New Yorkers: What do you think of the plastic bag tax?

yogabird

Sun, May 08 2016, 8:40 pm

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/05/06......html

Plastic shopping bags will soon cost 5 cents a piece, in an effort to help protect the environment.

Do you think this is a good move? Will it help people change their habits? Can you see yourself re-using bags, or transitioning to re-usable fabric shopping bags, or will you just end up paying the fee?

Do you agree that the huge amount of plastic bags we use actually hurt the environment or are they harmless? Can this habit just be wasteful, regardless of its effect on the environment? What about the hygiene issue with re-using bags?

Or will this just turn into another tax that will hurt consumers and put more money in the pockets of rich store-owners?

Amarante

Sun, May 08 2016, 9:17 pm

It's a great idea. Most people take reusable bags for sjopping and it's certainly changed people's habits in Los Angeles where it has been in effect for several years.

Plastic bags are a terrible threat to the environment including animals who become strangled. Plastic bags don't breakdown and paper bags are not better because they require resources including water to produce.

It takes a bit to become used to it but then it becomes a habit. If I forget a bag, I generally just buy another reusable one as that way I have a constant supply.

Why so upset about. It's about the NY add what most other places have done.

goodmorning

Sun, May 08 2016, 9:53 pm

New York is very different than some of the other places that it's been tried (e.g. LA, Seattle) in that there are a lot more people who shop by foot in NY. It's one thing to stash reusable bags in your car to use when you decide that you have enough time to swing by the grocery store and do some shopping. It's another when that means stuffing your pockets or your handbag with reusable bags so that you'll have them if you decide to stop at the grocery while walking home from work.

On a practical level, I reuse shopping bags for all sorts of things: to bag dirty diapers, to collect recyclables that I don't put in the regular garbage can, for bags of stuff that kids need to bring to school. Sure, I can buy bags for those purposes, but doesn't that defeat the point? It's only worth training people to stop using shopping bags if those bags end up trashed. If they get reused and recycled, what's the difference if I pay for it or not?

I think this law could have been structured differently: only charge if you're buying < 5? items, or no charge if you're buying raw chicken/meat that can leak and would be unsanitary, etc.

Amarante

Sun, May 08 2016, 10:24 pm

Most Europeans have always used recycleable bags and they are a walking population. The string bags of Paris are ubiquitous as a way of carrying home stuff.

It's an adjustment but get over it - as plastic bags and even paper bags are a scourge on the earth.

Are people spontaneously buying huge amounts of groceries such that carrying empty bags to the store is a huge deal. In my personal experience, I can neatly fold up two to fit in a normal size purse.

I would assume people are generally buying large amounts of groceries with planned trips so you learn to take the bags - just like you learn to take your keys. And if you are carrying such large amounts of groceries, it's impossible to shlep home anyway. I don't know how anyone would carry home more than two bags. If you need a bag in an emergency because you've dashed in somewhere, then 5 cents is probably worth it.

Plastic produce bags are still available.

And the advantage of recyclable is that items don't get all mashed up together - like berries or soft items the way they do in a plastic bag. And as others have posted, one can buy thermal bags to keep cold stuff cold or hot stuff hot.

seeker

Sun, May 08 2016, 10:37 pm

I think it's a little ridiculous and there are better ways to transition to less waste.
I also can't understand why meat and poultry are not included in the exceptions. They said exception for produce but not for the items that are probably MOST likely to leak and contaminate?
And it has been argued that washing and ultimately disposing of reusable bags is just as bad for the environment as plastic bags.
Plus it's not very convincing that there will be less plastic-bag use overall - without grocery bags we would have to buy trash can liners, diaper disposal bags, and so forth, which create just as much waste as using a bag for groceries, then a few other simple toting needs, then garbage disposal. What is gained here? Instead they could have campaigned more for reusing disposable grocery bags as trash liners. Or something.

I do use reusable bags, not as religiously as they'd like you to, and they do take up an unwelcome amount of space. I have no objection to encouraging people to use more reusables. But I think the bag fee is just ridiculous.

goodmorning

Sun, May 08 2016, 10:38 pm

Amarante wrote:

[b]

You're kidding, right? I usually carry home at least two bags in each hand. Often much more, and if I have a stroller, I can hang a whole bunch of bags off its handlebar.

Sure, you can plan grocery trips and pull out your stash of reusable bags. But it doesn't allow for a spontaneous walking-home-from-the-park-kids-are-happy-so-why-not-make-a-grocery-run-now?

I'm sure that there are advantages to thermal bags, but shouldn't it be my choice if I want to buy them?

I don't know, it seems like NY has so many problems to start with (including environmental ones) that to start nitpicking on plastic bags is really an odd place to focus our energy. Especially, again, if they get reused on a consistent basis.

goodmorning

Mon, May 09 2016, 9:19 am

Amarante wrote:

Most Europeans have always used recycleable bags and they are a walking population. The string bags of Paris are ubiquitous as a way of carrying home stuff.

Just as a btw, I don't know how accurate these figures are (and even if they were once, they're now outdated), but apparently, 14% of Paris households don't own cars (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/nov/09/france-car-ownership-sales-downturn) vs. 56% of NYC households (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._cities_with_most_households_without_a_car). That means that, as a percentage of the whole, NYC car-free households outweigh Parisian car-free households by a factor of four.

You are trying to extrapolate data from cities where the majority of households own cars (LA, Seattle, Paris) to a city where the majority do not. I think that's an unfair comparison.

Scrabble123

Mon, May 09 2016, 9:30 am

goodmorning wrote:

So pay the extra few cents for the bags.....

gp2.0

Mon, May 09 2016, 9:32 am

It's a GREAT idea! I'll address some of the arguments against:

1) no more impulsive shopping: you'll get used to always stashing a reusable bag in your stroller or purse - just like you got used to carrying your purse or diaper bag everywhere you go. If you need something, you get used to carrying it around. Also, I'm 100% sure that stores will start selling reusable bags - several stores are already doing this.

2) I reuse bags anyway so now I'll be buying more bags so the effect on the environment is the same: look outside yourself for one minute. If you live in NYC, play a little game called "count the shopping bags." There are bags strewn everywhere. On the street, in the trash, blowing in the wind, in my driveway. Maybe you are careful to reuse bags, but a huge percentage of people are NOT.

3) poultry will leak and its unsanitary: there will still be plastic produce bags. All you do is take one and wrap your package of chicken in it. Voila. I ALREADY do this all the time. I do it with cartons of yogurt too. Because the cheap plastic grocery bags leak all the time and I want them to have double covering in case of leaks.

I made this adjustment years ago with the Brooklyn Public Library, which used to have free plastic bags available for checked out books. They stopped providing the bags, I kvetched for awhile, then I transitioned to a reusable bag. It is SO MUCH better. It holds more books, doesn't tear, doesn't dig into my skin, and doesn't end up in the garbage.

Less plastic is definitely better for the environment in so many different ways. I can't believe there are people who would actually think that plastic doesn't make a difference.

Rosemarie

Mon, May 09 2016, 10:39 am

What it will mean for me is more makingbuse of the groceries free delivery service:they use boxes, so no bag charge, and they bring it up the steps and into my house, so much easier for me with kids anyway! For the environment: we just used more boxes-not so great for the environment but better than bags, but also used more carbon emissions for the van driving to my house to deliver that box. So net environmental benefit: probably zero or negative.

Additionally. Delivery service used people that are most likely illegal immigrants, so that provides more money to them, which I am not particularly in favor of. (And no, I do not ask the bag boy or delivery boy at the supermarket if they are legal or not, would not be very smart or PC thing to do, it is just my assumption based on knowledge of the demographics.)

gp2.0

Mon, May 09 2016, 11:56 am

There is also some confusion about what "good for the environment" actually means. Reducing plastic use is one aspect of environmental improvement. It will reduce the amount of plastic sitting in landfills. It will reduce the amounts of animals and ecosystems harmed. It won't contribute to the massive microscopic island of floating garbage in the ocean.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wik.....patch

Fish and birds eat the plastic. We eat the fish and end up ingesting toxic chemicals. Birds feed the plastic to their chicks - half of them die. Birds choke on or are strangled by plastic. Dolphins and whales get caught in plastic.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kamilo_Beach
That's a beach in Hawaii where tons of plastic garbage washes ashore.

goodmorning

Mon, May 09 2016, 12:16 pm

gp2.0 wrote:

It's a GREAT idea! I'll address some of the arguments against:
3) poultry will leak and its unsanitary: there will still be plastic produce bags. All you do is take one and wrap your package of chicken in it. Voila. I ALREADY do this all the time. I do it with cartons of yogurt too. Because the cheap plastic grocery bags leak all the time and I want them to have double covering in case of leaks.

Of course, that offers no net benefits for the environment as compared to a shopping bag.

That is, you can present workarounds to the bill: use produce bags! Buy trash bags for your recycling and diapers! etc. But if they don't address or improve the underlying environmental concerns, in what way is the bill a great idea?

m in Israel

Mon, May 09 2016, 12:43 pm

Another interesting aspect to this is that it is by no means certain that imposing this fee will reduce plastic bag use in supermarkets. In fact a study of this policy in South Africa showed plastic bag use has actually NOT gone down since the introduction of this rule (after an initial short term drop), presumably because it is not a big enough expense to make up for the inconvenience, so people are not dramatically encouraged to stop using the bags:

http://www.econrsa.org/papers/.....8.pdf

And as goodmorning said, I reuse my plastic bags anyway. (When this first came up in Israel I joked that maybe it is being sponsored by the makers of Diaper Genie who want people to buy their plastic bags to dispose of dirty diapers rather than just use the supermarket ones Smile

)