By Constance Beutel
CONSTANCE BEUTEL. File photo
AT ONE OF THE VERY FIRST BENICIA COMMUNITY SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION MEETINGS IN 2010, Benicia High School ECHO2 Academy students made an impassioned and well-researched presentation urging us to take action to ban single-use plastic bags.
The commission was advised to delay taking action to ban single-use plastic bags, as legislation was pending in the California Assembly that was about to accomplish this goal.
Unfortunately, California was unable to accomplish this needed legislation. So local governments have taken the lead. As of this month, 56 California cities and counties have taken action to ban single-use plastic bags.
When New Delhi, India, announced recently that not only had it banned single-use plastic bags but also the production of them, for me, it was the last straw needed to finally move to action here in Benicia.
The scope of the problem is serious
THE FATE OF many plastic bags: litter.
The ban addresses single-use plastic bags, the kind used in grocery, drug and hardware stores, as well as for takeout food, etc.
The reasons for the ban are many: Single-use plastic bags are difficult to recycle; they’re lightweight and frequently get tossed or blown away into our environment as litter, where they become health risks. As litter, some plastic bags end up clogging waterways and sewers. When these bags enter our Bay waters they can end up polluting our shoreline and even make their way to the Pacific Ocean Garbage Patch, where they can be ingested by fish and sea animals or deteriorate and end up in the food chain.
A National Geographic article on plastic bags estimates that we in the U.S. use nearly 100 billion plastic bags per year. Now, I can’t help wondering just how much 100 billion standard grocery bags weighs. This would be something to know in determining what it takes to produce this product, ship it, handle it, take it home and then “throw it away.”
As 1,000 of these bags weighs 12 pounds, 100 billion bags would weigh 1.2 trillion pounds. If I continue with this exercise, converting pounds to tonnes (2,200 pounds per metric tonne), works out to more than 545 million metric tonnes. A metric tonne measures 27 feet by 27 feet, so if we stacked these bags as metric tonnes one on top of the other, the stack would extend more than 2.7 million miles into space.
The only problem: They don’t stack into space — they go, year after year, into our environment and landfills. I would imagine the petroleum used to produced this plastic could be put to better use as well — or even better, be taken out of the CO2 greenhouse gas emission chain altogether.
If companies are unable to adapt to new products, they will face a serious financial impact. At $37 per carton for 1,000 plastic bags, we’re talking billions of dollars in annual revenue. It’s my hope that manufacturers will realize new, low-carbon products put green — dollars — into being clean.
Fortunately, with many California cities and counties already addressing the ban of single-use plastic bags, a lot of experience and data has been gained on the actual life cycle costing in addressing single-use plastic bag phase-out, and the concurrent environmental benefits and potential liabilities. We also have the benefit of knowing how to engage the community in the consideration and, hopefully, implementation of a city ordinance that would allow a successful transition from single-use plastic bags to a more sustainable process.
Doing the right thing
Here is a list of California cities and counties with single-use plastic bag ban ordinances:
Alameda County and city, Albany, Berkeley, Calabasas, Capitola, Carmel-by-the-Sea, Carpinteria, Dana Point, Dublin, Emeryville, Fairfax, Fort Bragg, Fremont, Hayward, Laguna Beach, Livermore, Long Beach, Los Angeles, Malibu, Manhattan Beach, Marin County, Mendocino County, Millbrae, Monterey, Mountain View, Newark, Ojai, Oakland, Pacifica, Palo Alto, Pasadena, Piedmont, Pleasanton, San Francisco, San Leandro, San Jose, San Luis Obispo County and city (Arroyo Grande, Atascadero, Grover Beach, Moro Bay, Paso Robles, Pismo Beach), San Mateo County, Santa Clara County, Santa Cruz County and city, Santa Monica, Solana Beach, South San Francisco, Sunnyvale, Ukiah, Union City, Watsonville and West Hollywood.
And besides New Delhi and Mexico City, some of the other places with single-use plastic bag bans include Bangladesh, China, Ireland and Haiti.
Learn more
Visit http://plasticbaglaws.org/ to learn more about single-use plastic bags and their impact on the environment. And if you are interested in joining the Community Sustainability Commission ad hoc work group studying the ban, please contact me at cmbeutel@sbcglobal.net.
Constance Beutel is chair of Benicia’s Community Sustainability Commission. She is a university professor and videographer and holds a doctorate from the University of San Francisco.
Sharing is caring!
The City of Corvallis, Oregon will enact a city ordinance next Tuesday that bans single-use plastic bags and requires a minimum 5-cent charge on all paper bags provided to customers at the point of sale. Great idea! I say, let’s do the same here. The way it stands now, the markets are passing the cost of both plastic and paper bags to the shopper. I use my own bags and would rather not pay for plastic or paper bags I choose not to use.
I believe the calculation is off: Constance says, “As 1,000 of these bags weighs 12 pounds, 100 billion bags would weigh 1.2 trillion pounds”.
But:
100,000,000,000 bags divided by 12 pounds/1,000 bags = 1,200,000,000 or 1.2 billion pounds, not trillion.
Still a lot of weight, but the calculation should be accurate, not off by a factor of 1,000.
Since Constance is off by a factor of 1,000, that many plastic bags actually equals 545,000 metric tonnes. (not 545 million). And a metric tonne does not measure 27 cubic feet. The volume of that many tonnes depends on the density. Constance is using the density of carbon dioxide gas, which is obviously much less dense than plastic.
Low-density Polyethelene (LDPE), which is what most plastic bags are made out of, is .91 grams per cubic centimeter. Let’s call it 1g per cubic centimeter.
A metric tonne = 1 million grams. Therefore, 545,000 metric tonnes = 545 billion grams. At LDPE density of 1 g per cubic centimeter, that is a volume of 545 billion cubic centimeters, which is 545,000 cubic meters.
The volume therefore is a cube 81.6 meters on a side (81.6 cubed = 545,000). Okay, we here in the USA like feet and pounds, so that is a cube 268 feet on each side. Less than a football field length on each side.
Constance is way off with her “2.7 million miles”. That is beyond absurd. Instead, imagine a cube a bit smaller than a footbal field on each side.
More like 268 feet into space, not 2.7 million miles. Quite a difference!
BeachBum said: Since Constance is off by a factor of 1,000,
It is important to look at the numbers, as you have BeachBum, to point out the reality of some of the ludicrous statements made by Environmentalists. Thanks go to you for taking the time to do so.
In this case I am certain that it was an honest error on the part of Constance, but it points out a disconnect between someone making a statement, which is off by such a huge factor, and the willingness of people in support of such causes to accept those numbers at face value without questioning them or investigating them. We have seen these exaggerations many times before on other issues; The rate of deforestation in the Amazon or the number of species becoming extinct as a result, are two that spring to mind.
As to the plastic bags themselves, I try not to use them, but would hope that this is an issue that can be resolved by personal choice directing the market, not by directives with the force of state or federal law.
Deforestation has decreased globally as a result of concerted efforts taken both at local and international levels. The same should and will apply to the use of plastic bags. If we let the market decide, we’d still be using asbestos building materials, PCBs, lead-based paint, and MtBE today.
The rate of deforestation and species loss may not be as was predicted 20+ years ago. However, deforestation still exists. Deforestation, habitat loss and the extinction of species go hand in hand. As long as they continue to be a realty, they should not be ignored.
I hardly think Constance was mistaken in here opinion that plastic bags are a problem. Plastic bags are petroleum-based and do not biodegrade. Sea turtles and other marine creatures mistake plastics and other garbage as food (such as jellyfish) and ingest it. This mistake causes blockages within their digestive system and eventual death. According to the US EPA, Americans use more than 380 billion plastic bags and wraps each year. It takes 12 million barrels of oil to produce this many bags. Worldwide, as many as one trillion plastic bags are used each year. This equates to 100 million barrels of oil! Plastic toxins end up in fish, which end up on our plates, which end up inside our bodies.
Thomas stated:I hardly think Constance was mistaken in here opinion that plastic bags are a problem.
No one said she was, in fact I agreed with her on that point. BeachBum correctly pointed out that there was math error made in her column.
I agree they are a problem. I would support efforts to reduce or eliminate their usage. I try to bring my own bags or use paper bags. And they are a problem for sea life for sure. We all should work to find and implement alternatives.
I was pointing out the math error because I think Constance did not think this one out and can do a better job of presenting the case. To say “2.7 million miles into space” — I mean, come on, that is so ridiculous it undermines her whole article, unfortunately.
And to say “a metric tonne measures 27 feet by 27 feet” means she confused mass with density (density = mass/volume).
Not to anger the editor, who I know is very busy and does generally a great job, but that is the kind of thing that should be questioned and confirmed prior to publication.
Thomas stated:”If we let the market decide, we’d still be using … MtBE today.”
The gas additive MtBE is a perfect example of market forces working for both misdirected good and the eradication of the evils of unintended consequences.
First defining a term (so as to be on the same page): ‘The Market’- The use of this term is often synonymous with ‘consumer demand’, but to limit the use to that element of ‘the market’ leaves out the demands made by organized advocates who seek to control, through government mandate, that which is produced to serve the general population.
Back to MtBE:.
MtBE was first used in the late ‘70’s as an additive by some refiners. By 1990 the Cean Air Act, which included a mandate for all refiners to use MtBE as an additive, was under consideration. This was resisted by some refiners as being expensive, as well as having possible detrimental environmental consequences, further study was sought. Those voices were silenced by those who sought to dictate that which was available to the market. In 1995 MtBE was the law of the land for 32 designated regions in 19 states.
Within a short time period, the words of those refiners proved to be prescient and the use of MtBE was soon banned by those same market forces that foisted MtBE upon the consumers, as the damage to the water table outweighed the benefits of reduced automobile pollution.
Literally billions were spent by the refiners to upgrade facilities to accommodate the addition of MtBE. Then billions were again spent to eliminate MtBE as an additive.
Additionally billions were spent to mitigate the consequences of those environmentalist who were flat out wrong in their demands for MtBE.
And we the consumer paid for it all at the pump.
Well stated DDL, I was a process operator for a major oil company when the government forced MTBE upon us, as you said a lot of money was spent upgrading facilities, due to the fact the MTBE would eat up the seals in equipment.
On a side note I have personally seen the AQMD lie about emmisions and the public always believes them.
If Benicia passes this ban, it is one more reason to not shop here.
That’s an intriguing thought. What are the existing reasons why one should not shop in Benicia?
For downtown insufficient parking is a big reason. In Southampton the choice of shops is becoming an issue.
I’m sure that Mario G. And the Economic Development Board could provide additional facts and data regarding the causes of the millions in economic leakage that they identified.
So, just to be clear, you are not suggesting boycotting Benicia businesses?
As an aside, I’ve never had an issue finding parking downtown. Even during Farmer’s Market. Regardless, what would you suggest they do to add parking?
Off topic
Deputy Dog Lund! How’s it going?
Great, Thanks for asking. Herr Thomas.
I am not calling for a boycott of Benicia businesses. However, if this ban goes through, I will personally shop less in Benicia. I imagine others will as well.
Parking solutions for downtown? Angled parking on First Street. Pave and stripe the gravel lot by the Yatch Club.
Is there anything about living in Benicia you like? Don’t think I’ve ever seen a positive comment out of you.
Yes. There are things that I like about Benicia, but I am concerned about our current direction. I am concerned about how we are prioritizing our real needs vs some small, very vocal groups’ wants. I don’t like it when the government unnecessarily restricts our freedoms. So I choose to comment when somebody advocates that I not be allowed to pick which type of bag I want. Or advocates that I be charged a nickel per bag. I don’t like spending money on a dog park when our schools do not have basic supplies.
I never would have thought that “Paper or plastic?” would become a battle cry for freedom. For some I can see that it would seem rather fitting though.
I see our local Space Cadet from Spaceship Earth is at it again. I have my products that I buy put in plastic bags all the time. It may well be a good idea to train our shoppers to bring their own bags. But then again if these products were not available to use at the stores would food prices go down? I think not. I think forcing a ban on the shoppers is wrong. Self training and education is a better way to go. What is next? I must buy an all electric car. Space Cadetryou must have better use of your time. I do not think the windmill on top of your house got much attention and this will not either.
Anachronism alert!
Spaceship earth? I shoul have stopped reading based on the title alone.
I do believe the Space Cadet means well. But time spent on items without a solution are not very productive. Yes banning plastic bags would solve the problem and more than likely bring about another problem. Think about this all electric cars at this point have failed. Government subs and still low sales. I would like to see the Space Cadet write about natural gas.