|
I found this article that seems to paint a contrasting picture. https://archive.is/BCd0w "Commissioned by the American Recyclable Plastic Bag Alliance, the report acknowledges that the total number of plastic bags declined by 60% since the ban—as its backers hoped. But because shoppers still had to carry their groceries home, they needed alternatives. Mostly that meant switching from the thin plastic film bags to the heavier, reusable bags now sold in many supermarkets. The problem is that most of these alternative bags are made of non-woven polypropylene, which takes much more plastic to make and isn’t widely recycled. And what about the supposed climate benefits? Well, the study finds that, owing to the larger carbon footprint of the heavier, non-woven polypropylene bags, greenhouse gas emissions rose 500%.
The problem is compounded by the way people use these bags. Though intended to be reused many times, the report says 90% of the new reusable bags are used a mere two or three times. So they are piling up in landfills and homes. Think of your own behavior in misplacing bags around the house or forgetting to bring them when heading out for groceries." |
This is a lobby group. Their goal is to produce and sell as much plastic as they can. The more people reuse plastic bags, the less money they make. Their argument is worth as much as that of the tobacco lobby. That doesn’t mean they’re wrong, just that they sure won’t quote any ideas or statistics in favour of reuse.
Don’t forget, folks: “recyclable” is an extremely low bar. Most things are recyclable. But many recyclable products are still so expensive (and energy-hungry) to actually recycle that the term is borderline meaningless.
Reuse trumps recyclable by a wide margin and anybody telling you otherwise is either working in a very narrow set of industries (eg paper) or malicious.