Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

When they banned single use plastic bags in New Jersey it increased the amount of plastic in use [1].

Starbucks straw less lids use more plastic than the old lid ands straw. With a lot of them ending up in the trash instead of recycling, it may not be a net benefit.

The changes being made aren’t having quite the impact people had hoped.

[1] https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2024/01/25/new-je...




Given that single use plastic bags are rather difficult to get recycled in so many metro areas (I remember reading a single digit percentage of it is even recyclable) it’s not clear if it going into the trash instead of recycling is not a huge impact. But increased use of single use plastics is certainly not desirable IMO similar to fossil fuels unless they’re compostable or similar types that at least can break down cleanly.


Plastic bags cannot be recycled, period.

Even worse, they clog up the recycling machinery.

https://www.chicagotribune.com/2015/07/30/plastic-bags-a-hea...


The best thing we can do for the environment is to ban recycling, kill the bike movement, and fight any solution that involves consumers.

Some of it is maybe well intentioned, but it is an intentional distraction that we have to do thing to save the planet.

No. Sanction countries that have rivers of plastic flowing into the ocean. Put the CEOs of chemical companies in prison when they have accidents. Eminent domain the entire farm when some crusty old fart refuses to allow a 15 foot wide section of land to be used for high speed rail.


The main goal isn't to reduce the amount of overall plastic created its to reduce the amount of plastic trash that ends up on the streets, beaches, rivers, etc.


I sometimes am not clear on what the goal is.

The article seems to argue that the goal is very narrowly to reduce the amount of plastic bags created/consumed and then claims a study shows that the bans do indeed achieve that goal. It's hard to imagine this goal not being achieved, but it's too narrow.

I haven't seen any study showing that total plastic trash, incorrectly disposed, is reduced. It could be hard to study, I admit. I'd love to know the amount of the reduction as well. My guess would be there is a reduction, but it is fairly small.

For example, in the San Jose survey: https://web.archive.org/web/20230512013405/https://www.sanjo... pre-ban creek and litter surveys only showed 9% single-use plastic bags and this dropped to 2%.

I'd imagine 7% reduction is the upper bound on the impact, but it could be smaller than that if other litter increased. Maybe that's high enough to make the ban worth the inconvenience, I don't know what the right threshold should be.

Broader goals could include reducing total plastic production, reducing fossil fuel mining, etc. I'm more suspicious that these goals are not being meaningfully affected by bag bans.


If that's the case, is targeting rich developed countries with efficient waste management and pickup the best approach? I live in a very clean, North American city. I rarely see plastic bags blowing around. We have residential garbage pick up, and public spaces all have public bins. Our landfills are, what I would assume, are well run. Does the plastic bag ban in my city make sense? We never had an issue with plastic ending up in lakes/rivers etc. Now look to developing nations where rivers and streams are overrun with plastic. Do they have plastic bag bans? Doesn't seem like it and seems like that is where there should be one.


If I was going to steel-man the argument, I’d suggest that you’re adding some kind of extra economies of scale to production of less polluting alternatives?

Also I note that mid-income countries like Thailand are also getting in on plastic bag reduction. The kind interpretation of that is that muang thai has finally discovered its eco-consciousness, but an alternative one is that they’re copying rich countries ‘cuz it’s fashionable, and that that effect might trickle down to the countries who are serious polluters


If the purpose it to keep plastic waste and microplastics out of your local environment and local drinking water sources, then local policies make sense.

Should other places that also have that potential problem also do that? Sure, probably, if it's practical. But people in country X usually don't get to make local policy for people in country Y.


Plenty of global south countries have plastic bag bans at various levels of governments, with varying degrees of implementation and success.

Eventually, every country in the world should have it. And one shouldn't wait for others to do good.


Building a wall around the Philippines would get you an overnight 10% reduction in ocean plastics

https://ourworldindata.org/ocean-plastics


Building a wall of that scale overnight would be quite a feat, almost as impressive as successfully getting people to start using paper straws.


Implementation details left to engineering, I’m just an ideas guy


In the context of plastic lids vs straws. While you seem to suggest that there is more plastic waste now by weight mass or quantity. There are other considerations. A lid is likely easier to see and pick up. Also a lid is potentially more likely to be less problematic for fauna whereas straws are known for being problematic (e.g. that one popular video of a straw stuck in turtle nose).

I'm not saying we shouldn't try to do better though. But there are no doubt a lot of complex variables at play




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: