• Front page
• Receive this content on your RSS reader

By John Cardie, Westminster

When the grocery store bagger asked the young lady in front of me if she wanted plastic or paper, she said, “I want to be environmentally friendly, so I choose paper!”

When the bagger asked me the same question (because baggers can’t be choosers) I said, “I want to be environmentally friendly, so I choose plastic!”

Who’s right?

First of all, it’s true that plastic doesn’t biodegrade as easily in a landfill as does paper. But this is only looking at one aspect of pollution and not the whole picture. A product’s “pollution profile” must be considered from “cradle to grave,” not just its end.

Plastic bags take 40 percent less energy to make than paper ones and produce 70 percent fewer atmospheric emissions.

Paper bag production kills trees, contributes to harmful acid rain, releases deadly dioxin and pollutes large volumes of water. Plastic bag production pollutes our waterways a whopping 94 percent less than the production of paper ones.

On a pound-for-pound basis, it takes more than 50 times more energy to “recycle” paper than it does plastic. Note that that’s not double or triple the wasted energy, but 5,000 percent more.

While it’s true, as I’ve noted above, that plastic doesn’t biodegrade as quickly as paper, 35-year-old newspapers that could still be read have been dug out of landfills. Paper bags take up more than seven times the space in landfills compared to plastic ones.

From a “consumer convenience” standpoint, it’s a lot easier to carry five plastic bags full of groceries to the car than five paper ones. Try also keeping your things dry in a canoe with paper bags vs. plastic, or picking up your dog’s droppings in the park using an absorbent paper bag — yuck!

Finally consider the fact that it takes seven trucks carrying paper bags to equal just one truck carrying the same number of plastic ones. Therefore, their transport to the grocery store or city dump wastes seven times the fuel (making prices rise) and creates seven times the “toxic exhaust” these extra trucks belch out. These additional trucks increase traffic jams, accidents and speed the destruction of our roadways.

So, looking at the total “pollution profile” and not just the “landfill life,” the next time a bagger asks, “Paper or plastic?” we should all answer, “I want to be environmentally friendly, so I choose plastic!”

John P. Cardie is a retired environmental consultant with more than 30 years’ experience in the field. He is a resident of Westminster.

READER COMMENTS

Don't use either! Both plastic and paper are bad for the environment in their own ways. The best way to limit your impact on the environment each time you go to the grocery store is to BRING YOUR OWN BAG! Use any bag you have around the house, or buy some from the many companies that sell reusable sacks. I have two good friends who just started one such company called Green Endeavors.

Ramon is right -- what's the environmental cost of the mining? Also, there are the deaths caused by sea life, etc., being choked by floating plastic bags. The article looks at part of the issue, but still far from the whole picture.

The canvas bags took some energy, water, and pesticides to produce and transport. Standard cotton is a pesticide and water hug, I understand. There are also bags made from recycled plastic bits...

I guess plastic and paper bags are fine too, if you use only one at a time. If you need more than one canvas bag (be warned - they do weigh a few ounces and you'd have to bring them with you), bring 2. Or 3. Or whatever. They hold a lot more weight and volume than either paper or plastic.

When I was a truck driver we took loads of paper for recycling to many places. It was usually somewhere between two and four hundred miles of transport on a semi that was new and got the formidable mileage rate of 6.5 mpg. Now when you factor in that we also transported old aluminum the same number of miles the recyle peopple would be amazed that the recycled products used much more energy than new and the plastics weighed so much less that we could have had ten or twenty times the volume on a trailer for the same fuel expenditure. The reason we had to go so far so often was that people don't want the stink of a paper recyling plant anywhere near. I would describe it as rotten potatoes in old gym socks. Quite strong and lasting. But I use plastic bags, which I re-use until they are so worn they are garden mulch for my strawberries and cloth bags because Sams Club has the best prices and no bags.

That's fine, Liam as long as you buy your groceries one bag at a time. The dude is correct - energy used is often forgotten by those who say they are environmentally concious.

This is a false dichotomy. Bring your own canvas bag - stronger than either plastic or paper and 0 pollution.

You neglected to mention that plastic uses petrochemicals, a dwindling resource, and paper is a renewable resource.

POST A COMMENT

• Why so much turnover in mayor's office?
• Hearing on the Ruby Hill towers
• Let freedom ring
• Promoting socialized medicine
• Immigration Laws or Lack Thereof
• Atheist Diversionary Tactics
• The "Melting Pot" is unique to America
• Many mighty hearts covering the world