Tag Archives: plastic bags

The truth about reusable shopping bags

Some bags are only beneficial after more than 100 uses

By Quentin Fottrell

Los Angeles is the latest American city to ban the use of single-use plastic grocery bags, but experts say their most common replacements—paper and reusable bags—come with environmental and financial costs of their own.

Indeed, some reusable bags need to be used over 100 times before they’re better for the environment than single-use plastic bags. Polyethylene bags need to be used four times, a polypropylene bag must be used at least 11 times, and a cotton bag must be used at least 131 times, according to a study by the U.K. Environment Agency .

Starting Jan. 1, the Los Angeles City Council prohibited the use of plastic bags, joining nearly 90 other cities around the country in banning what environmentalists say have been the scourge of oceans for decades. Consumers in L.A. will now have to pay 10 cents for a paper bag provided by the supermarket or bring their own reusable bag to the store. But the cost of paper and reusable bags goes beyond just the 10-cent fee. “If we are really going to change behavior we need to come up with some other way than relying on shoppers to buy paper bags or carry their own bags,” says Phil Lempert, CEO of grocery information site SupermarketGuru.com . In other words, find an alternative to both single-use “carryout” and reusable plastic, Lempert says.

The widespread use of single-use carryout plastic bags raises significant environmental concerns, according to a 2010 report by professional technical-services company Aecom Technology Corp ACM -2.03% . It cited the short and long term adverse effects to marine ecosystems, solid waste management, global resource consumption and litter. In most instances, a switch to reusable bags provides the greatest environmental benefits, the report found, “if used at least a minimum number of times.” Many major retailers sell reusable bags in biodegradable canvas, plastic or “bioplastics” manufactured from natural materials. But some of these materials “are very, very energy intensive material to manufacture,” says Stephen Joseph, counsel for the Save the Plastic Bag Coalition, a San Francisco-based coalition of plastic bag manufacturers.

People may not want to carry food in the same bag for extended periods for fear of contamination, experts say, although cotton bags may be the most easily washed and reusable. At the end of their life, only 5% of reusable plastic bags are recycled in the U.S., according to a 2011 report by California State University, Chico, and Clemson University. That’s the same recycling rate for single-use plastic bags.

Another problem: Many reusable bags being sold at the country’s major retailers are imported. Wal-Mart WMT -0.67% sells reusable bags with slogans like “A little green goes a long way.” In fact, many have also come a long way—over 7,000 miles. Wal-Mart’s standard reusable bag (50 cents) is made in China. Whole Foods has a variety of 99-cent “ Better Bags ” that are made from 88% recycled materials, but they’re not exclusively made in the U.S., a spokesman says. (Whole Foods shoppers are offered a rebate of 10 cents for each reusable bag they use.) Home Depot HD -0.87% also touts a store-branded orange nylon tote (99 cents), which is made in China. And Trader Joe’s polypropylene reusable bags (99 cents) are made in Vietnam.

Paper bags are biodegradable, but some experts say cutting down trees is no answer either. Some 46 million tons of paper and paperboard were recovered in 2011—a recycling of almost 66%—and accounts for over half of all recyclables collected in the U.S. by weight, according to the government’s Environmental Protection Agency. That includes all paper, of course, and not just bags. “By volume, it’s still enormous,” says Joshua Martin, director of the Environmental Paper Network, a global coalition of over 100 nonprofit organizations. Still, Martin welcomes the move away from plastic bags in L.A. and elsewhere, and favors a surcharge for each paper bag to encourage more people to think twice—and then some—about recycling. “You won’t find a whale washed up on the beach with its belly full of paper,” he says, “so I support the ban.”

To read the original Market Watch article click here: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/are-reusable-bags-worse-for-environment-than-plastic-2014-01-09

When I ran across this article I knew that I needed post this as a blog. This is a fantastic article and the comments are very telling with the reality of the situation we face when it comes to solving global environmental problems. There really is no arguing the pros and cons of plastics in our lives. The introduction and development of plastics was and continues to be a significant innovation to the improvement to the quality of life and at the same time it also is a growing environmental problem.

This article and the comments are great examples and a sample of how our society is trying to address the environmental problem we have created with using plastics. The truth is that innovation got us into this mess and innovation will have to get us out of it. It is extremely frustrating to see society desperately trying to do something with most of what is trying to be done will take decades to get habits changed or make even a slight difference on a large scale. The truth is that what we are doing is barely making a dent in the problem we already have and is not even close to keeping up with global growth of plastic use.

It’s frustrating at the least to listen to the arguments about using reusable bags verse single use bags. Most of what is being done whether it is using reusable bags, recycling, trying to reduce plastic use, etc is trying to solve a huge problem using tiny approaches. Sure it feels good as an individual to use reusable bags or to choose to throw everything into the recycle bin, but these approaches will not solve our global plastic pollution issue. We must think big and bring big solutions to the discussion of how we are going to solve this issue, otherwise we are going to look back 10, 20 , 30+ years from now and see that the problem has only gotten worse.

ENSO Plastics has developed a renewable plastic resin which is made from agriculture waste, it is marine degradable and completely safe if consumed by humans or other animals. So why are we still dealing with figuring out if we should use reusable bags or if they should come from china or all the other little issues, when there are technologies that exist today that would make bags that would biodegrade (in landfill and compost), are marine degradable within a few weeks, would break down within months if littered (based on climate moisture) and if consumed by wildlife would do no harm and is digestible?

Using ENSO RENEW resin to manufacture bags would cost a fraction of what is being proposed for paper bags of ten cents. This is a no-brainer in my mind and is the passion behind ENSO Plastics to solve the global plastic pollution issue. This technology and others like it are available today and consumers should be demanding large scale solutions like these to address the large scale plastic pollution issue.

Compostable Products Go Straight To Landfill

In Marin, Many Compostable Materials Go Straight to Landfill

Despite proliferation of biodegradable foodware, those products aren’t being composted at the two waste management facilities in Marin. As a result, people’s choices might not be as eco-friendly as they think.

By Jim Welte
Email the author
February 22, 2012

Greenwood School 8th grader Leyla Spositto and her classmates knew something was amiss just a few weeks into the school year when they saw the trash piling up.

Greenwood administrators had chosen San Ramon, Calif.-based Choicelunch as the school’s new lunch provider largely because nearly all of its packaging was made of compostable materials – from corn-based bio-plastic cups to potato-based “spudware” forks and spoons – and therefore would be diverted from the landfill. The move fit with one of the school’s core values of environmental stewardship.

But when Greenwood environmental science teacher Julie Hanft told the students that so-called bio-plastics weren’t being composted in Marin, Greenwood’s 7th and 8th graders, who handle the school’s trash as part of their after-school chores, were stunned.

“All of the stuff from Choicelunch was going to the trash,” Spositto said. “We were very surprised that a system didn’t exist for the packaging to be composted like it was supposed to be.”

So was Greenwood School Director Debra Lambrecht.

“We were very, very surprised,” Lambrecht said. “And the fact that the children were shocked and appalled? We thought, ‘Well right on.’”

With lots of packaging that could neither be composted nor recycled – bio-plastics can’t be recycled like regular plastic – the students and Hanft arranged to have a large collection of their Choicelunch packaging taken to Recology near Candlestick Park in San Francisco, where bio-plastics are composted. But they quickly realized that having a parent or teacher drive a truck across the Golden Gate Bridge weekly wasn’t exactly a sustainable solution.

Greenwood’s students and school administrators found themselves at the crossroads of an issue that all involved say is riddled with complexities. As a result, many Marin residents who think they’re making eco-friendly decisions – buying only compostable plastic cups for their children’s birthday party, for example – are sending more garbage to the landfill than if they were using recyclable materials.

“That’s the big shame about bio-plastics – people think they’re doing the right thing,” said Jessica Jones, the district manager for Redwood Landfill and Recycling Center in Novato, where most of the trash, recycling and compost from northern and southern Marin is taken.

Jones said Redwood, a subsidiary of Waste Management Inc., doesn’t compost bio-plastics because the compost the company produces is sold to and used on organic farms. If its compost contained any materials that took longer to biodegrade – like corn-based foodware or bio bags, for instance – it could not be certified by the Organic Materials Review Institute, the Eugene, Ore., which provides independent review of products to be used in organic farming.

Jim Iavarone, managing director at Mill Valley Refuse, which sends all of its waste to Redwood, said the inability to compost bio-plastics “has been a continual issue for us” ever since the company rolled out compost service in August 2010.

“The makers of these products and food services (like ChoiceLunch) have hung their hat on that,” Iavarone said. “It’s a good idea that just isn’t delivering as hoped or as advertised.”

Devi Peri, the education coordinator for Marin Sanitary Service, which serves most of Central Marin, including San Rafael, Larspur, Corte Madera, San Anselmo, Fairfax and the Ross Valley and Las Gallinas sanitary districts, says her company is in the same boat as Redwood.

“Not all compostable plastics are created equal and we don’t even have any way to see if it’s a true biodegradable plastic,” she said.

But compostable bio-plastics are accepted by other Bay Area waste companies like Recology, which processes most of its OMRI-certified compost at Jepson Prairie Organics, a facility in Vacaville.

“There is a clear disconnect between how Recology can compost bio-plastics and how we can’t,” Jones said.

The difference, according to OMRO Program Director Lindsay Fernandez-Salvador, is that Recology has an extensive “foreign removal program.” That program, essentially a filtering system, calls for manual removal of any all bio-plastic products not clearly labeled compostable. Under California law, products labeled compostable must meet the Biodegradable Products Institute’s ASTM D6400 standards, which “determine if plastics and products made from plastics will compost satisfactorily, including biodegrading at a rate comparable to known compostable materials.”

“Any compost may become contaminated with compostable plastics, but if the program has a reasonably robust foreign removal program, that satisfies OMRI’s requirements,” Fernandez-Salvador said.

A foreign removal program means that bio-plastics that aren’t labeled clearly or don’t meet the standards either end up in a separate compost stream of only products that will degrade at a slower rate than food scraps or yard waste – or they’re tossed into the landfill.

Peri said there is some industry skepticism about how much bio-plastic material is actually ending up in the compost streams at places like Recology.

“I have a feeling that it might be more (going to the landfill) than people might want to hear,” Peri said. “And maybe more than they are reporting.”

Jack Macy, the Zero Waste Coordinator for the city of San Francisco, acknowledged that some “compostable stuff that is not labeled well ends up in the landfill.”

“But the reason that we accept compostable bags and compostable foodware is that it allows us to capture more of the organics that we’re trying to divert from the landfill,” Macy added. “Every composter would prefer not to take that stuff because of the challenges of identification and the breaking down aspect. It’s easier to say no.”

That’s the choice Redwood has made, which spurred Greenwood’s 7th and 8th graders to take on the issue as a community action project. The students researched other options, spoke with potential vendors and made a presentation to Lambrecht right before the holiday break. The school intends to move to a completely independent lunch system next year, with an in-house chef making lunches dispensed with reusable plates and utensils. The move is one that only schools as small as Greenwood, with just 127 students, can afford to make.

In the meantime, Greenwood administrators have decided to dump Choicelunch and explore alternative options for the rest of this year.

“It is very disappointing,” said Karen Heller, the director of business development for Choicelunch, whose company supplies lunches for more than a dozen schools in Marin, including the Mill Valley and Ross Valley school districts. “But it hinges on the waste management company. Our hands are kind of tied.”

For two days a week, the school’s 8th graders will be selling lunch from Grilly’s and Tamalpie Pizzeria (one day apiece) to raise money for their 10-day spring trip. Lambrecht hopes to have a new deal in place in the coming days for the other days.

“We’ve really felt like we’ve accomplished something,” Spositto said of the student’s campaign. “We’re glad we had the authority to make this happen.”

Did you reuse your cotton bag 327 times?

As crazy as it may sound, plastic shopping bags have risen to the top of the environmental scene – not as a villain but as the winner!

A report released by the Environmental Agency in England has shown though life cycle analysis that plastic shopping bags are most often the best environmental solution, especially if you reuse them once as a can liner (or to clean up after your dog).

The actual report can be downloaded here: Plastic Bag Environmental Comparison

So, unless you reuse your paper bag 6-7 times, or your cotton bag over 327 times, when the cashier asks “Paper or Plastic?” stick with the plastic!

It’s a Polymergency and I Want to Talk Trash…

Let’s face it; nobody knows what to do about it. Seattle just banned the bags, there are entire towns banning the bottles, and California has banned any decision making process all together. If you don’t know about it or if you’re just blatantly unaware, there is a subject that’s coming to a movie theatre near you – literally. Films such as “Bag It” and “Addicted to Plastic” are just a couple of eye opening documentaries that are meant to be wake-up calls to the general public to stop and take notice. I remember seeing Food Inc. for the first time; it’s a snap back to reality. This particular wake-up call is screaming – PLASTIC! And it all correlates with each other, feedstock, energy, governments, the environment, industry power-players, and the ability to make wise(r) choices. We have a polymergency! You may not see it out your front door, but if you care to look out the proverbial back door, you will find that we’re swimming in plastics. 200 billion pounds of it is being produced every year and growing at a ferocious rate, most all of it, despite your own good intentions, is heading for a landfill…and it’s not going away.

There are plenty of intertwined storylines, but it boils down to three choices and what’s right – right now. First, you have your PLA’s (polylactic acid), made from corn starch. This is the choice to compost, Industrial Compost, not your backyard contraption. It’s sourced from feedstock with GMOs to harvest a specific type of crop – red flags should already be flying. If you’re not sure where I’m heading here, then I recommend “Food, Inc.” an enlightening description about genetic engineering and our food supply. Nevertheless, the PLA technology lacks the performance characteristics of tradition plastics (low melting point and poor barriers) and, by definition and despite the claims, it is not actually biodegradable. Ideally, and a stretch for sure, this type of plastic ends up in an industrial composting facility. If the compost facility actually accepts it (although not likely), it is lovingly processed into the “organic” soil under a very controlled environment. Otherwise, it’s considered a contaminant in the recycling stream and it’s undoubtedly going to a landfill.

Then there are the oxo-degradables, the choice to degrade. Okay, let’s get this out of the way, “Biodegradability” means that the organic material is capable of being broken down into innocuous products by the action of living things (as microorganisms). But, because everything eventually decays over time (albeit a ridiculous amount of time for plastic); this term is being unreasonably used when describing oxo-degradables as oxo-“bio”degradables. Oxo-degradables do just that, degrade. The technology certainly makes it look like its biodegrading. Have you ever picked-up an old brittle piece of plastic that just breaks apart in your hand? Basically, there are metal-ions interspersed along the polymer chain. When an oxo-degradable plastic is exposed to UV light and oxygen (which occurs immediately), like any metal, the ions deteriorate. The plastic becomes brittle and it breaks apart into tiny pieces of itself and contaminating, not biodegrading, into the soil and food chain. Obviously, there are shelf-life issues with oxo’s and, like PLA’s, they’re not welcome in the recycling stream. They’re heading for a landfill, and since this technology requires oxygen to degrade, and most landfills are an anaerobic (without oxygen), the plastic won’t degrade, let alone “biodegrade.”

Now a different technology has emerged, a technology which proves actual accelerated biodegradation without affecting the properties of traditional plastic. This is the ENSO technology that’s causing such misunderstanding for the California legislatures, and curiously enough, for the time being, their answer is to only allow you to be informed if the product is compostable (PLA). Considering the fact that the chances of your plastic trash being introduced into a composting facility, if you are actually able to find one in your area, are slim to none, this this is a peculiar line for California to take a stance on. The ENSO technology is an FDA approved and scientifically proven additive that maintains all the phenomenal characteristic of traditional plastic. The technology works with the recycling stream and the accelerated biodegradation occurs when the plastic enters a highly microbial aerobic/anaerobic environment (landfills). In comparison studies, when weighing factors such as sourcing, shelf-life, and end-of-life factors, the ENSO technology for biodegradation is simply a better choice.

Our scientific technology is moving towards better answers, but this is going to take time. Yet, with 100 million tons of plastic being dropped on our doorstep every year, we need to embrace proven newcomers to the scene. The answer isn’t to take away the bag or the bottle; it’s to choose a better bag or bottle. And it’s certainly not time to cripple advancements with bureaucratic finagling. Also, before we get too wrapped-up in the “green washing” of new technologies coming to market, we should start asking tougher questions. Just because something is labeled with a “feel-good” name and has “feel-good” pictures accompanying the marketing campaigns, does not mean it’s better for our environment. We are burying ourselves in plastic trash and separating the wheat from the chaff, or the marketing from the innovation, is going to be a critical step in improving our methods and preventing us from further trashing our planet.

Green news 4 u Interviews ENSO Plastics

This past Sunday Green News 4 U’s Mel Wylie interviewed our very own Teresa Clark, Co-founder of ENSO Plastics, LLC.

With all the misconceptions the plastics industry current holds, Green News 4 U’s Mel Wylie was eager to learn the facts. Being an environmental guru, Teresa was able to clearly educate listeners with the facts…no green-washing here. Mel also took the time to get Teresa’s views on some of the most controversial cultural plastic debates of the moment. Some of the topics covered in this podcast include the single use plastic bag debacle, chemicals leaching into water of plastic bottles, proper packaging labeling and much, much more.

Go ahead and check out the podcast here to see how Teresa answered all of green news 4 u’s questions! Let us know what you think of the podcast in the comment box below, and don’t forget to share this blog with your friends.

If you like this podcast be sure to keep up with Green News 4 U’s via facebook & twitter