h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I have noticed recently that alot of supermarkets are removing 'free' plastic bags or at least rationing them to 2 bags and then you have to buy one of their 'bags for life'.

This is always purported to be to help to 'save the environment'...or is it?

Are supermarkets being ethical and trying to save the planet?

We recently found out that supermarkets charge the manufacturers of good stolen from their shops rather than taking the hit themselves.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/retailing/article3850924.ece

It hsa been reported by suppliers that supermarkets hold off paying them for as long as possible which puts the suppliers in a precarious position...they need the money to survive but they also need the business so how can they complain?

My take on the 'bags for life' issue is that the accountants have realised that normal plastic bags cost them money and they get nothing back from these bags. So, use the enviroment as an excuse for reducing the number of plastic bags they have to buy by rationing and also start selling bags for life which they get money from. Yes, it does seem that they will have to keep paying for these but how often will people replace these bags and will it actually be cheaper to do this than keep paying for disposable plastic bags.

I thought they were under severe governmental pressure to reduce their use or they will be forced.
At least that's my take on it.

Personally, if they want to give me extra 'loyalty' points for using my bags again that's fine by me.

All part of the Courtald commitment it seems...

http://www.totallywasted.org/2007/04/less-waste-courtauld-agreement.html

Why don't they just go back to letting us use the cardboard boxes? Can't get more environmentally friendly than that surely?

As for the Courtaulds commitment I haven't really seen much reduction in food packaging at all.

And yes cardboard boxes would be the best thing to go back to but it seems to be 'company policy' not to have them out the front...probably 'looks messy'.

I use four food retailers on a regular basis.

Retailer 1: gives you a "green point" on your loyalty card if you use a bag or other container other than a new plastic bag.

Retailer 2: takes the bags and bottle carriers in which it has delivered my groceries (ordered online) back, for recycling.

Retailer 3: issued me with free "bags for life" until 5th May; now it charges 5p if you take a new bag. I've not tested this to see whether they charge 5p per bag used. (Becuase I use the "bag for life", natch! )

Retailer 4: does not offer any incentive or penalty associated with plastic bags.

So, four different approaches, in my experience. I'm not sure which is the best...are there any other variants on this theme?

RF

Of course a non-biodegradable plastic bag is actually a carbon sink. Every drop of oil used to make a bag that ends up in landfill is one less drop that gets burned and released into the atmosphere. It's a dubious form of carbon sequestration .

I hate using plastic bags - and am slowly but surely working my way down our seemingly endless supply of them for things like lining bins and emptying the cat litter tray.

The supermarket I use most of all, which is barely acceptable in countries with a consumer oriented approach but is about the best of a bad bunch here, have recently undertaken an overhaul of all their shops.

One of their "improvements" has been to install a lot more "self-check-out" points. Now in principle, anything that reduces my contact with surly shop assistants is a Good Thing. But generally I find a bright hello to the check-out person breaks the ice and cuts that out.

So I object to them on two grounds. And repeatedly (ie. every visit) complain about them both.

1) they increase the self-checkouts so they can reduce personnel. No. I belong to the same union so I feel duty bound to object to that.

2) (of equal importance to me) the self-checkout demands that you use their plastic bags. It's a selling point that those bags are free. They are flimsy, useless for a 2nd visit and have holes in so you can't use them for cat litter disposal.

I always take a fold away box with me when I shop. I put it in my trolley, and at the other end of the check-out I put my goods in it. That's it. And until the self-checkout takes account of that I'll carry on complaining.

Other times I use a canvas shopping bag. I see that C&A are offering them these days (EUR 1,50) - if only they would make you pay for the plastic ones too I'd feel it was progres.

Oops. It's a bit of a hobby horse of mine.

I ordered online recently and they unloaded from the van's trays straight into my kitchen.

But all these measures are just paying lip service to the problem. Everything you put in that tray, reusable bag or cardboard box is still wrapped in plastic.

>> Of course a non-biodegradable plastic bag is actually a carbon sink. <<

But isn't creating plastics from oil more carbon-intensive than producing petrol? So more CO2 gets released in the making than gets sequestered in landfill?

I don't know, so I'm asking for information.

RF

Dave there is a way round that - here all retail outlets have to take back packaging.

It is very common to see people taking things out of the plastic trays etc, and putting them in the bins provided by the supermarket.

Eventually the manufacturers will learn - but we have to tell them.

I just buy purpose made trolley bags.They are plastic with wooden handles and last for years.I've had mine for 4 years now.

But how do you carry them home?

RF

me? In my foldaway plastic box (that I've had since... well, just after I got married which is around 2 decades now)

And biodegradable plastic ags are a pain in the arse if you happen to use them to store anything in them for more than a year...you come back and find the bag in bits that refuse to be hoovered up and the contents liberally spread across the floor.

Incinerators with comibined heta and power(CHP) are a good solution with the correct scrubbing/effluent system. But NIMBYism comes into play at that point...typically.

>But isn't creating plastics from oil more carbon-intensive than producing petrol? So more CO2 gets released in the making than gets sequestered in landfill?<

Very probably, I was being slightly flippant. But it's indicative of the need to think everything through when it comes to greenness, which is very rarely done as we insist on using Daily Mail first-order logic everywhere. My in-laws have just returned from Hawaii, but I'm fairly certain they will continue to feel that warm feeling they get from "helping" the environment by recycling the piles of tabloid shite they get delivered daily. But I digress.

Plastic carrier bags have been targeted because of the (very real) damage they do when people let them fly free or sail across the ocean. If we could guarantee that this didn't happen, then plastic would actually be one of the greenest packaging options. Plastic is very light and therefore easy to transport. It's also very good at preserving things inside it, meaning less product wastage.

By comparison, paper uses a lot of nasty bleach in manufacture. Glass is heavy and energy-intensive to produce, transport and recycle. The worst is aluminium, which takes a huge amount of energy to produce and only slightly less to recycle.

I'm sure cardboard has a downside too, but it escapes me

>> I'm sure cardboard has a downside too, but it escapes me <<

Cardboard can be sequestered by providing bedding, and indeed housing, for the mentally ill, homeless, or both.

RF

p.s. Yes, I *am* joking. Just in case anyone needs this explaining to them.

And the other points I meant to make, and in fact will make while I'm still and feel the need - a lot of choices in these matters are largely dependent on exactly which environmental disaster you wish to prevent.

Landfills are unpleasant and and unhealthy and take up space that would otherwise be used for housing, farming or car showrooms, but is that really so bad in the grand scheme of things?

I used to think that landfills displaced forests and natural habitats for thousands of native creatures. But then I realised I live in a country where the only natural habitats are the hedgerows they plant to stop the beef eating the breakfast cereals. At least landfills keep humans away, and if Chernobyl is anything to go by this is a very, very good thing for the environment.

I work for a major retailer who is involved in both Department Stores and Supermarkets, and is regarded as the 'expensive' store in the high street.

I believe it was one of the first, if not the first, Supermarket chain to produce 'Bags for Life'. The bags returned become public benches.

However your Mum probably had one of those back in the '50's with a vinyl green or beige shopping bag... and in the '60's was the all engulfing string bag!!!

Also everything was wrapped in greaseproof paper, put in a paper bag, and everyone knew how to pack as the journey home was by 'Shanksey's Pony' or .

Cardboard box? A non-starter, as it uses up selling space, is a valuable recycling product, is invariably trashed on opening with the 'safe-knife' and will go in the bin with the end-user.

I use a conventional day bag and the for most of my food shopping, the majority of which is loose or canned!

For a big shop I use a 'Cabin' trolley and .

I do get very VERY annoyed with the 'Green' brigade who complain about paying for carriers, fill two trolleys with food, pay then go to their 4 x 4 with 20 badly-filled carriers, load them in the cavern of the lorry, and then repeat the event thte following week... having disposed of half that food in landfill, and not had the sense to bring back the bags to reuse, to at least reduce a small part of their waste and assist the rest of us...

I really get about this, and for those few who feel the same may wish to visit here!

http://www.care2.com/

I know it is American, but it does cover the and I know of three Hooters who are members!



I'll step off my soapbox now, but wil be back with the second installment!!!

I haven't finished...

MMF

plastic shopping bags bans are an example, as is fluro lighting, of well intentioned but muddle headed thinking.

the reality is that whatever you carry your shopping in will also have an environmental cost. cardboard boxes, woven or heavier plastic bags etc will ALL have a higher ecological cost than the current shopping bags. these heavier bag replacements do NOT have especially extended lives as anyone who has used them for any period will attest. many of them get lost or misplaced or simply not taken when shopping, therefore requiring replacement. and research shows that large percentages of the current bags are reused as kitchen tidy bags. in landfill they are actually beneficial because they help stabilise the structures before breaking down.

and another reality is that people who currently use them as bin liners will in future have to buy purpose intended bags, which are always higher density.

as for carbon sequestration, the percentage of carbon in these bags on a global scale is minuscule and will have near zero impact on climate change. and contrary to some alarmist accounts, the incidence of harm to wildlife from these bags is near enough non existent.

reducing and reusing the current bags is a desirable thing to do. banning them, knowing ahead of time that the replacements offer no ecological benefits over what is being replaced, is plain daft.