California bans plastic bags

[barbos]

I was questioning how long the loose ones last, though, when they're out being beat up by the sun.

Then google that.

I have never seen a partially degraded plastic bag on the roadside - have you? If they are so readily degraded, you'd think there would be lots in various stages of degradation. Yet, you don't see that.

I have, shopping bag will break into smaller pieces in one year on the sun.
Motor oil turns it into crap too.

 

[Rhea]

Then google that.

I have never seen a partially degraded plastic bag on the roadside - have you? If they are so readily degraded, you'd think there would be lots in various stages of degradation. Yet, you don't see that.

I have, shopping bag will break into smaller pieces in one year on the sun.
Motor oil turns it into crap too.

Interesting. In all the years I've done roadside cleanup, all bags have been intact. Do you have a link to what you looked up?
In all years I've used plastic bags outdoors, no degradation. Maybe we have different sun here. Looking forward to reading your info when you cite it.

 

[barbos]

I have, shopping bag will break into smaller pieces in one year on the sun.
Motor oil turns it into crap too.

Interesting. In all the years I've done roadside cleanup, all bags have been intact. Do you have a link to what you looked up?
In all years I've used plastic bags outdoors, no degradation. Maybe we have different sun here. Looking forward to reading your info when you cite it.

You can google it yourself.
Intact!=no degradation,
It may look intact but if you try to use it it will fall apart. Low density polyethylene is not suited for outdoor use.
ordinary polyethylene which is less stretchable degrades too but less quicker.

Of course in the ocean it will degrade much much slower and primarily due to the bacteria and not UV.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Apparently all plastics are biodegradable, just some take a very long time to do so or need specific conditions.

That being said, after reviewing the data on these I believe this law is a good idea, and hope that my state follows.

 

[whichphilosophy]

China introduced a law enforcing shops to charge the customers for each plastic bag they use and a fine of 1,000 RMB for each one a shop gives away free.
Now, five year's later and assuming the information is correct. the government is claiming a 2/3 drop in usage.

http://grist.org/news/chinas-plastic-bag-ban-turns-five-years-old/

 

[doubtingt]

There ARE stupid questions!

Really? So you want to prefer about 20% of the world's population do the can have computing over potentially 100% of the world's population who could use plastic bags.

We are not talking about the world, only the US, because that is the only place the US government can ban anything. Over 90% of Americans own a cell phone and 75% own a laptop (in fact 26% own a laptop, a smartphone, and a tablet). Use around the world is skyrocketing, especially in China and in developing countries. The development of their economies depends upon it. The political and economic utility of these device is massive, unlike plastic bags which can easily be substituted with minimal negative impact.

So yes, it was a stupid question.

 

[arkirk]

Apparently all plastics are biodegradable, just some take a very long time to do so or need specific conditions.

That being said, after reviewing the data on these I believe this law is a good idea, and hope that my state follows.

The material used in most plastic bags is not biodegradable. They do degrade over time with exposure to solar radiation, though the products of this degradation is still not biodegradable. You just get smaller and smaller pieces of plastic uniformly distributed everywhere. It is hard to see why anybody wants plastic bag residue in their food, their lungs, their dustpans, etc.

There are some plastic like bags that do biodegrade that are made from corn. One of the posters here mentioned them. She uses them when she walks her doggie. Something like that may be okay. I am sure the ban does not cover them.

 

[maxparrish]

More often than not the do-gooder fadists and 'cause celebre's' keep me bemused and curious - curious because I wonder what is in human nature that compels people to thoughtlessly jump onto these cause bandwagons, ever ready to dictate to most other non-bandwagon folks what they wear (hemp but not fur), what speech they may utter (PC language), what foods they may and may not eat (non-GM), what low flow only shower-heads they may purchase, or what kind of sack they are permitted to haul groceries in ?

Certainly most of these bandwagon 'make a law' causes are not rooted in a rational process, such crusading is rarely the result of a person's conscious gathering of serious knowledge and his/her then coming to a rational belief in a social restriction (or mandate). Almost always it sprouts with a subjective belief and a desire to exert power that comes first and then, only when confronted by opposition, it might be followed by a search for serious validation of those 'feelings'.

To understand the modern do-gooder crusader one must appreciate the roots:

First, the do-gooder is usually an individual fully infected with the narcissism ethos of the modern age, i.e.; that a person's extemporaneous and unstudied "feelings" are what instantly defines reality and truth, nothing more. Such "feelings" need not comport with reason or reality because they are self-validatng. "I feel, therefore I must be right". Such feelings are not over a principal that is at least amenable to deduction and error checking through consistency, but over the emotion of the moment; "If I am offended, it must be wrong".

Second, the do-gooder's narcissism ethos also contains an unconstrained assumption, that what a person feels is "good for society (or his/her group)" make it an automatic right to try to impose one's idea of good on others. The principled idea that many things in life are are none of their business is an unfamiliar concept - they just "assume" their gut feelings should be imposed through law.

Finally, the modern do-gooder has usually been (but not always) encultuated into parroting a socially constructed and quasi-religious theology, in this case "environmentalism". It starts in childhood through school lessons and peer regurgitation of mantras, myths, superstition, slogans, and practice of mandated ritual in the enviro religion - "Caring for the planet", "sustainable practices", "save the earth", "recycle", "buy green", "stewardship", "mass transit", "energy conservation" are all pseudo-thought blurbs. Exactly what catechism of muckery means (especially in regard to preferences. prices, and scarcity) is far less important than its role in creating a do-gooder values consciousness, not the least of which is that of "man as environmental sinner" (aka garbage making, resource wasting, energy squandering, and forest logging "evil" man).

So I suppose this more recent fad "as policy" should be expected. One person sees four plastic bags on a street and "presto" he "feels" that plastic bags are a danger...if not sinful! Another reads some hyped and sensationalist propoganda about thousands of dead sea mammals due to grocery bags and "presto" they believe it (as they have been trained to do) and immediately "feel" something has to be done. And yet another may "feel" that others are wasteful, and "presto" they sanctimoniously demand somebody impose controls on that person's consumer choices.

And why? Because they are offended and their feeling is a sacred faith. For those California mystics who practice this religion just a few familiar chants elicit nods of amen, but for the rest of us we wonder why they insist on speaking in tongues and dervish whirling.

 

[Rhea]

Interesting. In all the years I've done roadside cleanup, all bags have been intact. Do you have a link to what you looked up?
In all years I've used plastic bags outdoors, no degradation. Maybe we have different sun here. Looking forward to reading your info when you cite it.

You can google it yourself.
Intact!=no degradation,
It may look intact but if you try to use it it will fall apart. Low density polyethylene is not suited for outdoor use.
ordinary polyethylene which is less stretchable degrades too but less quicker.

I hear what you're trying to say, but in practice, they are not falling apart. That's all. Observation on actual bags in field.

 

[Rhea]

And why? Because they are offended and their feeling is a sacred faith. For those California mystics who practice this religion just a few familiar chants elicit nods of amen, but for the rest of us we wonder why they insist on speaking in tongues and dervish whirling.

Or, they look at evidence and make conclusions that are supported by data. (rather than dollars)

 

[maxparrish]

And why? Because they are offended and their feeling is a sacred faith. For those California mystics who practice this religion just a few familiar chants elicit nods of amen, but for the rest of us we wonder why they insist on speaking in tongues and dervish whirling.

Or, they look at evidence and make conclusions that are supported by data. (rather than dollars)

Do they? Reread the first page of this thread. The reaction to the ban is one of support, but based on what, other than a potpourri of subjective and personal grievances? The sum total of "evidence" provided by the plastic bag offended is carping that " plastic bag trash is overwhelming." (whatever that means), or that "these people are bag happy", or that "...I hate F###King plastic bags!" because they don't hold enough and are "hard to open." These vague feelings and petty gripes are the basis of someone supporting the banishment of a preferred consumer choice for tens of millions who do not agree? This is not "evidence" to make a conclusion, it is the arrogance and immaturity of collective narcissism - in other words the elevation of the adolescent mindset to policy making.

 

[barbos]

You can google it yourself.
Intact!=no degradation,
It may look intact but if you try to use it it will fall apart. Low density polyethylene is not suited for outdoor use.
ordinary polyethylene which is less stretchable degrades too but less quicker.

I hear what you're trying to say, but in practice, they are not falling apart. That's all. Observation on actual bags in field.

That's because you have not seen old bags.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UV_degradation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-density_polyethylene

they mention mineral oil, I can confirm it too.

 

[Rhea]

I hear what you're trying to say, but in practice, they are not falling apart. That's all. Observation on actual bags in field.

That's because you have not seen old bags.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UV_degradation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-density_polyethylene

they mention mineral oil, I can confirm it too.

Your link shows the susceptibility of LDPE to UV degradation. If you look elsewhere on Wiki and elsewhere in literature, you will see that most grocery bags are HDPE. Your link to LDPE in the "applications" section does not list plastic grocery bags, though the HDPE entry does.

We do see old bags. We clean areas that have not been cleaned in years.

 

[lpetrich]

... a potpourri of subjective and personal grievances ...

maxparrish, that describes your recent posts very well.

Let us look at some actions in a nation that Rep. Michele Bachmann has described as an exemplary capitalist country: Communist China. China Reports 66-Percent Drop in Plastic Bag Use | Worldwatch Institute

A strict Chinese limit on ultra-thin plastic bags significantly reduced bag-related pollution nationwide during the past year. The country avoided the use of 40 billion bags, according to government estimates.

Plastic bags are commonly found in waterways, on beaches, and in other "unofficial" dumping sites across China. Litter caused by the notorious bags has been referred to as "white pollution."

The State Council, China's parliament, responded in January 2008 by prohibiting shops, supermarkets, and sales outlets from providing free plastic bags that are less than 0.025 millimeters thick.

The State Administration of Industry and Commerce also threatened to fine shopkeepers and vendors as much as 10,000 yuan (US$1,465) if they were caught distributing free bags.

 

[barbos]

That's because you have not seen old bags.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UV_degradation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-density_polyethylene

they mention mineral oil, I can confirm it too.

Your link shows the susceptibility of LDPE to UV degradation. If you look elsewhere on Wiki and elsewhere in literature, you will see that most grocery bags are HDPE. Your link to LDPE in the "applications" section does not list plastic grocery bags, thought HDPE entry does.

We do see old bags. We clean areas that have not been cleaned in years.

Nope, grocery bags are definitely 100% for a fact LDPE.
LDPE is more suitable for that because it stretch more readily.

 

[Rhea]

Nope, grocery bags are definitely 100% for a fact LDPE.
LDPE is more suitable for that because it stretch more readily.

You should tell the American Chemical Society that you have discovered their info page is wrong.

http://pubs.acs.org/cen/whatstuff/stuff/8238plasticbags.html

Many kinds of polyethylene can be made from ethylene. Plastic bags typically are made from one of three basic types: high-density polyethylene (HDPE), low-density polyethylene (LDPE), or linear low-density polyethylene (LLDPE). Those thick, glossy shopping bags from the mall are LLDPE, while grocery bags are HDPE, and garment bags from the dry cleaner are LDPE. The major difference between these three materials is the degree of branching of the polymer chain. HDPE and LLDPE are composed of linear, unbranched chains, while LDPE chains are branched.

They'll probably be very grateful to you for fixing their error.

While you're at it, you should probably submit fixes for the Wiki pages you linked, and the page for PolymerAmbassadors.org .

edited to add:
here's another page you'll need to fix:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resin_identification_code
and another
https://www.completerecycling.com/resources/plastic-recycling/codes


I think you may be confusing the LDPE soft stretchy plastic like the clear produce bags or dry cleaning bags with the translucent and heavier grocery bags. Which are made from HDPE ...and HDPE is UV resistant.

 

[barbos]

You should tell the American Chemical Society that you have discovered their info page is wrong.

http://pubs.acs.org/cen/whatstuff/stuff/8238plasticbags.html

Many kinds of polyethylene can be made from ethylene. Plastic bags typically are made from one of three basic types: high-density polyethylene (HDPE), low-density polyethylene (LDPE), or linear low-density polyethylene (LLDPE). Those thick, glossy shopping bags from the mall are LLDPE, while grocery bags are HDPE, and garment bags from the dry cleaner are LDPE. The major difference between these three materials is the degree of branching of the polymer chain. HDPE and LLDPE are composed of linear, unbranched chains, while LDPE chains are branched.

They'll probably be very grateful to you for fixing their error.

While you're at it, you should probably submit fixes for the Wiki pages you linked, and the page for PolymerAmbassadors.org .

edited to add:
here's another page you'll need to fix:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resin_identification_code
and another
https://www.completerecycling.com/resources/plastic-recycling/codes


I think you may be confusing the LDPE soft stretchy plastic like the clear produce bags or dry cleaning bags with the translucent and heavier grocery bags. Which are made from HDPE ...and HDPE is UV resistant.

OK, there seems to be confusion about that. But most likely you are right, glossy department store bags are (L)LDPE and grocery bags are HDPE.
In any case, grocery bags do degrade on the sun, that's a fact which I personally observed.
They also degrade rather quickly from motor oil, I observed (unfortunately) it personally too.
Also I observed personally PE degradation from halogens specifically from iodine. You can't use PE bag as a container for iodine.
Regardless of which is which, both types degrade from UV if not specifically treated. HDPE just degrades less faster.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Or, they look at evidence and make conclusions that are supported by data. (rather than dollars)

Do they? Reread the first page of this thread. The reaction to the ban is one of support, but based on what, other than a potpourri of subjective and personal grievances? The sum total of "evidence" provided by the plastic bag offended is carping that " plastic bag trash is overwhelming." (whatever that means), or that "these people are bag happy", or that "...I hate F###King plastic bags!" because they don't hold enough and are "hard to open." These vague feelings and petty gripes are the basis of someone supporting the banishment of a preferred consumer choice for tens of millions who do not agree? This is not "evidence" to make a conclusion, it is the arrogance and immaturity of collective narcissism - in other words the elevation of the adolescent mindset to policy making.

Yeah. I'm simply not buying the ecological arguments. I can understand it as trash control, though. Bags are thin enough that you get an awful lot of visible trash for the actual mass involved and they're light enough they're prone to becoming trash by accident. (I've had a couple depart when I was putting stuff in the car and the produce in a bag rolled out, leaving a loose bag to be snatched by the wind.)

 

[maxparrish]

maxparrish, that describes your recent posts very well.

Like anyone, I have subjective and personal grievances, but unlike many I don't support bandwagons and causes merely because I am irked, and certainly not to marginalize freedom on the basis of that annoyance. We live in an age where State power is demanded for even the most trivial of reasons, and those demanding it are perplexed if someone objects to it on a moral/political principle - the admonitions of live and let live, or that some things are not the business of others does not cause a nano-second of hesitation before they jump on a banishment (or mandate) bandwagon.

Let us look at some actions in a nation that Rep. Michele Bachmann has described as an exemplary capitalist country: Communist China. China Reports 66-Percent Drop in Plastic Bag Use | Worldwatch Institute

A strict Chinese limit on ultra-thin plastic bags significantly reduced bag-related pollution nationwide during the past year. The country avoided the use of 40 billion bags, according to government estimates.

Plastic bags are commonly found in waterways, on beaches, and in other "unofficial" dumping sites across China. Litter caused by the notorious bags has been referred to as "white pollution."

The State Council, China's parliament, responded in January 2008 by prohibiting shops, supermarkets, and sales outlets from providing free plastic bags that are less than 0.025 millimeters thick.

The State Administration of Industry and Commerce also threatened to fine shopkeepers and vendors as much as 10,000 yuan (US$1,465) if they were caught distributing free bags.

Bandwagon thinking. A presumed serious problem in China is not evidence of a serious or real problem in the western world, particularly in California or the US. However they manage their garbage disposal and dumping sites, it would seem that the western world of developed countries do a much better job than an emerging market such as China (and its "white pollution").

 

[whichphilosophy]

Like anyone, I have subjective and personal grievances, but unlike many I don't support bandwagons and causes merely because I am irked, and certainly not to marginalize freedom on the basis of that annoyance. We live in an age where State power is demanded for even the most trivial of reasons, and those demanding it are perplexed if someone objects to it on a moral/political principle - the admonitions of live and let live, or that some things are not the business of others does not cause a nano-second of hesitation before they jump on a banishment (or mandate) bandwagon.

Let us look at some actions in a nation that Rep. Michele Bachmann has described as an exemplary capitalist country: Communist China. China Reports 66-Percent Drop in Plastic Bag Use | Worldwatch Institute

A strict Chinese limit on ultra-thin plastic bags significantly reduced bag-related pollution nationwide during the past year. The country avoided the use of 40 billion bags, according to government estimates.

Plastic bags are commonly found in waterways, on beaches, and in other "unofficial" dumping sites across China. Litter caused by the notorious bags has been referred to as "white pollution."

The State Council, China's parliament, responded in January 2008 by prohibiting shops, supermarkets, and sales outlets from providing free plastic bags that are less than 0.025 millimeters thick.

The State Administration of Industry and Commerce also threatened to fine shopkeepers and vendors as much as 10,000 yuan (US$1,465) if they were caught distributing free bags.

Bandwagon thinking. A presumed serious problem in China is not evidence of a serious or real problem in the western world, particularly in California or the US. However they manage their garbage disposal and dumping sites, it would seem that the western world of developed countries do a much better job than an emerging market such as China (and its "white pollution").

What an absurd reply. Quoting facts is not bandwagon thinking.
Here is one source f Institute which indicates how this was a problem at the time of the ban. Actually it was a ban on giving bags away free. Customers could still purchase them.

http://www.worldwatch.org/node/5808
Plastic bags, a seemingly minor commodity, have mobilized four powerful government departments in China. The State Council, China's cabinet, issued the bag ban earlier this year, and in May, shortly before its implementation, three other departments stepped in and imposed an auxiliary ruling to enforce the directive. The Ministry of Commerce, National Development and Reform Commission, and State Administration for Industry and Commerce set forth detailed stipulations on implementation and enforcement in the ruling, known as Administrative Measures for the Paid Use of Plastic Bags at Commodity Retailing Places.
China's central government dealt this heavy blow to plastic bags out of concern for the environment and a desire for greater energy savings. People in China use up to 3 billion plastic bags daily and dispose of more than 3 million tons of them annually. Most of the carriers end up in unofficial dumping sites, landfills, or the environment. Urban dumping centers and open fields alongside railways and expressways are littered with the discarded bags, mostly whitish ultra-thin varieties. Such scenes have generated a special term in China: "the white pollution."
Plastic bags consume a huge quantity of oil, an energy source that in recent months has hovered at more than $100 per barrel on international markets. Experts estimate that China refines nearly 5 million tons (37 million barrels) of crude oil each year to make plastics used for packaging.

Having lived in China for several years I noticed the clear drop in the use of plastic bags.

According to this source consumption of such bags dropped by 2/3

http://grist.org/news/chinas-plastic-bag-ban-turns-five-years-old/
In fact this source goes on to suggest that San Francisco would follow this successful model

QUOTE Some Chinese retailers may be ignoring the bag ban, but at least the country is doing better than the U.S. at tackling the problem.
San Francisco became the first American city to impose similar restrictions, in 2007, and a few other U.S. cities and counties have followed in its footsteps, but no plastic-bag rules exist at the federal level. Rep. Jim Moran (D-Va.) has introduced a bill that would impose a five-cent fee on all disposable bags, but it’s about as likely to pass as plastic through a seabird’s intestinal system. END OF QUOTE

There are still mountains of garbage piling up but at least this first issue seems to have been addressed