Blogs@Baruch – A WordPress network for the Baruch …



Policy Options BriefTO: The New York City Council FROM: Nabjot Kaur, Daniel Muniz, Sharmin UddinSUBJECT: Plastic Bag Ban DATE: October 6, 2016Problem: Plastic Bags are an Environmental and Health IssueAccording to the Department of Sanitation, New York City disposes roughly 10 billion single-use plastic bags a year, accounting for 10 percent of the national total disposal of plastic bags. These are used every day, and they are part of our lives as a social norm. They are convenient, lightweight, and easy to use; however, New York residents are not entirely aware of the dangers plastic bags bring with their use. Plastic bags are manufactured with many non-renewable resources such as polypropylene, which is derived from natural gas, ethane, naphtha, and propane. Since plastic bags are not biodegradable and there is no high demand market for recycling, the usage of the bags becomes a significant contributor to greenhouse gases, acting as a catalyst to climate change. The continued use of plastic bags in New York City imposes vast economic, environmental, and health burdens to its residents and ecology. Currently, New York City has delayed bag-tax policy start date until February 2017 as State Assembly members have been concerned with the economic impact this will have on low-income families. Although this bag-tax policy may serve as incentive to use recyclable bags, it will not be aggressive enough to deter the rate at which environmental damages caused by bag usage advance in our environment. We propose for the New York City Council to move forward with an absolute ban of plastic bag use.We live in a society of receive and toss away. We want so many things and we do not care where it ends up when we do not need it anymore. The United States produces 33% percent of solid waste in the world and 80% of products in the U.S. are used and tossed away. Plastic is a daily norm in our lives, and we do not even notice it. We go to a store and we want to buy something, but we need something to carry those items. Here comes, the easy portable single use plastic bag. Once we are home with our items, we toss away the plastic bag like it never existed. ?Approximately, there are 100 billion plastic bags thrown away in the U.S. every year, which is equal to dumping around 12 million barrels of oil into the environment. Worldwide, we use around 1 trillion plastic bags every year which is 2 bags per minute. The Citizens Campaign for the Environment states that U.S. retailers spend $4 billion per year on plastic bags even though they are distributed free at stores, and that cost is passed on to the consumer in the form of higher prices. Once bags are used, they are also expensive to clean up and dispose of. In New York City for example, the Department of Sanitation and GrowNYC reports that it costs New York City more than $8 million tax dollars export our landfill waste to somewhere else which includes high amount of plastic bags. The Wall Street Journal reports that the average time a person uses a plastic bag is 12 minutes. Ironically, those 12 minutes will eventually translate into hundreds of years on earth or forever. Bags ultimately will end up in landfills and oceans which kills marine life. According to a study conducted by Worldwatch, it was concluded that around 10-20 million tons of plastic end up in oceans each year and around 5.25 trillion plastic particles weighing around 268, 940 tons are floating in the oceans. Since the bags resemble jellyfish, many animals such as sea turtles, whales, seals, birds, etc. eat these bags. For example a Mexican environmental group, Global Ban Now, created a video named Silent Killers. They found a sea turtle almost close to death because she had ingested a single use plastic bag. This bag was blocking her digestive tract, slowly starving her to death, and she could not dive in the water but just float on top of the ocean. She was lucky that they found her and were able to remove the plastic bag from her digestive tract and release her back to sea. Not all animals are as lucky as this sea turtle was in Mexico. Plastic bags cause intestinal damage leading to infections and starvation, and ultimately, death.Since plastic bags do not biodegrade, animals are not the only ones that are affected by plastic bag pollution. The bags will break into smaller and smaller particles until they are small enough to enter the food chain releasing harmful toxins, which outnumbers the plankton population in the ocean. For example, a fish eating small plastic particles thinking it is plankton, but it is not, and humans will be next in the food chain when eating that fish. In 2001, Laval University in Quebec and Wayne State University did a study of Inuit women, who eat more marine life such as fish, seals, and certain whales than the usual person especially during pregnancy. The study showed that they had extraordinary levels of the chemical toxin polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB), which is from plastics, in their breast milk. This study stated that the federal agency, Health and Welfare Canada, who is responsible for health regulations set the tolerance level for that time as 1.5 parts per million of PCB. However, these women had an average of 3.59 parts per million in the fat of their breast milk and some Eskimo women even had 14.7 parts per million. These women feed their children up to 23 months, and consumption of PCB for a year is toxic enough to cause skin, liver, and immune system problems but the side effects can be shown after 4-5 months. The study claims that these PCBs come from the environment such as industrial waste and ocean pollution. This study is 15 years old and the number for present day must be higher since PCB is used to create flexible plastic. Plastic bags are being made continuously as stated earlier. Thus, this means it is going to have more marine life and humans consuming it. Now this does imply that Non-Inuit people are safe because studies show that children over the age of six presently test positive for Bisphenol A (BPA), which is not supposed to be found in humans at all. Patricia Hunt, a geneticist, attempted to figure out why women are having many issues with reproduction and abnormal eggs in their ovaries. She began conducting experiments on mice and these mice were exposed to BPA. The study showed that these mice had abnormal eggs in their ovaries, miscarriages, and birth defects. Hunt states that many scientists agree that BPA has caused huge health issues with rodents such as, “mammary and prostate cancer, genital defects in males, early onset of puberty in females, obesity and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder.” Although mice and humans are different species of mammal, this does not conclude that BPA absorbed in humans is safe. In 2004, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention tested urine of 2,500 human subjects and they found 93% unmetabolized of BPA. BPA has also been found in human blood as stated earlier and breast milk according to the National Toxicology Program of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The main carrier of BPA is used in producing plastic, and it is running through our veins. Some people who want to prevent this believe that they can recycle their bags. However, there is not a clear market for recycled plastic bags. The Sims Municipal Recycling - Sunset Park Material Recovery Facility in Brooklyn handles New York City’s recycling of ?metal, glass, rigid plastic, and beverage cartons. Eadaoin Quinn, Education Coordinator for Sims Municipal Recycling, states that Sims receives around 30 tons of plastic bags a day. Within a month, it receives 900 tons of plastic bags. Quinn states the problem is also that are no big buyers for plastic bags and those bags at Sims will go to the landfill. Quinn also states plastic bags cause a huge problem at the recycling facility because they are so soft and flexible. It extends and gets caught in the machines which slows down the process of sorting out recyclables, and so, Sims employees have to clear the machines stuck with plastic film throughout the day. Why is there not more facilities that can process plastic bags? The issue with plastic bags being recycled is ?the sorting process, high costs, and cleanliness of the bags. The Earth Resource Foundation reports that only 3% of plastic bags produced are actually recycled. Even though your local supermarket may have a plastic bag recycling station, it is not a full guarantee that the bag is going to be recycled. If the bag is slightly soiled, it will be thrown to the landfill or go to the ocean. An example of the constant issue of disposed plastic bags is the Pacific Garbage Patch. The Ocean Conservancy states that plastic bags are the most common pieces of garbage found on beaches. Since there are converging ocean currents, there is an island of plastic waste which is the Pacific Garbage Patch. It is now two times larger than Texas in the middle of the ocean. Our usage of plastic bags has created an island full of plastic waste, and it keeps increasing! National Geographic states that 70% plastic in the ocean sinks to the bottom, and there must be a huge amount of plastic in the ocean itself. If we compare this number to the usage and disposal of plastic bags as stated earlier, it is quite terrifying to consider the wellbeing for Earth in the future. As stated earlier, plastic bags are created from non-renewable resources of petroleum such as polypropylene. Oil companies continue drilling for this, and they wreak a tremendous amount of havoc on the environment. The damage includes: hazardous toxins being released, deforestation to clear areas for drilling, oil spills killing wildlife and polluting fresh water, and even organ damage and diseases for people who live nearby. The oil companies and plastic industry receive so much profit on the need for plastic bags that they do not care about the problems they cause.Case Studies: Plastic Bag Banning Policy that have SucceededThere are some countries that have banned plastic bags successfully and a complete ban of plastic bags is not a new phenomenon as countries like China have placed a total ban on plastic bags since 2008. China’s bill is distinctive because it bans the distribution of plastic bags and requires the plastic bags to cost more than its operating cost. There is also the Polluter Pays Principle (PPP) which externalizes the cost onto the party that creates pollution. In other words, this principle’s “purpose is to reduce product use and manufacture less pollution product and raise the capital for pollution prevention or treatment…it is conductive to change people’s plastic bags dependence gradually, form a habit of reuse plastic bags, and thus reduce the discharge and harness cost of ‘white pollution’ ”. China’s ban on plastic bags leads them to save about 4.8 million tons of petroleum. It reduced 40 billion plastic bags being put out into the world. Furthermore, those shopping at supermarkets have started bringing their own bags which further reduces the usage of plastic bags. China also has a penalty in place for businesses who give out free bags to consumers and the penalty is for about $1,465. This is a hefty amount for store owners and businesses to pay; therefore, it allows the initiative of completing banning plastic bags to work more efficiently. If New York City starts with a full ban like China, it can reduce millions maybe billion bags in the landfill and oceans every year.We can shadow and incorporate similar measures to the bill in New York which will put a complete ban on plastic bags. Having a tax on plastic bags does alleviate the pollution problem if we were to look at Ireland where there was a 95% reduction in plastic bag usage in 2002. This is a great number compared to the amount of plastic bags everyone is throwing into the ocean but this is not enough because people can still buy bags. The policy in China not only places the burden on those buying plastic bags but focuses on the parties that are producing pollution and therefore indirectly affecting our environment. This allows for awareness, and without awareness, we will not be able to reduce save our environment to the extent we would like to. When there is a measure in place and a monetary penalty attached to all parties, including the business owners, everyone will think twice before buying a plastic bag because they will remember the Polluter Pays Principle phenomenon. Often people will not mind paying the 5 cents or 10 cents for the plastic bag, but businesses will be impacted if they have to serve a penalty for selling the plastic bags. ???????Rwanda is another country that completely stood against the use of plastic bags, and did not place a tax as an alternative because that allows us to put a price on this issue. For Rwanda residents, an absolute ban gives store owners and civilians no choice but to take environmental concerns seriously. Charging a price will not eliminate the problem, it will rather reduce the amount of petroleum thrown into the ocean and effecting our environment as a whole. Almost half of the people in Rwanda live in poverty, the living conditions are not comparable to the United States. Nonetheless, Rwandans still believe that banning plastic bags will make their country a better place, save lives, and their economic condition. What they mean by economic condition is that by eliminating plastic bags, they are attracting more tourists. In fact, “1.2 million tourists visited Rwanda in 2014 – an increase of 4 percent in the last year”. Furthermore, the increase in tourism impacted their job market because about 8 percent, which is about 177,000 tourism related jobs. This is monumental for a country like Rwanda and this also allows us to take a step back and validate the results of a complete ban.Southern Australia also took the initiative to completely ban plastic bags in 2009 and saw immediate results and numbers that are noteworthy. They noticed that 9 out of 10 shoppers were using reusable bags rather than plastic bags, and it was 6 out of 10 shoppers that were using reusable bags before. This change allows us to further take a stance against the usage of plastic bags. In addition, Southern Australia also noticed a 400,000 reduction of plastic bags in one year. Southern Australia makes it a priority to communicate with retailers and unions regarding this, and therefore making sure everyone is complying in accordance with this initiative and there are not any risk factors. Hawaii was the first state to ban plastic bags in grocery stores in July 2015. Hawaii believes that reusing plastic bags does not lessen the environmental harm because they still end up in the ocean “adding to the 28 billion pounds of plastic already in our ocean”. There are some exceptions, such as using plastic bags for meat, fish, fruits, medicine, and other sanitary related article. Furthermore, for those businesses who do not comply with the ban will be reprimanded through penalties ranging from $100 to $1,000 a day. Having such penalties in place will encourage business owners to take the ban seriously, and will allow consumers to follow through accordingly. As we saw prior, China also has a similar penalty which has been effective thus far.???????California also placed a ban on plastic bags in 2014 and this bill outlined consumers to pay 10 cents if they want to purchase a paper bag as a substitute. As of July 2015, the California bill banned stores from giving out single-use plastic bags to consumers, and recycled paper bag could be sold to consumers if they are $0.10 or more. The bill in California is currently facing some delays because opponents of the bill have created two propositions 65 and 67 which will both be voted on this November. Proposition 65 will allow people to vote on the redirecting of the revenue collected to environmental causes. Experts think this proposition has underlying intentions, such as “to discredit the statewide ban by portraying the fees as a windfall for supermarkets”. Proposition 67 will require voters to agree or disagree with the ban of plastic bags. This proposition basically wants to nullify the bill that was originally created in 2014. California currently waits for a final decision on the ban on plastic bags. If New York City can follow these countries and states that have bans, it can help save our decreasing wildlife, reduce one of the big contributors to climate change, decrease humans having toxins in their bodies, encourage reusable tote bags usage as a norm in society, and give possible inspiration for the ban to become a national law. Arguments against Plastic Bag BansCertainly, there are many arguments against plastic bag bans such as a change in lifestyle or pathogen contamination. published an article titled “The Disgusting Consequences of Plastic Bans”. In this piece the author indicates that one of the arguments against bans incentivizes the re-usage of bags, which will increase the chances E. coli infections. The article attempts to establish a cause and effect relationship between re-used bags and an increase in diseases shortly after a ban placed in San Francisco. This relationship remains to be unfounded as there are myriad underlying factors that could have contributed to the spread of E. coli and salmonella infections. E. coli and salmonella are mainly caused by the mis-handling of meat processing and are part of the risk of our daily food intake. Meat not well cooked can cause salmonella infection alone. Bags may be a part of the possible infection process chain; however, it is not the originator of the disease.However, plastic industries are making claims that plastic is beneficial for the environment, they sponsor advertisements to persuade people to vote against bag bans in local elections, and support studies to prevent the usage of reusable tote bags. The plastic industry funded a study at the University of Arizona that there is 12 percent E. coli in reusable tote bags, but the author of the study reported that it is not enough bacteria to make an average healthy person sick. The author also stated that more than 99.9 percent of that bacteria can be destroyed by machine or hand washing. The current tax on the plastic bags will not make a difference because people will pay more in order to prevent bacteria like this example showed. How can we prevent people believing these bogus claims? The City Council can distribute reusable tote bags throughout the five boroughs at many city agencies, events, organizations, schools, etc., and they can explain how easy it is to wash them.Another main argument against plastic bag bans is the very popular “economic” effect on the population hired under this industry. Some studies indicate that the transition to a no-plastic bag use society would reduce employment to some degree, this does not weigh the total costs of all impacts that require consideration, and this serves as a proper segue for discussing cost-benefit analysis (CBA). While considering its textbook definition, CBA can only serve to weigh the costs against the benefits or revenue in a more monetary (tangible) language. However, in order to be able to accurately assess the impacts of the ban on plastic bags, one must be able to quantify the real costs related to the ban of plastic bags. This needs to include the environmental costs, along with external health costs that are caused by the pollution of bags in our environment. Can we quantify the loss of a species soon to be extinct? Perhaps not, but the intangible values that should be considered in the cost-benefit analysis would certainly outweigh the tangible costs of banning plastic bags.Lastly, some may question whether the ban will impact the economy (manufacturing company and jobs). Based on Rwanda’s example, we could see that there was a positive change in their economy – tourists like to visit clean and safe places. In fact, manufacturers could be offered an alternative, such as shifting to manufacturing reusable bags. There were many concerns in California regarding the economy when the plastic bag ban was implemented. What many people don’t know is that the ban included $2 million loan for those manufacturers who are willing to shift to making reusable bags instead of plastic bags as they were before. This not only allows a smoother transition, but allows prevents job losses. Final Policy PropositionRight now, this current bill will not make much of an impact, and as previously stated it gives an option for people to still purchase plastic bags. It might make some people use reusable bag during a tax ban, but the movement is not happening any faster right now to use it without a tax. The production of plastic bags is faster instead and we must stop that speed soon. A complete ban of plastic bags in New York City will greatly improve the environmental crisis we are living in now. Other countries have taken this initiative and have successfully seen and experienced results, whether we are speaking in terms of more usage of reusable bags or reduction in the amount of plastic bags. This all leads to less harm to our environment and public health. Completing banning plastic bags is a practical solution and will lead to better changes because countries as poor as Rwanda has taken this step and saw results. In many countries around the world, families make a living off of collecting plastic bags, but they still believed in saving the environment and saving lives such as China and Rwanda; therefore placing the ban. Thank you for taking your time to read this, and I will enjoy to offer assistance to arrive to a full solution to this problem. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download