We sometimes do the wrong thing out of good intentions. The city of Vancouver wants to ban plastic bags. While everyone seems to think it is a good idea, there is actually a problem with this proposition: its effects might be the exact opposite of its intentions.

When it comes to the bags we use to do our groceries, the best solution is definitively the reusable bag (a generally sturdy bag that can be used more than once). Many people easily managed to use 2-3 reusable bags to do all their groceries for many years. Reusable bags have a far lessen impact on the environment than plastic or paper bags because… they are less of them! Unfortunately, any ban of plastic bags will have no consequences on the number of people using reusable bags. The only impact of banning plastic bags will be to increase the number paper bags. And studies are far from being clear on which one of the two types of bags is less polluting. Read this study for example: http://www.angelfire.com/wi/PaperVsPlastic/

There are conflicting reports regarding which type of bag is more or less polluting. However, most studies do acknowledge that plastic bags take less energy to produce and they do not use forest product as paper does. The main problem with plastic bags is that it takes longer to disintegrate then paper. But, and this is the key point of this posting, plastic bags are easier to stock and to recycle. The main problem is that most cities in the world do not recycle plastic!

There is a clear lack of scientific consensus on the subject, but according to at least some studies, the best thing our municipalities might do could be the exact opposite of banning plastic bags. It could be that paper bags are more polluting then plastic ones. If this is true, then we might be better off by banning paper bags and help facilitate recycling of plastic bags. Not a popular position I admit, but the truth needs not to be popular to remain true.

However, let us be clear, the best solution remains the reusable bag.

Frédéric Van Caenegem