4 ms·

> - Reusable bags have to be reused dozens of times to make up for the additional environmental impact, so damage likely went up Damage to what? The bags? The

> - Reusable bags have to be reused dozens of times to make up for the additional environmental impact, so damage likely went up Damage to what? The bags? The food? The environment? I don't understand why bags built to be re-used is a bad thing. > - People have to pay more to buy more expensive plastic bags to carry their goods that are ironically also wrapped in plastic. If the food already being wrapped in plastic is a factor in how we bag the food, why do we need plastic bags at all? I don't see how this is relevant at all. > - Whole Foods home delivery had to send you more sturdy and expensive "reusable" bags. Just what the typical Whole Foods home delivery patron needs, about a dozen reusable bags delivered to them every week This seems easily solvable with a "return extra bags" feature. If you're getting delivery, the delivery man will be back next week. Why can't he pick them up then? > - People started stealing hand held shopping baskets Well before the current bag ban, most of the stores near me (California) had done away with shopping baskets. People stealing/taking them has been a thing forever and they constantly need to be replenished (same with shopping carts). > Here is how many times you would have to reuse a bag to have equal global warming impact: The bag ban is not to combat global warming. It's about the plastic bags that do not make it to the landfill. They end up in waterways and on plants and inside or on the faces of animals. I don't think I've ever heard of one of these bills arguing to get rid of single-use bags for global warming or landfill reasons. It's almost always an anti-litter measure.

bgirard 2y ago
> Damage to what? The bags? The food? The environment? I don't understand why bags built to be re-used is a bad thing. The environment. Reusable bags consume more resources to produce. So if you buy a reusable bag and throw it out, it's a net loss to the environment. If enough people are buying a resuable bag because they're not carrying around their reusable bags every time they buy something, it becomes a net lost because you're displacing cheap plastics bag (that are somewhat resuable) by more resource intensive resuable bags that don't get reused.
bko 2y ago
> Damage to what? The bags? The food? The environment? I don't understand why bags built to be re-used is a bad thing. Any damage done by throwing away a one time use plastic bag is multiplied by throwing away a "reusable" plastic bag. People want one time plastic bags and they'll use reusable plastic bags like one time if you force them. These bags are built to be tougher so are more expensive, more carbon intensive to produce, stay around longer in landfills, [insert bad metric of plastic bag] > If the food already being wrapped in plastic is a factor in how we bag the food, why do we need plastic bags at all? I don't see how this is relevant at all. Because there is already plastic bags everywhere so its a farce to declare "plastic is okay in every part of the process except this final part". > This seems easily solvable with a "return extra bags" feature. If you're getting delivery, the delivery man will be back next week. Why can't he pick them up then? Because it costs them money, and effort and gasoline to do so and then they have to clean them and recycle them. It sounds like a nightmare and a huge liability to do so. No offense, but I imagine you don't have any experience in recycling or operations of a food chain. It's like someone telling an engineer "why don't they just make code unhackable" > Well before the current bag ban, most of the stores near me (California) had done away with shopping baskets. People stealing/taking them has been a thing forever and they constantly need to be replenished (same with shopping carts). Great consumers don't even have to option to steal shopping carts. I guess they can work on balancing food on their head. Problem solved. > The bag ban is not to combat global warming. It's about the plastic bags that do not make it to the landfill. They end up in waterways and on plants and inside or on the faces of animals. I don't think I've ever heard of one of these bills arguing to get rid of single-use bags for global warming or landfill reasons. It's almost always an anti-litter measure. This seems like cutting off your nose to spite your face. How about you figure out how to get people not to pollute or to clean things up rather than just prevent them from having things that are super convenient.

bgirard 2y ago

> Damage to what? The bags? The food? The environment? I don't understand why bags built to be re-used is a bad thing. The environment. Reusable bags consume more resources to produce. So if you buy a reusable bag and throw it out, it's a net loss to the environment. If enough people are buying a resuable bag because they're not carrying around their reusable bags every time they buy something, it becomes a net lost because you're displacing cheap plastics bag (that are somewhat resuable) by more resource intensive resuable bags that don't get reused.

bko 2y ago

> Damage to what? The bags? The food? The environment? I don't understand why bags built to be re-used is a bad thing. Any damage done by throwing away a one time use plastic bag is multiplied by throwing away a "reusable" plastic bag. People want one time plastic bags and they'll use reusable plastic bags like one time if you force them. These bags are built to be tougher so are more expensive, more carbon intensive to produce, stay around longer in landfills, [insert bad metric of plastic bag] > If the food already being wrapped in plastic is a factor in how we bag the food, why do we need plastic bags at all? I don't see how this is relevant at all. Because there is already plastic bags everywhere so its a farce to declare "plastic is okay in every part of the process except this final part". > This seems easily solvable with a "return extra bags" feature. If you're getting delivery, the delivery man will be back next week. Why can't he pick them up then? Because it costs them money, and effort and gasoline to do so and then they have to clean them and recycle them. It sounds like a nightmare and a huge liability to do so. No offense, but I imagine you don't have any experience in recycling or operations of a food chain. It's like someone telling an engineer "why don't they just make code unhackable" > Well before the current bag ban, most of the stores near me (California) had done away with shopping baskets. People stealing/taking them has been a thing forever and they constantly need to be replenished (same with shopping carts). Great consumers don't even have to option to steal shopping carts. I guess they can work on balancing food on their head. Problem solved. > The bag ban is not to combat global warming. It's about the plastic bags that do not make it to the landfill. They end up in waterways and on plants and inside or on the faces of animals. I don't think I've ever heard of one of these bills arguing to get rid of single-use bags for global warming or landfill reasons. It's almost always an anti-litter measure. This seems like cutting off your nose to spite your face. How about you figure out how to get people not to pollute or to clean things up rather than just prevent them from having things that are super convenient.