You know that scene in those old Western movies (or Bugs Bunny) where a gangster shoots someone at the foot. The goal is not to injure the target, but to make him dance to avoid bullets for the purpose of intimidating, humiliating, or exerting dominance. Consider these scenarios as you consider a new set of meaningless plastic bag laws that seem destined to just make Californians dance.
Remember the hubbub in 2014 when Governor Jerry Brown signed a “groundbreaking” law banning “single-use” plastic bags from grocery stores, drastically reducing solid waste? A decade ago, the law turned the grocery store checkout process into an excruciating routine, with clerks asking consumers how many bags they wanted to buy and stingy shoppers hauling out germ-filled reusables. Cotton bag.
The behind-the-scenes negotiations over the law offer interesting lessons about legislative sausage-making, with unions, shops and environmentalists all fighting for the privilege. A key compromise allows stores to sell thicker “reusable” plastic bags, which seems odd to me. “Disposable” bags actually have multiple uses. They are so thin that I use them to pick up dog poop and drain the bathroom trash can.
In comparison, “reusable” bags take up so much space that I always throw them in the trash. mercury newsPaul Rogers recently reported that the loophole was inserted by some Democratic lawmakers in Sacramento who have plastic bag factories in their districts. I don’t remember that detail, but apparently replacing thin bags with thick plastic or paper bags might not actually go as planned.
Sure enough, the ban failed. In addition to adding to the typical grocery bill, plastic bans have failed to reduce solid waste. In fact, this has led to a massive increase in plastic entering landfills. According to a recent report, “Californians threw away more plastic bags by weight last year than when the law was first passed.” New York Times The article calls it “an environmental rule that is counterproductive and inadvertently makes the situation worse.”
Apparently, the California Legislature doesn’t know the term “unintended consequences.” But that doesn’t stop it from trying again. There are two bills currently before the Capitol. Senate Bill 1053 and Assembly Bill 2236 would also ban thicker plastic bags, replacing the thinner ones previously banned. Lawmakers seem to want us to reuse those dirty old bags stashed in trunks or under seats.
But even that isn’t entirely clear. As Rogers explains, Governor Gavin Newsom “banned people from bringing their own cloth bags to stores at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 because of concerns that the virus could be spread through the bags.” Turns out, that was just bullshit — Just like everything else related to bag related predictions. But after the decree was enacted, Californians started using plastic bags again in compliance with the government’s requirements.
If a new law is passed, the likely outcome is that people like me—for example, people who don’t want to live like bums and lug disgusting old bags into the store—will have no choice but to Buy thick and heavy resources – use up paper bags. The new bill increases recyclable content requirements and requires stores to charge at least 10 cents each, but makes paper the primary option. Remember, in the old days, we all used paper bags. They were partly replaced by the now-banned thin bags because plastic bags are more environmentally friendly and easier to reuse. I didn’t use a heavy paper bag so I would just throw mine in the landfill.
“The energy required to make a paper bag is approximately four times that of a plastic bag, plus chemicals and fertilizers…create additional harm to the environment,” explained national geographic. “(F) Or compared to plastic, for a paper bag to neutralize its environmental impact, it must be used between 3 and 43 times.” Given that paper bags are less durable, “a person is unlikely to get the most out of any bag to balance the environmental impact.” Impact.”
Ten years from now, a new generation of lawmakers will surely propose banning paper bags after they start clogging landfills. Despite their rhetoric about saving the planet, these lawmakers are smart enough to know that these efforts will not significantly improve the environment or reverse climate change. For now, it’s safe to say that the new ban will actually make things worse.
I cynically believe that environmentalist legislators are trying to make our daily lives as annoying as possible by banning the items we rely on (bags, natural gas appliances, gas yard equipment, internal combustion engine cars) as a way to punish the rich in our society of confession. It’s just for show, but they have political power, so we just dance.
This column first appeared in the Orange County Register.
