineration is obviously terrible for the atmosphere, but paper left to rot in a landfill has problems of its own, most notably producing twice the atmospheric waste of decaying plastic counterparts. It’s a difficult dilemma, deciding what to do with all this paper already produced and on the planet. But in the meantime, how about getting a reusable bag for your groceries and helping to curb the build-up before it gets even worse?

Photo via Flickr!

FALSE DICHOTOMY (n.) — A fallacy committed when the arguer claims that his conclusion is one of only two options, when in fact there are other possibilities. The arguer then goes on to show that the ‘only other option’ is clearly outrageous, and so his preferred conclusion must be embraced.

In contrast to yesterday’s update, some members of Riverside County are not too keen on speeding up any plastic bag reduction proposals in California (specifically the ban currently being proposed in Palm Springs). A few writers have at least switched tactics to attacking the price and recycling potential of reusable bags, but Riverside Press-Enterprise columnist Bob Pratte has apparently decided to keep things old-school with the false dichotomy: reducing plastic bag production must be outrageous because paper bags are worse.

I think plastic bags have been badly maligned. True, they take precious petroleum to produce, foul waterways and snag wild creatures, but their paper cousins have faults too. Heavy equipment used to log trees burns fuel. Paper plants create stinky pollution.

Not just any pollution, my friends: stinky pollution! Actually I suppose that would be a great point if anyone had happened to be arguing in favor of some sort of paper bag revolution, instead of trying to reduce pollution in various forms and just going after the most obvious and prevalent first? Who knows. Anyway, Pratte throws in a couple of paragraphs about donating food to the poor and homeless in plastic bags for good measure, but overall he seemed the most concerned about fitting in a mention that BOB PRATTE JUST BOUGHT A TOTALLY SWEET SAILBOAT.

Most importantly, plastic bags play a vital role on Mango Mango, our Corona-built sailboat that I bought from someone who won her on the “Price is Right.” The bags on board make handy receptacles for empty plastic water bottles and soft-drink and beer cans (but never glass bottles on a boat). I stow dozens of bags in a handy, long cloth tube with its openings at both ends cinched with elastic.

Before I cast off the dock lines, I hang a bag inside the cabin. When I return to the dock, I carry the bag up to a recycling container and dump in the cans and empty water bottles. If they’re not too mucky, I reuse the bags again.

Plastic bags help me recycle. They can be reused, unlike fragile paper bags. Instead of banning plastic bags, the city of Palm Springs should encourage their use — over and over and over.

Oh hey, bro! I was totally behind pollution reduction laws, but that was before I knew that plastic bags play a vital role on Mango Mango! How could we all have been so blind? Obviously, what with payments on your bitchen sailboat and all, you wouldn’t have any money left over to pick up the slack with garbage bags as needed (and no, the waste does NOT come out equal, let’s nip that argument in the bud) or, better still, cloth duffel bags that can be emptied and — wait for it — washed for reuse? (Because, seriously: how many times can a disposable plastic bag be reused before its inevitable stretching and tearing death? Twice? Three times? And, of course, that’s barring “muckiness.”) No, if Mango Mango demands plastic bags, then plastic bags are what Mango Mango shall have, and anything short would be an affront to Bob Barker. I’m glad that’s all cleared up, what a relief.

Wait, no. That is ridiculous and a horrible conclusion. Mr. Platte, I do concur that a solution should be found for passing out food at food banks and homeless shelters (a BETTER solution, but still). That said, perhaps making that the focus of your article, rather than an afterthought, might have had more profound impact toward making your point than building your centerpiece around Mango Mango. Although, congratulations on your sailboat, I guess. I’m sure it’s a pretty tasty boat. Next time, post pictures.

Photo via Flickr!

We know that that paper and plastic bags aren’t exactly born of the best conditions. But when all is said and done, how much do we really know about the step-by-step process of making our disposable transport containers? Are we simply repeating rhetoric, or do we know how bad things really are?

Last night, premiere news-mag The Huffington Post published an examination of the reproductive cycle of the paper and plastic shopping bag. It is thoroughly above-and-beyond in its report, standing out as it weighs the environmental benefits and costs of even the processes you want to believe in the most.

When you’re done using paper shopping bags, for shopping or other household reuses, a couple of things can happen… If you choose the recycle paper bags, then things get a little tricky.

The paper must first be re-pulped, which usually requires a chemical process involving compounds like hydrogen peroxide, sodium silicate and sodium hydroxide, which bleach and separate the pulp fibers. The fibers are then cleaned and screened to be sure they’re free of anything that would contaminate the paper-making process, and are then washed to remove any leftover ink before being pressed and rolled into paper, as before.

When an article is willing to look at recycling as objectively as the landfill alternative, you can pretty much count on it to be a reliable source. Even biodegradable plastic bags are held up for shameful scrutiny, leaving no stone unturned in the investigation. So what form of grocery transportation does Huffington Post ultimately endorse? The answer should come as no surprise.

Ultimately, neither paper nor plastic bags are the best choice; we think choosing reusable canvas bags instead is the way to go. From an energy standpoint, according to this Australian study, canvas bags are 14 times better than plastic bags and 39 times better than paper bags, assuming that canvas bags get a good workout and are used 500 times during their life cycle. Happy shopping!

And isn’t the happiest shopping done when you know it’s not at the expense of your environment? If not, perhaps it should be.

Image via the article!