Supporters of a ban on plastic bags emphasize their huge contribution to plastic pollution as one of the key reasons a prohibition is needed. Plastics act as pollutants, since they never biodegrade, (even in landfills) and remain toxic for many years. Additionally, supporters argue that because plastic bags are inexpensive and durable, their effects on plastic pollution never seem to decrease. Currently, there are 500 billion plastic bags that get used worldwide, which is roughly 83 bags per person in a year (Jacobsen, 2015). Ultimately, this all adds up to around 12 million barrels of oil needed for the 100 billion plastic bags in circulation in the United States every year (Larsen, 2014).
Marine animals are arguably the most affected due to plastic bags, from either direct ingestion or through exposure to chemicals within plastics. Sea turtles are some of the most common creatures to mistakenly ingest plastic bags, mistaking it for a jellyfish. Consumption of plastic can be detrimental to their health by blocking digestive systems, which leads to a bioaccumulation of toxins within them and a biomagnification of toxins throughout the marine food chain. In addition to sea turtles, sea birds are also highly affected: it’s estimated that around 90 percent of sea birds have plastic in their digestive systems, often leading to malnourishment and starvation (Parker, 2015).
Plastic bags are not only harmful to marine animals, but also to the environment. Landfills will benefit from a ban of single-use bags, since only 11 percent of plastic bags are actually recycled. (Parker, 2015). This means the rest went to landfills, getting buried, refusing to biodegrade and ultimately building up a wealth of toxins. Plastic bags are also very good at clogging pipes and storm drains, which can significantly increase an area’s risk for flooding, especially in populated urban regions.
The production of plastics is estimated to increase from 311 million tons to around 1,124 million tons from 2014 to 2050, which is likely to increase the amount of plastics in the ocean to an unequal ratio to the amount of fish. Plastic’s share of global oil consumption hit 6 percent during 2014, and it is thought to hit 20 percent by the year 2050. To reduce oil consumption (and especially our dependency on foreign oil reserves), supporters of a ban argue that plastic bags aren’t incredibly necessary if individuals develop a habit of carrying around their own grocery bags. A statewide ban on plastic bags would be one efficient way to save and use less oil, contributing to the health of marine animals and the effectiveness of storm drains.
References
Jacobsen, Sharon. “Plastic Bag Pollution .” N.p., 2005. Web. 2 June 2017.<http://dpw.lacounty.gov/epd/PlasticBags/Articles/Googobits_07-21-05.pdf>.
Larsen , Janet . “Plastic Bags Fact Sheet .” Earth Policy . N.p., Oct. 2014. Web. 30 May 2017. <http://www.earth-policy.org/images/uploads/press_room/Plastic_Bags.pdf>.
Parker , Laura. “Nearly Every Seabird on Earth Is Eating Plastic.” National Geographic . N.p., 2 Sept. 2015. Web. 30 May 2017. <http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2015/09/15092-plastic-seabirds-albatross-australia/>.
Thankyou for sharing the data which is beneficial for me and others likewise to see. Commercial Roof Cleaning
Plastic bag bans do not necessarily lead to success due to various factors, such as, limited control to enforce bans, lack of good replacements for single use plastics, a strong black market for plastic bags, and the monetary and influential power of the plastic industry.
The plastic industry is incredibly powerful, thus influential when making decisions contributing to a single use plastic ban.
A part of the plastic industry being influential is because it contributes greatly to the economy. If there is a ban of single us plastics enforced, there will be job losses and disinvestment in the full plastic industry.
Industry deflect allegations onto the choices of consumers, or only focus on more business-oriented solutions like self regulation. Which makes a single use plastic ban seem necessary, but also raises concern of how effective it would really be.
Many find switching our focus to changing the economy to a circular economy would be much more effective, specifically in the long term, than a single use plastics ban.
Plenty people worry about increased prices due to alternatives for single use plastics.
Disabled people are commonly left out of environmental discussions, which is a problem, especially when discussing a single use plastic ban, because many disabled people rely on plastics. A contribution to the problem is the lack of accessibility to alternatives, disregarding the needs of disabled people on a lower socioeconomic level. Making the problem worse, many alternatives can be harmful towards specific disabled groups. Necessary single use plastics overall have added to the stigma and bias on disabled people.