AlterNet reports
It's a basic question faced by millions of shoppers every day: paper or plastic? Making the best choice for the environment, however, is less simple.
Last November, Californians approved Proposition 67, which upheld a 2014 ban on the issuing of single-use plastic bags in grocery and drug stores. As a result, shops were able to continue charging customers around a dime for reusable plastic or paper bags. The ban seems effective because it should lead to a reduction in plastic waste. More importantly, the extra charge aims to incentivize people to bring their own reusable bags to the store. But let's face it, many shoppers still forget, which brings us back to that darn choice we often have to make at the checkout line.
So, which option is better?
[...]The U.K. Environment Agency, a governmental research group, conducted a similar inquiry around the same time period. Its report[PDF] was a life cycle assessment comparing the environmental impacts of a variety of grocery bags. From extensive research, some of the study's key findings concluded that:
- Single-use plastic bags outperformed all alternatives, even reusable ones, on environmental performance.
- Plastic bags have a much lower global warming potential.
- The environmental impact of all types of bag is dominated by the resource use and production stages. Transport, secondary packaging, and end-of-life management generally have minimal influence on their performance.
- Whatever type of bag is used, the key to reducing the impacts is to reuse it as many times as possible.
The ecological break-even point with a cloth grocery bag comes on its 131st use.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Thursday January 19 2017, @05:28AM
It's easier for heavy and edged grocery items to poke a hole in the plastic bags, even if you double bag.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Some call me Tim on Thursday January 19 2017, @05:31AM
I have a metric ass load of saved bags, you could say I have a virtual library of Congress of the damn things. I just stuff a few in my pocket every time I go to the store and more often than not, I end up giving one or two to someone in line at the checkout. Whoever has to clean out my house when I die is going to thank me or curse me for the cabinet full of the damn things. ;-)
Questioning science is how you do science!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 19 2017, @05:39AM
The store I goto has a recycle bin of them in front. I drop off a bunch every few months.
(Score: 2) by TheRaven on Thursday January 19 2017, @05:20PM
sudo mod me up
(Score: 3, Disagree) by SomeGuy on Thursday January 19 2017, @05:33AM
The whole thing about reusable bags being all green and good for the environment is just a marketing gimmick to sell bags... That you will promptly forget about and never use. Or use a few times until they get nasty and you can't really wash them (perhaps some do wash).
And getting a law passed to make it illegal to use any other product? That is the ultimate marketing jackpot.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 19 2017, @06:08AM
Paper or reusable are really the way to go. Plastic bags don't last very long and often times wind up in the ocean joining that huge hunk of plastic that's rapidly becoming continent size.
Paper isn't too bad in that it's a bit more durable than plastic, and is made from renewable resources, unlike plastic, and is relatively inexpensive to produce. Reusable cloth bags are kind of nice, because they can last years and you can throw them in the washer when they get nasty.
Those reusable plastic bags are probably the worst. They aren't easily cleaned, and they aren't as durable as fabric.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 19 2017, @06:48AM
RTFA. The amount of resources that go into producing wood pulp from trees (water in particular) isn't insignificant.
Paper bags are also much heavier, so transport is more resource-intensive.
TFA takes on the usual assumptions head-on and shreds them.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 4, Insightful) by choose another one on Thursday January 19 2017, @09:07AM
TFA was ignored though - it was some sort of inconvenient truth.
The UK (where TFA was produced, and it was a few years ago) went ahead with a tax on "single-use" plastic bags anyway, to discourage their use - despite every other alternative being proven worse.
What is politically best for the environment has nothing to do with what is actually best for the environment. That is why we are doomed.
(Score: 5, Informative) by TheRaven on Thursday January 19 2017, @05:41PM
From TFA, cotton bags need to be used 131 times to use less carbon dioxide than single-use bags (assuming that you use the single-use bags three times). We have a few that we've had for 4-5 years and seem to be in just as good condition as when we got them, in spite of being used most weekends for shopping, so I don't see a problem with that (they're also used in situations where we'd have needed to double or triple bag things because of the weight if using single-use bags).
A few things that jump out from reading the study:
sudo mod me up
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 19 2017, @05:51PM
> The maths for working out what proportion of bags end up being used as bin liners is quite suspect and contains a lot of hand waving.
It's doubly questionable since ever since I don't have plastic bags anymore, I switched to other things like toilet paper or toast packaging as bin liners.
For anyone willing to do that, they should not be counted as a useful use.
(Score: 2) by choose another one on Friday January 20 2017, @02:53PM
While it is hard to work out what proportion of carrier bags are reused overall, you can know what _your_ reuse rate was. Ours was close to 100% - no bag was thrown away after first use _unless_ it broke so badly it became useless (only a very small percentage). Some bags we re-used more than once, so we're probably between 2 and 3 uses. Based on the table in the summary, cotton bags are 327 uses vs 100% re-used HDPE.
We have had about 3 heavy duty cotton bags for several years (possibly >5, probably 10), they are used for supermarket shopping, maybe 3 times a week, usually taking one cotton bag with other heavy plastic bags inside, so that's 50 uses per year. Have they lasted 6 years - barely, they are falling apart have been patched/repaired several times and have really been in need of replacing for well over a year now. Also I suspect our bags (heavy cotton canvas with wooden handles) are actually a lot heavier than the cotton bags considered in the report.
Are the cotton bags a better option? Not sure - it certainly isn't a slam-dunk.
The impacts for bags in table 5.2 are assuming each bag is reused the suggested number of times, 5.1 shows the impact per-bag-produced, but not for cotton
because it is too high (stated in the text). I guess they could have used log-scale for that, but that confuses people too...
Comparing CO2 pollution is hard (as report shows) but it can at least be done. Comparing other pollution forms is impossible - how do you rate plastic vs cotton for destruction of the marine environment? Easy - plastic pollutes a lot, cotton not a lot. Except if you live near the Aral sea, in which case cotton causes total destruction of the marine environment. How do you account for that?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 19 2017, @04:51PM
What is the problem in using water? The water is not destroyed. The higher demand for water leads to more research and development in this area. Sequestering carbon in wood-pulp reduces atmospheric carbon. Also every so called "estimate" for amount of resources that go into something I have ever read has been wild speculation that is at least 2 orders of magnitude off. I personally will always use paper over plastic, glass over plastic, and wood over plastic where ever I have the option to do so.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 20 2017, @12:19AM
The issue is that we have a finite amount of fresh drinking water available at any given time. Getting more of it usually means having to pipe it in from far away and/or desalinizing ocean water. Both of which can be extremely expensive if you're in an area that doesn't have abundant fresh water available. Of that water, 20% is in Lake Baikal and unavailable to regions outside of Russia.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 19 2017, @07:25AM
With California's giant coastline, that was a major point of these[1] initiatives.
(I skipped over that in TFS but it's in TFA.)
[1] There were 2 competing initiatives on the ballot.[2]
One was an attempt at damage control by the plastic bag industry and the retailers.
[2] I voted against both.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Thursday January 19 2017, @04:31PM
WTF are you talking about? The reusable plastic bags are the best. They *are* easily cleaned: all you need is a garden hose. And they're just as durable as fabric, at least the ones I use are. I use the plastic ones all the time, not only for groceries but all kinds of other random stuff too (including tools when I need to go fix something somewhere; this gets rather heavy but the reusable plastic bags have no trouble with it).
Paper is crap; it isn't durable at all. It's easily torn or ripped, and disintegrates when it gets wet. The reusable plastic bags don't have these problems. And the plastic ones are made of recycled plastic anyway.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 19 2017, @08:42PM
If you don't mind food poisoning, that's probably acceptable. Otherwise, it's great to be able to sanitize the bags being used to transport food.
Cloth also better tolerates being folded and scrunched. 171 reuses sounds like a lot, but cloth can usually handle at least that much.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Thursday January 19 2017, @04:26PM
That you will promptly forget about and never use.
Speak for yourself. If you're too dumb to remember them and reuse them, maybe you have a problem. I and people I know don't seem to have this problem. The reusable bags are great, not only for carrying groceries a lot more effectively and efficiently than the single-use bags (which happily split and pour your stuff all over, and don't hold much anyway), but for carrying other stuff. I'm constantly using mine for carrying all kinds of things around. They're large (as large as the paper bags) so they hold a lot, and they're thick, durable plastic so they can carry a lot of weight and don't get damaged easily.
Or use a few times until they get nasty and you can't really wash them (perhaps some do wash).
Have you never seen reusable bags? They're made of thick plastic. Of course they can be washed out. How dumb.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday January 20 2017, @02:08AM
Environmental breakeven after 131 uses - how many uses does a trip through the washing machine extend that? How many trips through a washing machine can a reusable bag take. All in all, I wouldn't be surprised if the reusable bag doesn't ever reach environmental breakeven if you wash it once every 4 to 6 months - by the time you reach 150 uses (3 years, 6 washings), it's probably broken to the point of non-usability.
Now, you could make a more durable bag that would last longer, but that would take longer still to reach environmental breakeven.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 19 2017, @05:50AM
Paper in fact do not decompose in landfill due to the lack of oxygen, and takes up much more space than thin plastic bags.
(Score: 2) by rob_on_earth on Thursday January 19 2017, @09:11AM
that sounds reasonable, but can we have a source?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 19 2017, @11:04AM
I suppose that there are some microbes that can consume paper in the absence of air, but I figure they'd be pretty exotic and not the kinds of critters you'd find laying around waiting to get to work on that.
If you're really interested, here's a seed. [google.com]
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 19 2017, @09:20AM
Paper is not supposed to go to landfill anyway. Landfill is always the last option after bio degradation and incineration, and paper qualifies for both. If paper is ending up in landfill, you were never trying to do something about it in the first place.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 19 2017, @07:25PM
My choice is paper which then goes into recycle....I assume this is the best for the environment.
The OP addresses those cases where I should have brought my good canvas bag that will last a long time, but forgot. My choice is paper, but your answer lies in what you will do after you get home....if it goes in the trash because you have a good sturdy canvas bag that you forgot, then I think that paper is the wiser choice if you recycle it.
Reusable plastic is better if you will reuse it a number of times before it gets tossed.
(Score: 2) by Leebert on Thursday January 19 2017, @08:05PM
Why? Don't those disposal options release carbon into the atmosphere, whereas paper buried in a landfill sequesters it?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 19 2017, @08:44PM
So paper makes a stable structural base for building suburban housing in a previous landfill.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 19 2017, @10:22PM
That is a feature. Any idea for a better carbon sequestration? This is pretty good.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Friday January 20 2017, @05:55AM
I call (to your attention) the bullshit!!! No, literally, think of it!
It is made from the degradation of cellulose by the bacteria in the bull's guts.
Which are of the anaerobic kind [wikipedia.org]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 3, Insightful) by tftp on Thursday January 19 2017, @05:52AM
No matter what is in favor today, the other choice is always better. There are tons of people who stand to gain from the switch, and very few who benefit from keeping it the same.
Personally, I rarely (virtually never) use paper bags. Paper is very ecologically unfriendly to manufacture - the deaded trees, the chemicals, the water that the paper mills take clean and return not quite so... paper is OK for writing, but it is not very good as a construction material, and doubly so as a material for reusables. Plastic in that regard is super-strong, and at the same time nearly weightless. I can reuse a common thin plastic bag maybe 20-30 times. I have a few stored away for trash, and I do use them for that purpose. When I go to the store I have a bag with me (when walking) or a cart (if I have a car outside.)
Is the ban good? If people buy paper bags, then it is clearly bad from my POV, as I dislike flimsy, single-use paper bags. It would be good only if everyone carries reusable bags - but those who "forget" (??? Do they forget the shoes and the shirts too?) won't be affected - they will simply pay ten cents for an item that costs 1 cent in retail (but China will sell for less if you buy a whole pallet, which stores do.) Those who do not forget often had their own bags anyway, unless they *needed* plastic bags for trash.
Overall, it is much worse that we have the government that makes it illegal for a business to give a free item to their customer. Where will those arbitrary prohibitions end - if they ever will?
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 19 2017, @06:52AM
What I like about paper bags is that they stand up nicely when you set them down.
(My first job was as a supermarket bag boy.)
Those damned plastic things just flop over|open.
Now, when paper gets wet, it does quickly become useless.
For years, I've taken my own backpack/cardboard box when shopping.
I do grab some plastic bags at the checkout to put my trash in.
For that reason, this new law irritates me.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Thursday January 19 2017, @08:14AM
No matter what is in favor today, the other choice is always better. There are tons of people who stand to gain from the switch, and very few who benefit from keeping it the same.
Tell that to the people who manufacture and sell "the same."
(Score: 1) by tftp on Thursday January 19 2017, @08:21AM
Tell that to the people who manufacture and sell "the same."
They exist? Who are they? Perhaps, makers of most basic staples in the food industry? Beyond that everything seems to be in flux. There is very little stability in our world. Perhaps in 1500's an apprentice could learn the trade, make the masterpiece and settle down, unchanging, until the end of his days. But today? There isn't enough time in the day to read all the important news in my area of expertise.
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Thursday January 19 2017, @08:31AM
My lawyer has advised me to say that it's definitely NOT ExxonMobil.
Thank you and god bless.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 19 2017, @02:09PM
I ran a 8 year experiment back in the 1580s when one of the blacksmiths was singing the praises of their artisan plastic bags. Tacked a couple to the sunny side of a shed, and staked a couple more on the ground. Ten years later my wife took them down and threw them in the recycle when we moved out of that house.
Statute of limitations on false advertising had already expired.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 19 2017, @08:57PM
(??? Do they forget the shoes and the shirts too?)
Probably not. However, unlike reusable bags:
1) People go everywhere with shirts and shoes, not just when they go to the store. It's easier to form a habit at 100% than "whenever you are doing X and only doing X."
2) It is very obvious when you are missing your shirt ("why am I so cold?") and shoes ("the ground is scratching today"). You "use" them all the time, so when you don't have them to use it's obvious. You only use the reusable bags when you are trying to pack things up at the store. In other words, when it is too late.
3) People have worn shirts and shoes their whole lives (probably before they can even remember). They don't carry bags around their whole lives. How many times have you or a female family member forgotten their purse? How many times have you or a family member (especially an older one who didn't grow up with one) forgotten a mobile phone?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 19 2017, @07:20AM
Where there's a bag discount, reusing a bag is like using a coupon, and at some stores the receipt even lists the store brand bag as a store coupon. At other stores the cashiers pressure people to donate the amount of the bag credit to charity instead, and at those stores people literally reply, "If I didn't want to keep the bag credit, I wouldn't have brought the bag."
(Score: 2) by rob_on_earth on Thursday January 19 2017, @09:13AM
I always find it funny that when I get to the the checkout it seems I have the competitors bags. I do not do it intentionally it just what bags are int he back of my car.
Of course Tesco(UK) have the right idea with various Starwars designs on their bags.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 19 2017, @12:41PM
I almost never use competitors bags, except for that one time when I was drunk. I haven't shopped drunk since.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 19 2017, @07:32AM
The absolute last thing this poor old planet needs is more plastic in the environment. And single-use paper bags aren't much better. Cloth bags for the win. I have several heavy cotton ones that I've used for 5-6 years. I just throw them in with the other laundry about every second month to keep them clean. Sometimes old fashion things are the best. Had to laugh at the blog in the summary that says reusable bags are the worst.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday February 06 2017, @05:47PM
Yes, why let science get in the way of your beliefs? Your bags are much better for the World, science be damned!
(Score: 4, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 19 2017, @07:48AM
Just steal a shopping cart and use it to transport all your groceries. It's reusable, obviously, and it makes you look like a bum. If people think you're a bum then they're less likely to steal from you.
(Score: 1) by oldmac31310 on Thursday January 19 2017, @07:07PM
When you are finished using the cart, be sure to throw it in a river along with any bicycle wheels or car tyres you have lying around.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Thursday January 19 2017, @08:09AM
The report does not consider the introduction of a carrier bag tax, the effects of littering, the
ability and willingness of consumers to change behaviour, any adverse impacts of
degradable polymers in the recycling stream, nor the potential economic impacts on UK
business.
The problem with the study is that that problem IS littering. Plastic bags cause huge problems with Stormwater systems. Simple clogs cause expensive issues, plus, it's a persistent bio-accumulator. [wikipedia.org]
Micro-plastic bio-accumulation hasn't exhibited toxicity, yet (so not quite as bad as a PBT [wikipedia.org]). But, toxicity tends to be only a matter of concentration....
(Score: 3, Informative) by CoolHand on Thursday January 19 2017, @02:47PM
http://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/health/case_studies/plastics.html [carleton.edu]
Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job-Douglas Adams
(Score: 2) by dry on Friday January 20 2017, @02:51AM
I live not too far from a landfill and occasionally take a walk in the forest across the street from it. There's an amazing amount of plastic bags littering the forest. Driving by one windy day, I saw why, namely bags flying out of the landfill.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 19 2017, @08:11AM
It's not about actually helping the environment, it's about showing how much you care about the environment.
The psychology of virtue signaling, on a secret ballot, is unbelievable.
Myself, I am fortunate enough to live in a place that hasn't yet been overcome by collective insanity. I happily take disposable plastic bags, and put my trash in them. Since most of my trash comes from the grocery store anyway, it works out about right.
Of course, it's not nearly as much virtue signaling as buying separate plastic garbage bags to throw away and reusable bags to show off, but it's better for the environment and cheaper for me.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 19 2017, @10:41AM
I don't know about "full", but we've got enough to keep things interesting.
I've heard it said that, at some point, the Earth tilted and everything that wasn't well-rooted rolled into Cali.
I've also heard it said that Cali is "the granola state".
(What ain't fruits and nuts is flakes.)
Have you seen our Prop65 signs? [kqed.org]
There are absolutely everywhere.
In a CYA move, places automatically put them up so that they won't get sued by the everything-can-kill-you types.
I got something in the mail the other week that had a Prop65 warning on it.
You think there are folks posting in S/N that don't understand Science??
Visit Cali and be amazed.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 19 2017, @05:41PM
dude, people have been wearing branded items forever. it is not virtue signaling to wear a rolex. it's wealth signalling.
people that use these reusable bags tell me two things:
whether they are misguided or not, they are concerned about waste
they were willing to pay for the bags, and are using them and not for the first time, since they aren't being purchased, they're being used
they are not waving about the bags as jewelry to virtually signal to someone that they bought the bags.
Not everything is out to piss off a person who voted republican, even if it happens first in california.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by ese002 on Thursday January 19 2017, @08:34AM
From TFA:
Those plastic totes, though, like the Lululemon bags everyone seems to have, are actually much more efficient, requiring only 11 uses to break even with the impact of using 11 disposable plastic bags. So, yes, shopping with a tote bag can be better than using and throwing away disposable plastic bags—but only if you really commit.
So eleven uses is "really committing"? I've had a Trader Joes plastic weave bag (very much like the linked to Lululemon bag) for 9 years, or more than 400 uses. This is the most common style. Hardly anyone uses cotton bags. And while the Bay Area may be slightly more environmentally conscious than LA, I doubt there is that much difference. When I'm in line, I mostly see people using reusable bags.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 19 2017, @09:09AM
Indeed, I only buy plastic bags if I didn't know that I would need a bag at all when I left home. Typically it is if I'm coming from work, remember that I have to buy something that can't wait for the weekend, and go directly to the shop instead of first going home (especially if the shop will close in the time I need to go home first). Usually in that case I buy so little that I don't need a bag at all, but a few times a year it happens that I buy more than planned, and thus need a bag.
I don't know why they have to end up in landfills or in the ocean, though. Mine are reused for things like collecting dirty clothes when not at home and not able to wash them; this keeps those nicely separated from the clean stuff in my baggage, and reliably blocks any smell they might develop. And when I dispose of the bags, they go into the recycling bin.
(Score: 2) by TheRaven on Thursday January 19 2017, @05:44PM
sudo mod me up
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 19 2017, @07:23PM
I am expecting to see this become a noteworthy thing in Cali.
"Public broadcasting" has been doing it with tote bags for decades.
Cloth shopping bags seems an obvious extension to the paradigm.
Back when I was still driving (and paper bags were still the norm), I kept some paper bags in the car.
I was one of those folks who would take bags with branding from another store into the store that gave a 5c per bag discount.
Another thing I liked about paper bags (besides the way they stand up nicely) is that a 60lb paper bag can hold MUCH more than those stupid plastic things.
The whole purpose of shopping bags is to -reduce- the number of things you need to manage.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by ese002 on Thursday January 19 2017, @08:18PM
A lot of people around here use cotton bags, because lots of places hand them out for free with some branding on. They're stronger than the reusable carrier bags, but the fold up smaller.
Are you sure they are cotton? Over the years, I have received quite a few cloth bags as freebies at trade shows. However, not a one has been cotton. They are all some sort synthetic, probably nylon or polyester.
The trade show bags are not as durable as the ones I bought. They typically fail within two years. It makes me wonder about *their* environmental footprint.
A few places, including Trader Joes, do sell natural fiber bags. They cost noticeably more than the synthetic bags. ($3-4 IIRC). I do see them in use but not nearly as often as the cheaper options.
Smart and Final sells reusable bags that are just heavier weight versions of single use bags. They are probably cheaper to make and require less energy than the synthetic cloth bags. However, without proper handles, I am sceptical that they actually hold up to many reuses. One of the reasons I like reusable bags is convenience. They are much stronger and have proper handles. I can fit my shopping in fewer bags and more easily carry them. The Smart and Final bags seem to nullify this advantage.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 19 2017, @05:47PM
Do you use it to virtue signal? It seems that you have a lot to show, based on the prevalent beliefs as to why anyone would use a bag like this. You even state you have used the bag longer than virtue signalling has been a term. I applaud your dedication.
(Score: 2) by ledow on Thursday January 19 2017, @09:02AM
And yet the UK introduced a 5p charge on one-use plastic bags "for environmental reasons".
Maybe they should talk to each other occasionally.
(Score: 2) by gidds on Thursday January 19 2017, @02:07PM
The 5p minimum charge applies to all plastic bags, not just single-use ones.
But then, paper bags haven't been commonly available in the UK for many years*, so the charge isn't promoting paper bags; it's promoting reuse (or doing without) — both of which are environmentally friendly. (Or at least, less environmentally harmful.)
(* I never found out whether that was for plain commercial reasons, i.e. plastic was cheaper and/or preferred by consumers, or whether it was forced in some way.)
[sig redacted]
(Score: 2) by kazzie on Thursday January 19 2017, @07:16PM
It's possible the great British cliamte had something to do with the decline in use of paper bags.
Then again, it's worth onting that when the Republic of Ireland chose to introduce a charge on single use bags, they levived the charge on plasticbags. The result: every shop gives out disposable paper bags instead.
(Score: 3, Informative) by PiMuNu on Thursday January 19 2017, @09:53AM
> The U.K. Environment Agency, a governmental research group
It is not a research group, as it has executive powers and responsibilities. Some of the work it does is research oriented. E.g. the Environment agency has responsibility for flood defences, which would involve a research activity (monitoring of water levels and modelling flood scenarios for example) along with an executive activity (building flood defences).
Citation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environment_Agency [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by tyler on Thursday January 19 2017, @10:35AM
I like the Costco way of reusing using boxes that merchandise shipped in. The merchandise is going to be shipped in the box regardless, the box is going to be recycled or thrown in the trash either way, so might as well save a bunch of bags and reuse those boxes. ALDI just puts your stuff back in the cart and lets you figure out what to do with it. Some of them leave you shipping boxes, all of them sell bags, but won't suggestively sell them or give them to you.
The best answer is to buy less stuff. Buying less stuff means less materials extracted from the environment, less energy refining and processing them, less energy manufacturing the stuff, less energy shipping it, less materials packaging it that also goes through this process. It also means more money in your pocket for other things or an earlier retirement. There are whole online communities of people retiring early by simple not consuming is much. The great thing is, you don't have to deprive yourself either, you just have to change your mindset a bit and be honest with yourself.
Here a few of many sites, blogs, and forums about the topic:
www.mrmoneymustache.com
earlyretirementextreme.com
frugalwoods.com
livingafi.com
bravenewlife.com
A great book that will help with the mindset part is: Your Money or Your Life by Vicki Robin and Joe Dominguez
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 19 2017, @04:03PM
Another great way to get into that mindset is when you have to choose between literally starving or making next month's rent if you can't figure it out.
(Score: 1) by tyler on Thursday January 19 2017, @05:25PM
If you are in that much of a financial pickle, post a case study on forum.mrmoneymustache.com
No guarantees, but if you follow some of the advice, you will most likely be better off than you were. You will have to be willing to make some changes, but they aren't necessarily deprivation when you get to the root of your spending. It may sound surprising, but the changes have a good chance to improve your general happiness and quality of life. The book I recommend covers this in great depth.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 19 2017, @08:23PM
reusing using boxes
Slow down, Cowboy.
Take a moment to proofread before clicking Submit.
Yeah, I've been doing this for years.
No bags to tear/flop over at inopportune times.
After finding some boxes that are just the right dimensions for me, I took some other boxes, cut them up, and used that to double up the sides/bottom of the dimensionally-ideal boxes.
A little Moo Glue to keep everything in place and I'm still using those boxes many, many months later.
My first job was at a grocery store.
That was so long ago that the store had an incinerator where the boxes were BURNED.
Today, there are folks who make their living by collecting and recycling cardboard boxes.
ALDI
We recently got one of those grocery stores in an adjacent suburb.
Their weekly mailer had a bunch of items at impressive prices, so I went a bit off my usual beaten path to shop there.
The concept is quite brilliant.
It's like they only carry items on which they can get a GREAT price.
[The ALDI cashier] just puts your stuff back in the cart and lets you figure out what to do with it
The area between the checkout and the exit is a table-like shelf where you can take your time and package your purchases.
To help assure that the shopping carts stay in ALDI's parking lot, they -don't- have those locking-wheels thingies (which require batteries and a RF antenna around the perimeter of the lot). There is instead a gadget on each cart that allows the carts to be chained together.
To get your cart, you insert a quarter into the gadget.
To get your quarter back, bring the cart back where you got it and hook up the chain thingie again.
The place is pretty brilliant.
It's as if the folks who thought it up had actually WORKED in a grocery store.
buy less stuff
...and when you need stuff, see if you can get it second-hand for pennies on the dollar.
My folks grew up in The Great Depression.
They were also involved with WWII rationing.
I was infused with frugality from birth.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by dry on Friday January 20 2017, @02:59AM
I thought all stores pretty well used the chain together method while charging a Loonie here to encourage you to bring them back.
The grocery store I usually shop at, sells (and sometimes gives away) plastic bins, basically the same as the ones you carry around the shop if you don't need a buggy. Works well, they fit nicely in the buggy, you empty them at one end of the cashier, and refill them at the other end, put them in the trunk of the car, carry them into the house and put your groceries away. Last close to forever, easy to clean, much better then any type of bag.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 20 2017, @04:14AM
I thought all stores pretty well used the chain-together method
It was the first time I've seen it. Imagine that.
The grocery store nearest to me just got a new owner and a total revamp.
They chain their shopping carts together at closing time--but it's one giant chain and it takes an employee to do that.
I still saw one of their carts away from their lot.
Now, see, you folks have figured out how to use the cheapest, lowest technology to get the job done--and effectively.
The nitwits here are like magpies: fascinated by the newest shiny thing they see.
The thingies we have are in 1 of the 4 wheels of each cart.
It's a battery-operated radio receiver and a battery-operated pawl gadget that locks the wheel as you approach the perimeter of the lot.
If the battery is dead, then, of course, the thingie doesn't work and you can take the cart anywhere you like.
They also have to use a cutting disk to make a trench around the perimeter of the lot to embed the RF antenna.
Kinda like the inductive sensors at traffic lights.
Just imagine the purchase price of all of that stuff--as well as upkeep costs.
Just nuts.
Reminds me of the story about the USA's zero-g space pen.
(The story goes that the Rooskies just used pencils.)
[personal] plastic bins [...] refill them at the other end
Makes way too much sense, dude.
a Loonie
Ah. A Canuck.
Send some of your smart guys down here.
We need them badly.
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by dry on Saturday January 21 2017, @02:11AM
Part of it is probably that a dollar is harder to write off then 2 bits, though when grocery stores first implemented the chain together thing, they did only require a quarter.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by KritonK on Thursday January 19 2017, @01:02PM
Do you still use non-biodegradable plastic bags in the US?
Here in Greece, we've had biodegradable plastic bags for years, which means that the rest of the world must have had them for decades.
Leave one of those bags for a few months in a closet and, when you try to pick, it up it will fall apart into tiny flecks, despite the fact that the enzymes added to the plastic are supposed to require light, to do their work.
Oh, and we've never had paper. We switched directly from bring-your-own-bag to plastic bags. Initially, stores might charge for the bag, but now they'll give you one, whether you want it or not.
(Score: 2) by Sulla on Thursday January 19 2017, @03:42PM
This I am interested in. To what extent does it biodegrade? Is it going to make all them micro plastics that fish choke on, or does it actually degrade to nothing?
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 3, Interesting) by theluggage on Thursday January 19 2017, @01:46PM
Single-use plastic bags outperformed all alternatives, even reusable ones, on environmental performance.
OK, this gave me that WTF? feeling so I skimmed the report.
Turns out, this particular finding of the report is based on the assumption that 40.3% of single-use plastic shopping bags get re-used as bin liners, thus saving the environmental impact of manufacturing & disposing of a single-use plastic bin-liner.
So, on one level it makes sense: no point using an eco-friendly reusable bag if the practical upshot is that you buy a load of single-use bin-liners instead. On the other hand, the 40.3% figure turns out to be an estimate based on another estimate taken from a survey cited by the report in which respondents self-reported their bag re-use habits, calculated by someone who clearly doesn't understand appropriate precision... So, no worries there.
Meanwhile, 175 re-uses for a cotton or similar bag doesn't seem unreasonable - say, once a week for 4 years - especially when most stuff you put in is in sealed packages or separately bagged anyway so they don't really get dirty quickly. Mine are a bit disgusting but they must be at least 10 years old (and I'm a slob).
NB, at the supermarket I mostly use, since the UK.gov introduced the compulsory 'plastic bag charge', even if I forget my bags and pay the charge, the bags I get are significantly bigger and thicker than the old "free" bags (more like the carrier bags you used to get back in the good old days when I were a lad) - so the "lightweight single use" option that this report talks about isn't really available any more.
(Score: 2) by bob_super on Thursday January 19 2017, @06:32PM
Bob's law of 3-digit estimates/polls/forecasts to the rescue: [foghorn level] BULLSHIT!
(Score: 3, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Thursday January 19 2017, @01:56PM
At our grocery stores, the "false choice" of paper or plastic is just a customer service training ritual - engage the customer, ask them a harmless/empowering question, make them feel that you are serving them and they have choices, control.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by jdavidb on Thursday January 19 2017, @03:51PM
Every grocery store in my town offers just the original thin plastic bags, I think. At least they never ask me paper or plastic.
We went through Austin recently where there is a law against plastic bags, and we were given some strange paper bags that had handles. It was the first we realized there was a law. It was annoying because we extensively reuse plastic bags for trash, carrying food, and all sorts of purposes.
ⓋⒶ☮✝🕊 Secession is the right of all sentient beings
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday January 19 2017, @04:18PM
The choice is obvious: plastic bags. I have never heard of people suffocating on a paper bag, but a plastic bag can be used to rid the planet of a human pest quite effectively. And it's reusable!