What is a plastic bag?

A plastic bag, polybag, or pouch is a type of packaging made of thin, flexible, plastic film, nonwoven fabric, or plastic textile. Plastic bags are used for containing and transporting goods such as foods, produce, powders, ice, magazines, chemicals and waste.

How many plastic bags do we use?

The number of plastic bags used worldwide has been estimated to be on the order of 1 trillion annually.The use of plastic bags differs dramatically across countries. While the average consumer in China uses only 2 or 3 plastic bags a year, the numbers are much higher in most other countries: Denmark: 4, Ireland: 18, Germany: 65, USA: > 300, Poland, Hungary, Slovakia: more than 400.

• Over 1 trillion plastic bags are used every year worldwide. Consider China, a country of 1.3 billion, which consumes 3 billion plastic bags daily.

• About 1 million plastic bags are used every minute.

What’s the problem?

• An estimated 6 billion plastic bags are consumed--just in that county--each year. (William T. Fujioka, 2008)

• It is estimated that worldwide plastic bag consumption falls between 500 billion and 1 trillion bags annually. That breaks down to almost 1 million every minute.

• The average family accumulates 60 plastic bags in only four trips to the grocery store.

• In good circumstances, high-density polyethylene will take more than 20 years to degrade. In less ideal circumstances (land fills or as general refuse), a bag will take more than 1,000 years to degrade.

• An estimated 3,960,000 tons of plastic bags, sack and wraps were produced in 2008. Of those, 3,570,000 tons (90%) were discarded. This is almost triple the amount discarded the first year plastic bag numbers were tracked (1,230,000 tons in 1980). (EPA)

• Anywhere from 0.5% to 3% of all bags winds up recycled. (BBC, CNN)

• Every square mile of the ocean has about 46,000 pieces of floating plastic in it. (UN, 2006)

• Ten percent of the plastic produced every year worldwide winds up in the ocean. 70% of which finds its way to the ocean floor, where it will likely never degrade. (UN, 2006)

Paper or plastic bags: which is better? It's an age old question, when it comes time to check out when grocery shopping: paper bag or plastic bag? It seems like it should be an easy choice, but there's an incredible number of details and inputs hidden in each bag. From durability and reusability to life cycle costs, there's a lot more to each bag than meet the eye. Let's take a look behind the bags.

Where do brown paper bags come from? Paper comes from trees -- lots and lots of trees. The logging industry, influenced by companies like Weyerhaeuser and Kimberly-Clark, is huge, and the process to get that paper bag to the grocery store is long, sordid and exacts a heavy toll on the planet. First, the trees are found, marked and felled in a process that all too often involves clear-cutting, resulting in massive habitat destruction and long-term ecological damage.Mega-machinery comes in to remove the logs from what used to be forest, either by logging trucks or even helicopters in more remote areas. This machinery requires fossil fuel to operate and roads to drive on, and, when done unsustainably, logging even a small area has a large impact on the entire ecological chain in surrounding areas.

Once the trees are collected, they must dry at least three years before they can be used. More machinery is used to strip the bark, which is then chipped into one-inch squares and cooked under tremendous heat and pressure. This wood stew is then "digested," with a chemical mixture of limestone and acid, and after several hours of cooking, what was once wood becomes pulp. It takes approximately three tons of wood chips to make one ton of pulp.

The pulp is then washed and bleached; both stages require thousands of gallons of clean water. Coloring is added to more water, and is then combined in a ratio of 1 part pulp to 400 parts water, to make paper. The pulp/water mixture is dumped into a web of bronze wires, and the water showers through, leaving the pulp, which, in turn, is rolled into paper.

And that's just to make the paper; don't forget about the energy inputs -- chemical, electrical, and fossil fuel-based -- used to transport the raw material, turn the paper into a bag and then transport the finished paper bag all over the world.

Where do paper shopping bags go when you're done with them? When you're done using paper shopping bags, for shopping or other household reuses, a couple of things can happen. If minimally-inked (or printed with soy or other veggie-based inks) they can be composted; otherwise, they can be recycled in most mixed-paper recycling schemes, or they can be thrown away (which is not something we recommend).

If you compost them, the bags break down and go from paper to a rich soil nutrient over a period of a couple of months; if you throw them away, they'll eventually break down of the period of many, many years (and without the handy benefits that compost can provide). If you choose to recycle paper bags, then things get a little tricky.

The paper must first be re-pulped, which usually requires a chemical process involving compounds like hydrogen peroxide, sodium silicate and sodium hydroxide, which bleach and separate the pulp fibers. The fibers are then cleaned and screened to be sure they're free of anything that would contaminate the paper-making process, and are then washed to remove any leftover ink before being pressed and rolled into paper, as before.

How are plastic bags made? Unlike paper bags, plastic bags are typically made from oil, a non-renewable resource. Plastics are a by-product of the oil-refining process, accounting for about four percent of oil production around the globe. The biggest energy input is from the plastic bag creation process is electricity, which, in this country, comes from coal-burning power plants at least half of the time; the process requires enough juice to heat the oil up to 750 degrees Fahrenheit, where it can be separated into its various components and molded into polymers. Plastic bags most often come from one of the five types of polymers -- polyethylene -- in its low-density form (LDPE), which is also known as #4 plastic.

How does plastic bag recycling work? Like paper, plastic can be recycled, but it isn't simple or easy. Recycling involves essentially re-melting the bags and re-casting the plastic, though, according to the U.S. EPA, manufacturing new plastic from recycled plastic requires two-thirds of the energy used in virgin plastic manufacturing. But, as any chef who has ever tried to re-heat a Hollondaise sauce will tell you, the quality isn't quite as good the second time around; the polymer chains often separate break (thanks to reader MaryBeth for noting the difference between "separate" and "break" -- the former implies that the chains can come back together, which they can't), leading to a lower-quality product.

What does that mean to you? Basically, plastic is often downcycled -- that is, the material loses viability and/or value in the process of recycling -- into less functional forms, making it hard to make new plastic bags out of old plastic bags.

What about biodegradable plastic bags? Biodegradable plastic is a mixed bag (pun intended) as well; while biopolymers like polyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA) and Polylactide (PLA) are completely biodegradable in compost (and very, very, very slowly -- if at all -- in a landfill) and are not made from petroleum products, they are often derived from our food sources.

The primary feedstock for bioplastics today is corn, which is rife with agro-political conflict and often grown and harvested unsustainably; because of these reasons, and because it competes with food supply, it is not likely to be a long-term solution in the plastics world.

Plus, some bags marked "biodegradable" are not actually so -- they're recycled plastic mixed with cornstarch. The cornstarch biodegrades and the plastic breaks down into tiny little pieces but does not actually "biodegrade," leaving a yucky polymer mess (if in small pieces).

The only way to avoid this? Look for 100% plant-based polymers, like the two mentioned above.

So, while it's good to have the alternative (and to recognize the innovation it represents), bioplastics aren't quite ready to save us from the paper or plastic debate.

Paper or plastic: A look at the facts and numbers Further insight into the implications of using and recycling each kind of bag can be gained from looking at overall energy, emissions, and other life cycle-related costs of production and recycling. According to a life cycle analysis by Franklin Associates, Ltd, [pdf] plastic bags create fewer airborne emissions and require less energy during the life cycle of both types of bags per 10,000 equivalent uses -- plastic creates 9.1 cubic pounds of solid waste vs. 45.8 cubic pounds for paper; plastic creates 17.9 pounds of atmospheric emissions vs. 64.2 pounds for paper; plastic creates 1.8 pounds of waterborne waste vs. 31.2 pounds for paper.

Paper bags can hold more stuff per bag -- anywhere from 50 percent to 400 percent more, depending on how they're packed, since they hold more volume and are sturdier. The numbers here assume that each paper bag holds 50 percent more than each plastic bag, meaning that it takes one and half plastic bags to equal a paper bag -- it's not a one-to-one comparison, even though plastic still comes out ahead.

It's important to note that all of the above numbers assume that none of the bags are recycled, which adds a lot of negative impacts for both the paper and plastic bags; the numbers decrease in size (and the relative impacts decrease) as more bags are recycled. Interestingly, the numbers for paper bag recycling get better faster -- the more that are recycled, the lower their overall environmental impact -- but, because plastic bags use much less to begin with, they still ends up creating less solid and waterborne waste and airborne emissions.

Paper and plastic bags' required energy inputs From the same analysis, we learn that plastic also has lower energy requirements -- these numbers are expressed in millions of British thermal units (Btus) per 10,000 bags, again at 1.5 plastic bags for every one paper bag. Plastic bags require 9.7 million Btus, vs. 16.3 for paper bags at zero percent recycling; even at 100% recycling rates, plastic bags still require less -- 7.0 to paper's 9.1. What does that mean to me and you? Plastic bags just take less energy to create, which is significant because so much of our energy comes from dirty sources like coal and petroleum.

Paper bags or plastic bags: the conclusion Both paper and plastic bags require lots and lots of resources and energy, and proper recycling requires due diligence from both consumer and municipal waste collector or private recycling company, so there are a lot of variables that can lead to low recycling rates.

Ultimately, neither paper nor plastic bags are the best choice; we think choosing reusable canvas bags instead is the way to go. From an energy standpoint, according to this Australian study, canvas bags are 14 times better than plastic bags and 39 times better than paper bags, assuming that canvas bags get a good workout and are used 500 times during their life cycle. Happy shopping!

Plastic bag ban map:

-GREEN-Banned -BLUE-Usage fee -RED-Failed to be banned

China's Plastic Bag Ban is Working, So Far

It may be have only been in place for a month so far, but initial reports by the Worldwatch Institute show that China’s ban on free plastic bags is having a definite impact.

In Guangzou City the use of plastic bags in supermarkets has been cut in half, while in some supermarkets in Beijing use of plastic bags has dropped by 90 percent.

Plastic Bag Ban Embraced

According to the Worldwatch Insitute:

Shoppers have embraced the ban without significant complaint, despite sacrificing some degree of shopping convenience. Older generations have reminiscently turned back to the woven baskets or plain cloth bags they used before plastic alternatives entered the Chinese market in the 1980s. Younger people are busy checking out online shops for more fashionable "eco-friendly" bags. Those who do pay for plastic bags are trying to buy as few

as possible, foregoing the long-engrained perspective of "better more than fewer" prevalent before the ban.

Prior to the ban, Chinese consumers used up to 3 billion plastic bags per day, generating more the 3 million tons of nonbiodegradable waste annually. Annually China uses a third of its imported oil, 37 million barrels) to make plastics used in packaging.

Fees, Taxes and Bans | Recycling and ReuseStates are continuing to consider strategies to reduce the number of plastic carry-out bags from grocery stores and other retail outlets. Some states are targeting paper bags as well. Regulating bags can mitigate harmful impacts to oceans, rivers, lakes and the wildlife that inhabit them. Reducing bag use can also relieve pressure on landfills and waste management. Bans and FeesIn August 2014, California became the first state legislature to enact legislation imposing a statewide ban on single-use plastic bags at large retail stores. Governor Jerry Brown signed the bill into law on September 30. The ban will take effect on July 1, 2015.

In addition, there will be a 10 cent minimum charge for recycled paper bags, reusable plastic bags, and compostable bags at certain locations. A detailed summary of the law can be found below. In addition to California, a de facto statewide ban exists in Hawaii as all of the most populous counties in the state prohibit non-biodegradable plastic bags at checkout, as well as paper bags containing less than 40 percent recycled material. Bans in Kauai, Maui and Hawaii counties took effect between 2011 and 2013. Retailers in Honolulu County have until July 1, 2015, to make the change. In 2009, the District of Columbia enacted a law to ban

the distribution of disposable, non-recyclable plastic carry-out bags and set a fee of 5 cents for distribution of all other disposable bags.In 2009, North Carolina banned plastic bags for the Outer Banks region, a chain of barrier islands off its coast. However, in 2011, the state passed legislation to temporarily suspend that ban due to a tornado that hit Dunn, North Carolina, which is the major distribution center for paper bags in the area. The ban has yet to be restored.2014 Legislation SummaryAs mentioned above, California lawmakers passed the first statewide plastic bag ban in the United States in 2014. Senate Bill 270 was signed by the governor on September 30, 2014. Legislation is pending in Massachusetts, New Jersey, Rhode Island and Puerto Rico that would also ban single-use bags.Four states – Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania— are considering a fee or tax on the distribution of bags which a shopper will have to pay, either directly or indirectly, with proposed fees ranging from 1 cent to 15 cents per bag. Depending on the state, the revenue would be used to improve recycling practices and encourage recycling, or help fund capital expenditures at state parks and historic sites. A portion of the revenue could also be returned to retail stores.

Recycling Programs and RequirementsStates have continued to propose and enact legislation relating to labeling, recycling, and reusing plastic bags. In 2010, California passed legislation that requires manufacturers of compostable plastic bags to ensure that the bag is readily and easily identifiable from other bags. That same year, Delaware enacted an At-Store Recycling Program. The legislation encourages the use of reusable bags, requires stores to establish an at-store recycling program that provides an opportunity for customers of the store to return clean plastic bags, requires that plastic carry-out bags display a recycling message and provides fines and penalties for noncompliance. Illinois passed similar legislation, the Plastic Bag and Film Recycling Act, in 2012, but it was vetoed by the Governor. Energy and Environment Legislation Tracking Database

Enacted Plastic and Paper Bag Legislation

Enacted Plastic Bag State Legislation SummariesCaliforniaStatewide Ban on Single-Use Carryout Bags (2014 CA S 270)Prohibits certain large stores, as of July 1, 2015, from providing a single-use plastic carryout bag to a customer, with specified exceptions. Prohibits a store from selling or distributing a recycled paper bag, reusable plastic bag or compostable bag at the point of sale unless the store makes that bag available for purchase for at least $0.10 and certain conditions are met. The ban does not apply to handle-less plastic bags used to protect meat and produce from damaging or contaminating other purchased items. After July 1, 2016, these prohibitions and requirements will take effect for smaller stores such as convenience food stores. Revenue will be retained by the store to offset costs associated with providing recycled or reusable bags and complying with other provisions of the law. Persons or entities that violate the law may be subject to civil penalties imposed by the city, county or state of California.

Requires reusable grocery bags sold to customers at the point of sale to be made by a certified producer and to meet certain criteria with regard to the bag’s durability, material, labeling and heavy metal content. In addition to these requirements, a reusable bag made from plastic film, as opposed to other natural or synthetic fibers, must meet certain benchmarks for recycled material content by 2016 and 2020. Beginning July 1, 2015, bags made from plastic film may not be sold or distributed unless certified by a third party entity. Applications for certification must include specified information that verifies, among other things, the incorporation of clean postconsumer recycled material.Declares that it occupies the whole field of regulation of reusable grocery bags, single-use carryout bags, and recycled paper bags and prohibits a local public agency from enforcing or implementing an ordinance, resolution, regulation, or rule adopted on or after September 1, 2014, relating to those bags, against a store unless expressly authorized. Allows a local public agency that has adopted such an ordinance prior to September 1, 2014, to continue to enforce and implement that ordinance or other type of regulation, but preempts any amendments other than to increase the bag charge at covered stores.A sum of $2,000,000 is appropriated from the Recycling Market Development Revolving Loan Subaccount to the state Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery to provide loans for the creation and retention of jobs and economic activity in California for the manufacture and recycling of plastic reusable grocery bags that use recycled content. (09/30/2014 - Enacted)Compostable or Marine Degradable Plastic Bags (2010 CA S 228)Requires a manufacturer of a compostable plastic bag to ensure that the bag is readily and easily identifiable from other bags. Prohibits a compostable plastic bag sold in the state from displaying a chasing arrow resin identification code or recycling type of symbol in any form. Requires a manufacturer to comply with these requirements only to the extent that labeling requirements do not conflict with federal requirements. (09/28/2010 - Enacted)

Recycling: Plastic Products (2012 CA S 567)Prohibits the sale of a plastic product labeled as compostable, home compostable, or marine degradable unless it meets standard specifications or a specified standard, or the plastic product is labeled with a qualified claim and the plastic product meets that standard. Prohibits the sale of a plastic product that is labeled as biodegradable, degradable, decomposable, or as otherwise specified. Provides for a civil penalty for a violation. Provides for the continuation of plastic bag labeling provisions. (10/08/2011 - Enacted)

At-Store Recycling Program (2006 CA A 2449)Retail stores must adopt an at-store recycling program. Plastic bags used at retailers must have clearly printed “Please Return to a Participating Store for Recycling” on the bag. Retailers must also make reusable bags available for purchase by the customer, in lieu of plastic bags. (Repealed January 1, 2020)DelawareAt Store Recycling Program (2009 DE H 15; Amended by 2014 DE H 198)Encourages the use of reusable bags by consumers and retailers, requires a store to establish an at-store recycling program that provides an opportunity for a customer of the store to return clean plastic bags, requires all plastic carryout bags to display a recycling message, requires stores to maintain records of collection and recycling of plastic bags, prohibits imposition of a plastic bag fee upon a compliant store, provides for fines and

penalties. (08/17/2009 - Enacted)

Recycling Program (2012 DE SCR 24)Requests a report and suggestions for improvement on the at-store recycling program of plastic carryout bags for the purpose of improving the program and bettering the environment. (06/29/2011 - Enacted)District of ColumbiaAnacostia River Clean Up and Protection Act (2010 DC B 150)Protects the aquatic and environmental assets of the District of Columbia, to ban the use of disposable non-recyclable plastic carryout bags, to establish a fee on all other disposable carryout bags provided by grocery stores, drug stores, liquor stores, restaurants, and food vendors, to give the Mayor the authority to implement rules and procedures to collect the fee, to establish a non-lapsing recurring Anacostia River Cleanup and Protection Fund. (09/23/2009 - Enacted)MaineCheckout Bags (2010 ME S 131)Convenes a work group, through a partnership with state agencies and other appropriate entities, to work together towards a viable solution to the checkout bag issue to achieve environmental benefits, maintain financial viability for manufacturers and retailers and avoid cost impacts for consumers, provides for a report to the legislature. (05/19/2009 - Enacted)Recycling Plastic Bags (1991 ME LD 1166)Retailers may only provide customers with plastic bags if there is a receptacle to collect used plastic bags with twenty feet of the entrance and all the plastic bags collected are then recycled. New YorkPlastic Bag Reduction, Reuse and Recycling Act (2008 NY A 11725)Retailers of stores are to establish in-store recycling programs that provide an opportunity for the customer to return clean plastic carryout bags to be recycled. The plastic carryout bags provided by the store must have printed on them “Please return to a Participating Store for Recycling.”North CarolinaPlastic Bag Use (2010 NC S 1018)Reduces plastic and non-recycled paper bag use on North Carolina's outer banks (a sea turtle nesting area). A retailer subject to G.S. 130A-309.102 shall display a sign in a location viewable by customers containing the following notice: "[county name] County discourages the use of single-use plastic and paper bags to protect our environment from excess litter and greenhouse gases. We would appreciate our customers using reusable bags, but if you are not able to, a 100% recycled paper bag will be furnished for your use." Please see additional NC bills for identical language regarding the use of plastic bags and fines. (06/24/2009 - Enacted)

Plastic Bag Management (2011 NC S 146)Suspends the ban on plastic bags in certain coastal areas due to a disruption in the supply of paper bags because of the severe tornados. The major distribution center for paper bags used by retailers in the areas subject to the ban was located in Dunn, NC, but was severely

damaged and rendered unusable by the tornados of April 16, 2011. The General Assembly finds that the suspension of the requirement until the supply chain for paper bags is restored is in the public interest. This act becomes effective April 16, 2011. (04/20/2011 - Enacted)**Suspends the above bill.Rhode IslandPromotion of Paper Bag Usage (2008 RI S 2565)To decrease use of plastic bags, this legislation promotes the use of paper bags by retailers. Retail establishments must offer the use of a paper bag to the consumer. Every retail establishment that provides customers with plastic bags must provide conveniently located receptacles where customers can return their clean and dry plastic bags to be recycled. Failure to comply with these laws is punishable with fines up to $500.

How Many Cities Have a Ban on Plastic Bags?

We all know how terrible plastic bags are for the environment—they choke wildlife, they don't break down in landfills ([url='http://animal.discovery.com/birds/ocean-gyre-birds/albatross-ocean-gyre-birds-pictures.html']or in oceans), they add to our demand for oil, and they aren't easy to recycle, which is the biggest reason why 90 percent of plastic bags in the U.S. are not recycled.

Yet an estimated 500 billion to 1 trillion plastic bags are used worldwide every year-380 billion of those in the U.S.—and governments have been slow-moving at best to do anything about them.

According to Salon, a study a few years ago "found that the inks and colorants used on some bags contain lead, a toxin. Every year, Americans throw away some 100 billion plastic bags after they've been used to transport a prescription home from the drugstore or a quart of milk from the grocery store. It's equivalent to dumping nearly 12 million barrels of oil."

But things are finally starting to pick up. Here's a quick look at a few spots around the world that have banned plastic bags, or at least placed a tax on their use.

U.S.

In California, the ban started in San Francisco in select stores; if pending legislation goes through, it could soon expand to all stores not only in the city, but in the entire state.

A similar ban exists in coastal North Carolina and was recently passed in Portland.

England

In 2007, Modbury became the first town to ban the plastic bag in Britain, where 13 billion plastic bags are given away every year. If customers forget to bring their own, reports the

Times Online, "a range of bags made of recycled cotton with organic and fairtrade certification will be available from

Other cities have followed suit, some just a few months ago, and there are efforts to make London plastic bag-free by the time the Olympics come around in 2010. According to the Daily Mail, "Londoners use 1.6billion plastic bags a year - for an average of just 20 minutes per bag."

Mexico

Mexico City adopted a ban last summer—the second major city in the western hemisphere to do so.

India

India seems to be taking the lead in bans on plastic bags, although enforcement is sometimes questionable. Cities including Delhi, Mumbai, Karwar, Tirumala, Vasco, Rajasthan all have a ban on the bag.

Burma

A ban went into effect (with little notice) in Rangoon late last year. In neighboring China, the use of plastic bags is restricted.

Bangladesh

Plastic bags have been banned in Bangladesh since 2002, after being found to be responsible for the 1988 and 1998 floods that submerged most of the country.

Rwanda

The country, which has had a ban on plastic bags for years, has a reputation for being one of the cleanest nations not only on the continent, but in the world.

Australia

Sydney's Oyster Bay was the first Australian suburb to ban plastic bags. Twelve towns in Australia are now said to be plastic bag-free—an effort to cut down on the estimated 6.7 billion plastic bags used in Australia every year.

Taxed, not banned

Plenty of other places have chosen not to ban plastic bags, but to discourage them through financial means. There have been taxes on plastic bags since before 2008 in Italy, Belgium, and Ireland, where plastic bag use dropped by 94 percent within weeks of the 2002 ban. In Switzerland, Germany, and Holland, the bags come with a fee.

And, in one lonely case (that I could find) of a reversal on a ban after it was implemented, Taiwan had a ban on plastic bags for three years before it lifted it in 2006.

EU Countries Each Choose How to Limit Plastic Bags

BRUSSELS, Belgium, November 4, 2013 (ENS) – The European Commission today adopted a proposal that requires its 28 Member States to reduce their use of lightweight plastic carrier bags. But how they do so is up to each of the them.

There is no EU-wide ban on plastic bags in the proposal, although such a ban has been under consideration. The Commission said, “For reasons of subsidiarity and because the scale of the problem varies across Member States, the proposal foresees that Member States design themselves the measures they deem most effective, taking into account existing best practices.”

Under today’s proposal, Member States can choose whatever measures they find most appropriate to meet this requirement, including charges, national reduction targets or a total ban.

Lightweight plastic bags are often used only once, but can persist in the environment for hundreds of years, often as harmful microscopic particles that are known to be dangerous to marine life in particular.

Environment Commissioner Janez Potocnik said, “We’re taking action to solve a very serious and highly visible environmental problem. Every year, more than eight billion plastic bags end up as litter in Europe, causing enormous environmental damage.”

“Some Member States have already achieved great results in terms of reducing their use of plastic bags. If others followed suit we could reduce today’s overall consumption in the European Union by as much as 80 percent,” said the commissioner.

In 2010, an estimated 98.6 billion plastic carrier bags were placed on the EU market and close to 100 billion plastic bags have been placed on the EU market every year since, according to the commission. This number amounts to every EU citizen using 198 plastic carrier bags per year.

Consumption figures vary greatly across the EU’s 28 Member States, with annual use per capita of lightweight plastic carrier bags ranging between an estimated four bags in Denmark and Finland and 466 bags in Poland, Portugal and Slovakia.

Potocnik said today that “encouraging results” have been achieved by the Irish levy and the Danish tax on plastic bags.

Technically, the Commission’s proposal amends the Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive with two main elements.

First, Member States are required to adopt measures to reduce the consumption of plastic carrier bags with a thickness below 50 microns, as these are less frequently reused than thicker ones, and often end up as litter.

Second, these measures may include the use of economic instruments, such as charges, national reduction targets, and marketing restrictions – subject to the internal market rules of the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU.

The high reduction rates achieved in some EU Member States, through the introduction of charges and other measures, show that results can be achieved through effective action.

The proposal follows measures taken by individual Member States and from calls by EU Environment Ministers on the Commission to assess the scope for action at EU level.

It comes after extensive public consultations that found broad support for an EU-wide initiative in this area.

In 2011, the European Commission opened a public consultation, asking the public how best to reduce the use of plastic carrier bags. Opinions were also sought on increasing the visibility of biodegradable packaging products, and boosting the biodegradability requirements for packaging.

Potocnik said at the start of the public consultation in May 2011, “Fifty years ago, the single-use plastic bag was almost unheard of. Now we use them for a few minutes and they pollute our environment for decades. But social attitudes are evolving and there is a widespread desire for change. That’s why we are looking at all the options, including a Europe-wide ban on plastic carrier bags.”

But public opinion does not support a Europe-wide ban on the plastic bags.

The properties that make plastic bags commercially successful, low weight and resistance to degradation, also contribute to their proliferation in the environment. They escape waste management streams and accumulate, especially in the form of marine litter.

Marine littering is increasingly recognized to be a major global challenge posing a threat to marine ecosystems and animals such as fish and birds. There is also evidence indicating large accumulation of litter in European seas.

The longevity of plastic bags means that there are now some 250 billion plastic particles with a combined weight of 500 tonnes floating in the Mediterranean Sea alone, according to the European Commission.

These particles can cause suffocation in sea creatures that ingest them accidentally or mistake them for food, the commission says, adding that plastics break into tiny particles, and have a high potential for contaminating soil and waterways as they may contain additives such as persistent organic pollutants.

At least 267 different species are known to have suffered from entanglement or ingestion of marine litter, says the European Commissision. In the North Sea, the stomachs of 94 percent of all birds contain plastic. Plastic bags have been also found in stomachs of several endangered marine species, such as such as green turtles, loggerhead turtles, leatherback turtles, black footed albatrosses, and harbor porpoises.

European waters are littered with plastic bags. They accounted for 73 percent of the plastic waste collected by trawlers along the Tuscany coast. Similarly, plastic bags represented more than 70 percent of total debris in most stations sampled in the Gulf of Lions and around the French cities of Nice and Marseille. Plastic bags were also found on UK beaches, reaching average densities of one bag every 23 meters.

Questions and answers on the proposal to reduce the consumption of plastic bags

What is the overall aim of this proposal?

The overall aim is to promote waste prevention and reduce littering. It requires Member States to take measure to reduce the use of lightweight plastic bags on their territory. The proposal takes the form of an amendment to the Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive.

What are the main components?

The proposal contains two basic elements. First, it amends Article 4 (prevention) of the Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive, requiring Member States to take measures to reduce consumption of lightweight, less frequently re-used plastic bags (with a thickness below 50 microns). Second, it stipulates that these measures may include the use of economic instruments (such as taxes and levies, which in some Member States have proved to be very effective), national reduction targets, as well as marketing restrictions in derogation of Article 18 of the Directive, subject to the Treaty’s internal market rules.

How are lightweight plastic bags defined in this proposal?

For the purpose of this proposal lightweight plastic bags are defined in terms of their thickness as bags thinner than 0.05 mm (50 microns). This threshold will help ensure higher reuse and lower littering rates.

Are Member States now free to ban plastic bags on their territory?

Yes, provided that certain conditions are met – the ban can't be discriminatory to a certain type of lightweight plastic bag over another, and it mustn't be a disguised restriction on trade between Member States.

Article 18 of the Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive obliges Member States not to impede the placing on the market of their territory of packaging which satisfies the provisions of that Directive.

The proposed derogation from this Article would give Member States more freedom to introduce more restrictive measures, but the freedom to define such measures is not unlimited. Any such measure has to be compatible with EU law, including Articles 34 to 36 of the Treaty on quantitative restrictions in the internal market.

Member States may maintain or adopt measures that restrict the free movement of goods, provided that these are proportionate (i.e. restricted to what is necessary to achieve the legitimate aim of protecting the environment), and are non-discriminatory (i.e. they may not discriminate packaging originating from other Member States and may not protect their domestic market).

When would the new rules take effect? By when would Member States need to reduce their overall use of lightweight plastic bags?

Once the proposal is approved by the European Parliament and the Council, it will enter into force 20 days after publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

From the date of entry into force, Member States will have 12 months for transposition, and two years to implement the Directive.

What's the problem with plastic bags?

The properties that make plastic bags commercially successful – low weight and resistance to degradation – have also contributed to their proliferation in the environment. They escape waste management streams and accumulate in our environment, especially in the form of marine litter. Once discarded, plastic bags can last for hundreds of years – mostly in fragmented form. Marine littering is increasingly recognised to be a major global challenge

posing a threat to marine eco-systems and animals such as fish and birds. There also is documented evidence indicating large debris accumulation in European seas.

What is the situation in the Member States?

In 2010 it was estimated that slightly fewer than 100 billion plastic carrier bags were placed on the EU market (98.6 billion in fact). This amounts to every EU citizen using 198 plastic carrier bags per year, which represents more than one bag per day for each European household. Some 90 % of those 100 billion bags were lightweight bags. Annual per capita consumption of thin plastic bags varies greatly between Member States, ranging from an estimated 4 plastic bags consumed per citizen in Denmark and Finland, to an estimated 466 in Poland, Portugal and Slovakia. There clearly is scope to learn from the successful action taken in a number of Member States. Further details on the rates of plastic bag consumption in each Member State are available in the Full Impact Assessment that accompanies this proposal.

What is the connection to marine litter?

Estimates suggest that in 2010, over 8 billion plastic carrier bags were littered in the EU. They escape waste management streams and accumulate in our environment, especially in the form of marine litter. Because they last so long, the cumulative number of plastic bags littered increases over time. Littering has environmental impacts (e.g. air, water, marine and soil pollution, biodiversity loss) as well as adverse economic effects (e.g. loss of raw materials in the EU, losses for recyclers and the tourism sector, costs of litter clean-up activities) and social consequences (e.g. loss of aesthetic value of landscapes, potential impacts on human health).

Plastic bags can be especially damaging for the marine environment. Animals are injured or killed by entanglement or ingestion of plastic bags mistaken for food. At least 267 different species are known to have suffered from entanglement or ingestion of marine litter. In the North Sea, the stomachs of 94% of all birds contain plastic. Plastic bags have been also found in stomachs of several endangered marine species, such as such as green turtles, loggerhead turtles, leatherback turtles, black footed albatrosses, and harbour porpoises.

How are Europe's seas affected?

Although marine litter is a major global challenge, there is evidence indicating large debris accumulation in European seas – e.g. along the coasts of the eastern Mediterranean, the North Sea, the Celtic Sea, the Bay of Biscay and the Sicily Channel.

The precise proportion of marine litter attributed to plastic bags is uncertain, but research and clean-up projects in different EU regions illustrate the scale of the problem. For example, plastic bags accounted for 73% of the plastic waste collected by trawlers along the Tuscany coast. Similarly, plastic bags represented more than 70% of total debris in most stations sampled in the Gulf of Lions and around the French cities of Nice and Marseille. Plastic bags were also found on UK beaches, reaching average densities of one bag every 23 metres.

Why does the proposal not oblige Member States to use economic instruments to reduce plastic bag consumption?

The proposal highlights the paramount role that different economic instruments can play in reducing plastic bag consumption, as can be seen for instance from the encouraging results achieved by the Irish levy or Danish tax on plastic bags. However, for reasons of subsidiarity and because the scale of the problem varies across Member States the proposal foresees that Member States design themselves the measures they deem most effective, taking into account existing best practices.

COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE IMPACT ASSESSMENT

Accompanying the document

Proposal

for a DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending Directive 94/62/EC on packaging and packaging waste to reduce the consumption of lightweight plastic carrier bags

1. Problem definition

Plastic carrier bagsare a popular and convenient product widely used for transporting items from the store back home. It was estimated that in 2010 every EU citizen used 198 such bags, 89% of which are single-use. In a business as usual scenario their consumption is expected to increase further. The properties that have made plastic bags commercially successful – low weight and resistance to degradation – are also contributing to their environmental impacts. In 2010, more than 8 billion plastic bags were littered in the EU.

Moreover, municipal or private waste collection systems in the EU send a very significant part (49,7% or 710 000 tons a year) of plastic bags collected to landfills, which is clearly sub-optimal from a resource efficiency perspective. Very high consumption of single-use plastic carrier bags, their inapropriate end-of-life treatment, and their resistance to degradation are damaging our environment including marine ecosystems.

In the EU, plastic carrier bags are considered as packaging under the Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive (Directive 94/62/EC[2]). However, there is no EU legislation or policy specifically targeting plastic carrier bags. Some Member States have already developed policies to reduce the use of plastic carrier bags by means of pricing measures, agreements with the retail sector or awareness campaigns, with variable results. Following attempts by some Member States to ban plastic bags, the Environment Council of 14 March 2011 discussed the issue and invited the Commission to analyse possible EU action against the use of plastic bags.

2. Analysis of subsidiarity and EU added valued

High consumption rates of plastic bags pose both a common and a transboundary challenge for the EU. It is unlikely that all Member States will tackle the issue effectively without EU intervention. The added value of EU action would lie in providing a framework establishing a shared objective, concepts and definitions, and a timeframe, while leaving Member States free to decide about precise implementation methods, in line with the subsidiarity principle.

EU action is fully in line with the two objectives of the Packaging Directive: to prevent and reduce the environmental impacts of packaging and packaging waste, and to ensure the coherence in addressing a common and transboundary problem.

3. Objectives

The general objective of an EU policy initiative on plastic carrier bags is to limit negative impacts on the environment, encourage waste prevention and a more efficient use of resources, while limiting negative socio-economic impacts.

More specifically, the objectives of the initiative are to:

· limit the environmental damage caused by an increasing consumption of plastic bags in terms of littering and unsustainable resource use, by significantly reducing the amount of single-use plastic carrier bags consumed per capita by 2015;

· tackle a common and transboundary problem in a coordinated and coherent way across the EU.

The Impact Assessment evaluates the main environmental, social and economic impacts of potential policy options aimed at reducing the use of single-use plastic carrier bags. Various

levels of ambition are assessed and compared to a baseline scenario, in order to identify the instruments that minimise costs, while maximising benefits.

4. Policy options

The options put forward in the analysis focus on prevention measures targeting single-use plastic carrier bags.

Option 1 (the "baseline scenario") takes a "do-nothing" approach in which the status-quo would be maintained. There would be no additional policies and measures aiming to limit the consumption of single-use plastic carrier bags at EU or national level.

Option 2 ("Voluntary commitment of a significant share of the EU retail sector not to provide single-use plastic carrier bags") entails a voluntary agreement by a significant share of the EU retail sector to stop providing single-use plastic carrier bags. For the purpose of the Impact Assessment, such an agreement would translate into a reduction of 55% single-use plastic carrier bags.

Option 3 ("Setting an EU level prevention target for single-use plastic carrier bags combined with economic instruments and accompanied by the possibility for Member States to introduce market restrictions by way of derogation of article 18 of the Packaging Directive"). This option is composed of three mutually supportive elements: a prevention target; a pricing measure; and a possibility for Member States to introduce market restrictions by way of derogation of article 18 of the Packaging Directive. The prevention (reduction) target would be set for single-use plastic carrier bags at EU level, and would result in a reduction of 80% of the EU average consumption of single-use plastic bags.

Option 4 ("Introducing an EU level ban of single-use plastic carrier bags"), the provision of single-use plastic carrier bags in retail service would be prohibited – a reduction of 100% of single-use plastic bags consumed in the EU.

5. Analysis of impacts

The assessment focuses on the additional impacts that options 2-4 have compared to the baseline scenario.

All options to reduce the use of single-use plastic carrier bags share the same types of impacts; only the magnitude of these impacts differ from one option to another.

· Environmental impacts

The main environmental benefits are linked to the decline in the amount of waste and the number of bags littered, which translates into lower litter clean-up expenses and expenses incurred in formal waste management (collection, recycling and disposal). These costs are

expected to be reduced considerably as consumption of single-use plastic bags diminishes. Lower consumption of single-use plastic bags would also result in more efficient resource use and lower greenhouse gas emissions.

· Economic and social impacts

Measures to reduce the consumption of single-use plastic carrier bags, especially regulatory measures, are likely to entail some administrative burden to ensure implementation and enforcement, for both the public and private sectors. The administrative burden will depend on the final design of the implementation measures chosen by Member States.

The net impacts on producers are expected to be positive. Although the measures proposed entail a decrease in the activity of single-use plastic bag manufacturers, producers of multiple-use plastic bags will benefit from the changes. In the EU, 70% of single-use carrier bags are imported, limiting the negative impacts on European producers. Reduced availability of single-use plastic carrier bags would in part be offset by a switch to reusable plastic carrier bags, mainly produced in the EU.

The net impacts on retailers are also expected to be positive, although they may face initial costs to implement any of the proposed measures (e.g. awareness raising, administrative costs, an increase in costs of providing other free alternatives). These costs could be offset by the increased sale of reusable alternatives and the overall reduction of consumption of single-use carrier bags currently often provided free of charge. Some retailers may even profit economically from measures to reduce single-use plastic bag consumption.

Impacts on employment levels are likely to be slightly negative in all the proposed policy options.

Consumers may face an initial increase of costs under all options, as the recommended use of economic instruments would imply that they are asked to pay for plastic carrier bags. However, these costs will decrease as consumers switch to reusable alternatives, which save costs in the longer run.

All options will increase awareness of the environmental impacts of single-use plastic bags and resource efficiency aspects, and help promote more sustainable consumption patterns. All measures have the potential to influence consumer behaviour more broadly, and guide manufacturers' and retailers' business models.

6. Comparing the policy options

The four policy options have been assessed quantitatively and qualitatively. The quantitative analysis focuses on three environmental impacts (resource use; littering rates; and impacts

on public spending on waste management and litter collection) and on six economic and social impacts (administrative burden; impacts on EU producers; impacts on EU retailers; impacts on consumers; impact on employment levels; and public awareness).

Environmental Impact Indicators || Baseline (business as usual) || Retailers' voluntary agreement || Prevention target + economic instrument || Ban

Tonnes of total plastic carrier bags (% reduction) || 0 || 13 || 20 || 24

Tonnes of single-use plastic carrier bags (% reduction) || 0 || 55 || 82 || 100

Number of total plastic carrier bags (% reduction) || 0 || 47 || 70 || 85

Number of single-use plastic carrier bags (% reduction) || 0 || 55 || 80 || 100

Oil (kt saved) || 0 || 463 || 693 || 842

Emissions (MtCO2eq avoided) || 0 || 81,2 || 121,4 || 147,6

Littered bags' reduction (billion/2015) || 0 || 4,1 || 5,3 || 6,4

Table 2: Quantitative comparison of the main economic impacts of the options proposed, averaged over years 2015-2020, relative to the baseline (business as usual).

Economic Impact Indicators (€m/year) || Baseline (business as usual) || Retailers' voluntary agreement || Prevention target + economic instrument || Ban

Costs Reduction to Retailers || 0 || 412,5 || 649,8 || 791,7

Profits to EU Bag Manufacturers || 0 || 5,7 || 3,8 || 4,2

Cost reduction for Litter Collection || 0 || 34,0 || 46,3 || 54,2

Cost reduction for waste management || 0 || 25,8 || 39,8 || 49,5

Total savings and benefits || 0 || 478,0 || 739,8 || 899,5

Social Impact Indicators || Baseline (business as usual) || Retailers' voluntary agreement || Prevention target + economic instrument || Ban

Net Change in Employment in EU Bag Manufacture in 2015 (Full Time Equivalents) || 0 || -860 || -1340 || -1641

A ban on single-use plastic bags would score best against environmental and economic indicators, followed by a prevention target (80% reduction) and a voluntary agreement with the retail sector (55% reduction), with the business as usual scenario having the poorest score. The ban would lead to the largest negative effects on employment, followed by a prevention target and a voluntary agreement, with the business as usual scenario not leading to net changes in employment levels.

Six other issues (more difficult to quantify) complement the analysis in a qualitative way:

Flexibility of Member States to decide on specific policy measures. A prevention target would prescribe an objective, but would grant all Member States the flexibility to decide which measures work best in their national contexts, a condition that would not be met in the case of an EU-wide voluntary agreement with the retail sector nor in the case of a ban.

Implementation costs. Changes in institutional arrangements needed to implement any new measure may entail administrative and human resource costs.

A voluntary agreement with part of the EU retail sector would entail lower implementation costs for public authorities than a prevention target or a ban. On the other hand, a voluntary agreement also comes with risks related to possible free-riding and the difficulty of imposing sanctions in case of non-compliance.

The administrative costs related to a prevention target accompanied by a pricing instrument will depend on the exact measures to be adopted by individual Member States. Public authorities are likely to face additional costs related to monitoring (in particular to ensure compliance by retailers with reporting obligations), but this would be a small part of the costs already borne by Member States in the context of reporting on existing targets for

packaging and packaging waste. In the case of a prevention target monitoring and enforcement costs are likely to be lower than in the case of a ban.

Member States that have already implemented measures to reduce the use of plastic bags and have already reached the average per capita target will not need face further impacts.

– Possibility to generate revenues. The economic instruments recommended to accompany a prevention target for single-use plastic bags would generate revenues that could be directed towards public authorities or retailers. If revenues flow to public authorities, they could be used to offset (part of) the administrative costs related to implementation and enforcement.

– Acceptance of the measure. As the retailers in the EU Retail Forum only cover 55% of the total EU consumption of single-use plastic bags, if such a voluntary agreement were to materialize, many smaller retail shops would not take part. This not only risks confusing consumers as availability of single-use plastic bags would vary across shops, but also raises questions in terms of a level playing field between all retailers in the EU. Moreover, there is a risk that individual retailers covered by the Retail Forum do not accept the agreement.

– Raising awareness on sustainable consumption. Making single-use plastic bags more scarce and introducing economic instruments may help raise consumer awareness of (un)sustainable consumption patterns, beyond the consumption of plastic bags only. This effect is less likely in the case of a voluntary agreement with only part of the EU retail sector.

– Other issues. A ban and a prevention target may affect small shops more than larger ones because it might discourage impulse buying by “walk-up” customers. For larger retailers, which represent the main channel for plastic bags distribution to consumers, 'impulse shopping' is likely to account for a smaller share of sales.

7. Preferred option

An EU-wide prevention target with an explicit recommendation to use economic instruments and the possibility for Member States to apply market restrictions by way of derogation of Article 18 (option 3 as described in Section 3.2.3 of the full Impact Assessment report) has the highest potential to deliver ambitious environmental results, while achieving positive economic impacts, limiting negative effects on employment, ensuring public acceptance and contributing to wider awareness on sustainable consumption.

However, further consideration of the policy options analysed in this impact assessment during the Commission's inter-service consultations have led to the conclusion that it would

be difficult at present to design and implement an EU-wide reduction target, given the current very large differences between Member States' consumption levels of single-use plastic bags. Instead of establishing a common EU target, it is therefore preferable to introduce in Article 4 of Directive 94/62/EC the obligation for all Member States to reduce the consumption of single-use plastic carrier bags, while allowing them to set their own national reduction targets and to choose the measures to reach those targets. At a later stage the establishment of an EU-wide reduction target could however be considered.

8. Monitoring and evaluation

Member States will be expected to transpose the Directive 12 months after its entry into force, and to implement measures that reduce single-use plastic bag consumption within 2 years of the entry into force. They would notify the Commission of their national legislation to reach the objective, which the Commission would then check for conformity.

The core indicator for progress towards meeting the objectives set for this policy initiative would be "Single-use plastic carrier bags placed on the market".

Monitoring a reduction in the consumption of single-use plastic carrier bags combined with economic instruments and accompanied by the possibility for Member States to introduce market restrictions by way of derogation of article 18 of the Packaging Directive should be relatively straightforward, given the monitoring instruments that already exist for the implementation of the Packaging Directive and the Waste Framework Directive.

Member States are responsible for the implementation, monitoring and enforcement of their national measures to achieve the requirements of the policy initiative advocated in this report. Therefore, the exact data collection methods will depend on the internal organisation of each Member State and the nature of the implementing instruments chosen. New measures aiming to reduce the use of single-use plastic carrier bags will not imply major changes to existing monitoring obligations, as these are already covered by those set in the Waste Framework Directive and the Packaging Directive.

The Commission will encourage the sharing of best data collection practices from countries that have successfully implemented such initiatives, as it has done in the context of other waste stream Directives.

How Plastic Bags Affect Wildlife

Share on emailShare on facebookShare on twitterShare on myspaceShare on digg| More Sharing ServicesMore

The real impact of plastic bag litter is felt on wildlife both in the marine environment and in rural areas.

Tens of thousands of whales, birds, seals and turtles are killed every year from plastic bag litter in the marine environment as they often mistake plastic bags for food such as jellyfish.

Plastic bags, once ingested, cannot be digested or passed by an animal so it stays in the gut. Plastic in an animal’s gut can prevent food digestion and can lead to a very slow and painful death.

As plastic bags can take up to 1,000 years to break down, once an animal dies and decays after ingesting plastic, the plastic is then freed back into the marine environment to carry on killing other wildlife.

A Bryde's whale dies after swallowing 6 square metres of plastic

In August 2000, an eight metre Bryde's whale died soon after becoming stranded on a Cairns beach. An autopsy found that the whale's stomach was tightly packed with 6 m2 of plastic, including many plastic check-out bags. Such obstructions in animals can cause severe pain, distress and death.

Bryde's whales, like many other types of whales, feed by swallowing large amounts of water. If the Bryde's whale had died at sea, it would have decayed, releasing the plastic to kill other marine life for hundreds of years to come.

'Lucky' the platypus rescued

In May 2003, a Platypus was rescued from the Don River, Tasmania, after a plastic bag became wrapped around its body, cutting deep into its skin.

The platypus overcame the species' inherent shyness to approach a person for help.

After seeking medical advice and giving the platypus time to recuperate, it was deemed to be okay and set free. On seeing its injuries, its rescuer and the media called it 'Lucky.'

'Pete' the pelican died after swallowing 17 plastic bags

In 1998, a pelican was found dead in Kiama after eating 17 plastic bags.

The pelican presumably thought the plastic bags were food. The pelican was preserved and named Pete. Since then he has been standing in front of a sign at Fitzroy Falls that informs visitors of how he died and the problems of plastic bags and ocean pollution.

Other wildlife affected by plastic bags

Discovered in agony, a calf that was recently put down in Mudgee NSW, was found to have eaten 8 plastic bags. The loss of this calf cost the farmer around $500.

Birds get caught up in them too. Unable to fly they die of starvation.

Turtles have also been rescued with plastic bags lodged in their throat – and part of the bag hanging out of their mouth.

Statewide ban on plastic grocery bags has broad support, poll shows

A statewide ban on plastic grocery bags has broad support among voters,

presenting a challenge for industry groups that hope to overturn the law,

according to a new USC Dornsife/Los Angeles Times poll.

Sixty percent of the voters who answered the survey said they support the

ban, signed recently by Gov. Jerry Brown. It applies to single-use plastic

sacks at grocery stores and pharmacies starting July 1 and expands to

convenience and liquor stores a year later.

Overturning the law could be difficult, the poll shows. A third of Californians

already live in places with local restrictions, such as Los Angeles and San

Francisco, and many voters are used to them.

"I keep a bunch of bags inside my car," said Sherezada Caballero, a 29-year-

old photographer and filmmaker in Los Angeles, who is not affiliated with a

political party.

"Whenever I go into the store," she said, "I take them out of my trunk. It's

not that big of a deal."

Moreover, among those who do not live under local restrictions, 52%

support the statewide ban.

"Even the people who haven't been exposed to it don't think it's egregious,"

said Drew Lieberman of Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research, the

Democratic pollster on the bipartisan survey team.

The law could still be placed on hold if opponents collect 504,760 signatures

by the end of the year to qualify their referendum for the November 2016

ballot.

That could force a costly fight two years from now between bag

manufacturers on one side and store owners, environmental groups and

unions on the other.

The bag ban was one of the most contentious issues in the Capitol this year,

sparking intense lobbying.

Environmentalists wanted the new law, saying plastic bags can pollute

rivers and oceans, harming wildlife. Bag makers fought the measure,

arguing that it would cause job losses.

California, which has a long history of strict environmental regulation, is the

first state to enact a statewide ban. According to the poll, a majority among

all races and income levels would vote to uphold it.

Among those who oppose it, most said the law shows government overreach.

That's what bothers Phil Yarbrough, a 53-year-old Republican from Orange

County who owns a mortgage financing company.

"We ought to have the freedom to choose what we should want for

ourselves," he said, adding that lawmakers should focus on bigger problems

such as schools and the drought.

"There are serious problems in California," Yarbrough said. "They seem to

be sidetracked with stuff that really aren't the big issues."

David Kanevsky of American Viewpoint, the Republican half of the polling

team, said that such arguments are unlikely to carry the day in a

referendum battle.

"If this becomes an ideological thing, that's not enough to persuade voters in

a Democratic-leaning state where voters aren't necessarily opposed to more

government if they agree with … what it's trying to do," he said.

Other respondents disliked new costs that come with the ban. Instead of

plastic bags, stores will offer paper bags for at least 10 cents each.

"If I go to your store, and buy anything in your store, you're supposed to

have the courtesy to give us the bags to carry things out of your store," said

Georgia Anderson, an 87-year-old retired Democrat living near Los Angeles.

"I don't feel like I'm supposed to pay 10 cents for a bag — paper, plastic,

whatever," she said.

Nicholas Snow, a 52-year-old Democrat, predicted people would easily form

new bag habits.

He starred as the "bag monster," wearing a costume covered in plastic bags,

in public service announcements about a local ban in Palm Springs, where

he lives.

"There's probably people with hundreds of bags stuffed in a drawer in their

kitchen," he said. "They won't miss those bags when they're gone, and they'll

be able to use their drawer space for something else."

The USC Dornsife College of Letters, Arts and Sciences/Los Angeles Times

poll was conducted by telephone with 1,537 registered voters from Oct. 22

through 29. The margin of error is plus or minus 2.9 percentage points.