SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 18 submissions in the queue.
SoylentNews
In an effort to reduce plastic bag pollution, Kenya has introduced tough laws that will result in a prison term of up to 4 years or a maximum of $40,000 for any Kenyan producing, selling or even using plastic bags, although initial enforcement will target manufacturers and suppliers.
"The East African nation joins more than 40 other countries that have banned, partly banned or taxed single use plastic bags, including China, France, Rwanda and Italy."
Bags can take 500-1000 years to decompose, in the mean time killing or harming wildlife and entering the human food chain.
What is being done about plastic bag pollution where you live?
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Kenya Introduces Big Penalties for Plastic Bags
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 124 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
The last time I saw him he was walking down Lover's Lane holding his own hand.
-- Fred Allen
(Score: 3, Interesting) by isj on Tuesday August 29 2017, @03:58PM (24 children)
In Denmark plastic bags with a capacity of at least 5 liters and with handles get taxed at $0.25
So I use my cotton bag or my rucksack. In the cases where I forget them and have to buy a plastic bag I reuse it for kitchen garbage.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 29 2017, @04:04PM (23 children)
However, the only reason the government taxes plastic bags is because it's yet another revenue stream; why should this one particular organization receive money just because you use a plastic bag? It makes no sense.
I mean, why isn't the government giving people $0.25 for each plastic bag they bring to a recycling center? Think about it.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 29 2017, @04:17PM (10 children)
This is how I picture you, "think about it!"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VxNuQDxnECU [youtube.com]
The reason they tax the bags is in order to reduce the waste stream. In case you never learned the three Rs of recycling, it goes Reduce Reuse Recycle in that order. Stop generating waste, reuse what you can so it doesn't go in the landfill, recycle whatever can't be reused.
I am thinking about it, and I quickly come to the conclusion that paying people to recycle ends up being the same thing since that money would come from taxes. I prefer to tax those who are using the plastic bags instead of taxing everyone so we can pay for doing the right thing.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 29 2017, @04:24PM (9 children)
You'll notice that my subject is "That tax is portrayed as a way to reduce waste." Telling me it's to reduce waste is a waste of time.
You neglect to explain why this particular organization that calls itself "government" should be the one receiving revenue.
Why can't a person be taxed $0.25 for using a new plastic bag, but then receive back ~$0.25 for returning it to a recycling center?
Think about it!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 29 2017, @04:30PM (8 children)
1. I think explaining the purpose of a law is an admirable thing, but I'm just craaaazy
2. Who else? Seriously?
3. Because the point is to change people's habits so they buy reusable bags and stop filling the landfill with throw away plastic ones.
You obviously have an axe to grind and could care less about thinking, good day sir.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 29 2017, @04:44PM (5 children)
Carrying produce and animal products in a reusable bag means there will be a greater transfer of disease-causing organisms.
It would be better to ensure that such items are carried in the kinds of bags that have a well-defined path from clean-to-recycling.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 29 2017, @04:49PM
You can wash the bags, you can get separate small bags to put such items in, and besides I have yet to see any stores in the US ban produce bags.
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Tuesday August 29 2017, @05:14PM (3 children)
Bags can be cleaned - and it's entirely up to the user whether they are or not.
Besides which - the outsides of anything you buy at the store is going to be covered in germs anyway - and unlike the germs in your bag, they won't all be germs you've already been living alongside of.
(Score: 2) by mhajicek on Tuesday August 29 2017, @06:14PM (2 children)
Cleaning a reusable bag once is more harmful than using several disposable bags.
The spacelike surfaces of time foliations can have a cusp at the surface of discontinuity. - P. Hajicek
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 29 2017, @06:27PM
I would like to see some evidence on this. They are small and take up little room in the washer or dryer.
Its not like anyone washes a load of just these bags and I wont be doing more loads just due to the facts.
Its also not the energy the bag needs to be produced its the fact that it probably ends up in the great pacific plastic patch if you don't recycle.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 29 2017, @06:40PM
Wrong, the resource use in creating a single bag is much higher than you think. Start to finish it will use more water and other resources than washing will.
SO MUCH FUD TODAY!!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 29 2017, @04:46PM (1 child)
YHBT
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 29 2017, @09:25PM
You Have Been Taxed is a very good way of describing this situation.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Tuesday August 29 2017, @04:23PM (5 children)
Because governments don't work that way. Governments modify society with taxes; if you want to reduce something, you tax it. They wanted to reduce smoking (due to all the health problems it causes), so they slapped big taxes on it. Fast-forward a few decades and smokers are pariahs, having to stand outside in the rain in humiliation to get their fix, just as they should be.
Don't want to pay a tax on plastic bags? No problem, don't use one. Get some inexpensive reusable shopping bags and bring those to the supermarket. Same thing with smoking: don't want to pay cigarette taxes? No problem, don't smoke. Don't like it when the government does social engineering? Tough shit, that's part of living in a society. Don't like it? Go move to the wilderness and grow your own tobacco and don't complain when you get an easily-treated disease and die from it.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 29 2017, @04:29PM (4 children)
After all, if a government taxes something in order to reduce its presence in society, then I guess government is intent on reducing productivity—that's one of the most taxed aspects of society!
Anyway, see here. [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 29 2017, @04:58PM (3 children)
Good point:
(Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 29 2017, @05:02PM (2 children)
This is a good point [soylentnews.org]:
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 29 2017, @05:27PM (1 child)
How is my parent "Redundant", but my grandparent isn't?
Biased jerks.
(Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 29 2017, @09:01PM
The "Redundant" mod should be removed. Any time I've seen it used, it has been totally misused.
(Score: 2) by tekk on Tuesday August 29 2017, @04:23PM (3 children)
If you change it from a disincentive to get plastic bags to an incentive to recycle them, then you have people trying to get as many plastic bags as they can for the maximum value; the incentive goes the wrong way (more plastic bags used).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 29 2017, @04:27PM (2 children)
That's just an incentive for beggars to pick up plastic bags blowing down the street.
Also, why couldn't a person be taxed for a new bag, but then receive [almost all of] that tax money back when taking that bag (or some minimum number of bags) to a recycling center?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 29 2017, @04:34PM (1 child)
Because that would not do a whole lot to REDUCE the number of bags, and most plastic grocery bags are not even recyclable since they are very low grade plastic.
The obvious rebuttal to giving .25 for returned bags is that someone would buy plastic bags in bulk and get probably 5x the return by taking them to the recycling center. Have a few people just shut their brains off today???
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 29 2017, @04:56PM
In that case, the bag manufacturer itself would have an incentive just to recycle its own bags immediately after making them, thereby proving once again the ineptitude of your government.
Of course, if there's a "tax" on such bags (paid to the organization, possibly the government, that will return some money for recycling the bag), then such a perverse incentive would be removed; the manufacturer would just receive back slightly less than he paid, making it uneconomical to do so.
Furthermore, people want to use bags to carry their damn stuff (especially gross stuff like raw meat), so their might well be a market of people who want to purchase those bags for a price that allows the manufacturer pass on the costs of that "tax" to consumers—thereby pushing the burden of dealing with the "tax" to each person who wants a bag.
(Score: 2) by BasilBrush on Tuesday August 29 2017, @06:05PM
In the UK, the mandatory plastic bag charge is donated to charity by the retailer. They need to provide evidence that they have done so, but the money never goes through the government's hands.
Hurrah! Quoting works now!
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday August 30 2017, @07:15AM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves