Following is a response piece to Marc Gunther’s recent article, In Defense of the Plastic Bag.
Full disclosure: I’m a journalist turned activist who works for a nonprofit called The 5 Gyres Institute founded by Dr. Marcus Eriksen and Anna Cummins to research, educate and act on issues pertaining to plastic and chemical pollution in the marine environment as well as the watersheds that feed them. As 5 Gyres’ Policy Director, I have worked tirelessly on chemical, plastic bottle and bag bans across the country. It is my goal to take an objective view of the facts, investigating industry and Gunther’s claims in order to ultimately inform the positions of educators, stakeholders and policymakers.
As a surfer, I started noticing plastic everywhere on every beach in the world where I traveled about ten years ago. It bothered me. As I became more versed on the subject of maritime plastic pollution, I was invited by 5 Gyres to participate in a research voyage to The North Atlantic Gyre, and after seeing what I saw out there, firsthand, over 1,000 miles from land, I quit my job at a media company and started working on plastic pollution issues full time.
Since that voyage, I’ve sailed across two other oceanic gyres now, the South Atlantic and the South Pacific, witnessing the same pollution in two other oceans. It is exceptionally sad and difficult to explain what plastic pollution in a gyre looks like, but when you see plastic films floating on the surface, two weeks from land under full sail, it starts to give you the cosmic heebie-geebies.
What’s at issue is this:
Plastic does not biodegrade in a meaningful if even comprehensible timeframe. Thus, some portion of it accumulates in the environment. The more we produce, consume, and recycle plastics, the more plastic will come into the world and accumulate in landfills, on land, in rivers, and the sea. Plastics at sea concentrate incredibly dangerous chemicals, fish eat plastic, and we eat fish.
It’s really that simple. This is why we care. It sure as hell isn’t for the paycheck.
The Truth About Texas-Sized Garbage Patches
The garbage patch in the North Pacific isn’t the size of Texas, but what Gunther suggests in his piece about the activist role in perpetuating that myth isn’t accurate either. Though Angelique White’s assessment is right, she’s not quoting her own data to debunk the myth she’s talking about (let alone the data from the cruise she was on). What’s interesting is that environmentalists were blamed for perpetuating the Lonestar State garbage island myth. White issued a press release through Oregon State University meant to debunk the Texas myth. We the environmentalists, applaud this effort. We can’t win with money, so we better have bulletproof facts on our side. What I take issue with is Gunther’s snarky tone, where he names The Surfrider Foundation and Heal The Bay as environmental groups spreading misinformation. In Gunther’s piece, he copies the line from the press release verbatim: “participated in one of the few expeditions solely aimed at understanding the abundance of plastic debris.”
What’s interesting is the title of the press release: “Garbage Patch Not Nearly As Big As Media Portrayed.” What’s ironic is that the press release is unequivocally calling his profession out, not mine. So, in the spirit of Gunther’s eye-for-an-eye tactic, is it fair for me to say that the media is responsible for spreading misinformation about the efficacy of plastic bag recycling? I’d say that’s accurate.
If you’re curious about the Texas thing, read SeaPlex’s Miriam Goldstein’s excellent analysis, here.
But let’s talk about what we do know, rather than beat up on each other and rely on bad journalism and skewed interpretations of press releases for our facts. After three expeditions in the last year, the 5 Gyres Institute has confirmed its suspicions that plastic pollution exists in all major gyres; we will soon be publishing data on plastic pollution density in the South Atlantic and South Pacific gyre.
To date, the largest data set that exists regarding plastic pollution in any area of the ocean is published by SEA Education, which documents 22 years of ocean surface sampling in the North Atlantic and Caribbean, including the western part of the North Atlantic Gyre. The largest concentration of plastics ever recorded is 580,000 .15 grams of plastic particles per square kilometer which is equal to 87 kilograms (or roughly 191 pounds).
Now, SEA’s data set, like almost all data sets on the subject, account only for the plastic that floats. If you talk to scientists about the issue casually, they tend to believe that the density of plastic in the ocean is much higher than their data suggests and that much more research is needed to accurately portray how much plastic is in the ocean, if that’s even possible. What scientists know is that there are 7 billion people on earth addicted to plastic and no matter where they look, even in the most remote of places, they find a plastic stain. When I spoke with Kara Lavender Law from SEA Education this spring about her massive data set, which is the envy of many scientists within this community, she stated plainly that it’s still a very small snapshot.
So How Much Is Out There?
Everyone wants to know that answer to this question. According the scientific literature, the best guess so far comes from a report by Columbia University (download -- PDF) that takes all of the major existing data sets, mixes them with a bit of computer modeling and estimates the ocean surface area of all five major gyres. That number is just shy of 16 million square kilometers, which gives us an estimate of 73,878,000 pounds of plastic within the border of the gyres.
But here’s another problem. We’re only talking about the gyres. There are 315 million square kilometers of ocean surface on planet earth. From firsthand experience on three research expeditions that have sampled inside and outside the elusive borders of the gyres, I can say this, anecdotally: The gyres do concentrate plastic, but plastic is not just within the gyre borders, it’s everywhere. Plastic in the ocean varies in density, but not frequency. Ninety-nine out of 100 times you sample, you’ll find plastic, even if you’re just a few miles out to sea. So what’s in the other 300 million square kilometers of ocean that comprises 65% of the earth’s surface? Answer: We don’t know. Yikes.
Next Page: Are there plastic bags in gyres?
Thank you for such a thorough
Thank you for such a thorough refutation of Gunther's article.
You might enjoy a (OK, my...)
You might enjoy a (OK, my...) song on the topic of plastic bag pollution
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cgZvbLcH6ZM&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Well said, Stiv. "We the
Well said, Stiv.
"We the environmentalists.... can’t win with money, so we better have bulletproof facts on our side".
Ban pollution, not products!
Ban pollution, not products!
Except when they are one.
Except when they are one.
Thanks for this reply. We're
Thanks for this reply. We're going to have to disagree both on some of the evidence here and on the conclusions we draw.
Stiv, I think you and some other readers missed or overlooked the very last paragraph of my post, which says that I’m going with reusable bags when possible–although when I forget them I am not going to feel bad about using and recycling plastic. Yes, I favor reusable bags as the best options. [And I am reassured by your point that the bacteria found by that single small study is nothing to worry about.]
As I wrote, both the science and the politics here are complicated bu I do think there are some things we can agree upon.
(1) Plastic waste in the ocean is a big problem, albeit one that has been exaggerated by some NGOs and media reports.
(2) Plastic bags are a relatively small contributor to that big problem. Perhaps 10%, perhaps much less. We are a society awash in plastic–most all of the prepared foods we eat come in plastic, much of what’s in the supermarkets, newspaper wrappers, etc.
(3) It’s highly unlikely that we will ban all that plastic.
So the question is, what to do?
I think a ban on plastic bags might be a step in the right direction but I really don’t see what the next step might be. Bans on plastic bottles? Doubtful. A return to paper? I hope not. So--I think it’s probably better to develop robust recycling streams for all plastics, ideally recycling streams where plastics are picked up at home. Meantime, recycling at grocery stores is available. No it's far from a perfect solution but it's one element of moving towards a closed-loop economy where we eliminate waste. Put another way, I think the heart of the problem here is that we need to change human behavior from one that is destructive (littering of all kinds of plastic) to one that is constructive (recycling). We have met the enemy and it is us. Not some evil company. This is a problem for social marketers, not govt regulators, to solve. See, for example, “Don’t Mess with Texas,” a campaign which is credited with reducing litter in Texas by more than 70%. http://bit.ly/ustD4y That’s a lot more than a plastic bag ban will do.
Let's also remember that there are real costs to a plastic bag ban or tax. Lower income people will have to pay for bags that used to be “free” that they might have used for garbage bags, cat litter, whatever. Another, perhaps more significant downside is that we will feel like we’ve solved a problem when quite clearly we haven’t.
Finally, I confess that my (sometime) libertarian bent means that I am skeptical when the government dictateswhat I can and cannot buy. As regular readers know, I am not doctrinaire about this. I support a strong and steep price on carbon as well as strict but simple regulation of too-big-to-fail financial institutions, but I don’t like the government deciding what legal products are good and bad for us.
What’s next, a ban or tax on ice cream because it “makes us” fat and medical costs are being socialized? Or a ban or tax on SUVs because they pollute more than my hybrid? Or, for that matter, a ban on gay marriage because some people don't like it?
Like you, I try not to use
Like you, I try not to use plastic. This is hard when so much requires it and it has become so ubiquitous. I wash and reuse zip lock bags given to me or that inevitably end up on my possession. I keep bags (recycled, reused, Chico) in my car trunk and purse. If I forget them when in my car at the grocery store, I put everything back in the cart after I've paid and then bag them in the trunk and use the bags in my trunk to sort items as necessary by room, refrigerator, freezer, garage, bathroom, upstairs, downstairs, etc.
Many department stores and grocery stores recycle bags and people who cannot afford to pay the small fee to buy bags can merely take bags from the recycled area and reuse those at the counter. Stores like Sam's Club and Costco have done away with bags entirely and allow people to use the packaging boxes to get their things home. It works.
Libertarian thinking often fails to address longer term values that transcend the personal, cultural lifetimes of a defined set of humanity. Environmental values go far beyond government and should be addressed within personal ethics as part of human philosophy. Some humans are so arrogant or ignorant that they disregard not only the impact of their actions on other humans, but also that of other living species. If you have better ways to suggest than bans instituted by democratically elected representatives, we're open to suggestions.
The important point is that we are fouling our nest and the nest of other species - what is the Libertarian answer to ignorance, inaction, arrogance and failure in the case of things like pollution?
Mark: Yes, I'm happy to agree
Mark:
Yes, I'm happy to agree to disagree. What's at issue is that Hilex Poly knowingly and willingly props up their argument for their product by skewing data, intimidating solutions based entrepreneurs, and arguing for a system to capture the problem their products cause that is absolutely ineffective. A ban is not a strategy, it's a tactic. What myself, and the activist community at large believes is that the only way we're going to get industry to stop using their sinister and unhelpful tactics is to dismantle them and educate people to use their power as citizens of this planet to pressure lawmakers to act. I don't fear government the way the libertarian does--- government is the only vehicle in society by which I can protect myself from companies like Hilex. Companies that produce products that actually have changed the chemistry of my own body.
Absolutely, I favor a carbon tax on SUVs. Here's the problem, to live in a civil society we need to enact best practices to protect the commons. I'm all for closed loop economies, but this model, which I call out is far from that. If Hilex Poly put their money into building waste to energy facilities that are actually clean, like plasma incineration, we'd be approve of that strategy. Plastic is concentrated fuel, burning it has high BTUs and the output is energy. People litter because their mom never told them not to, but also, what they discard is perceived to have no value. If plastic was bought by waste to energy facilities, it would become valuable. There would need to be some public and private sector investment in these existing technologies, and a paradigm shift towards decentralization of waste management facilities, but it's doable. I believe that the economy that will survive is a sustainable one, as there is no business to be done on a dead planet. This one is clearly not sustainable. 50 years out of about 4,000 of recorded history and in that time we've managed to spread plastic garbage to all reaches of the earth. What is it going to look like 50 years from now if we let Hilex and their like to be in charge of solving the problem? Based on their behavior so far, that's not a gamble I am going to take.
The only way an activist gets audience with behemoth like Hilex and other chemical companies is to show them that you can hurt them. But that's not the point. My goal isn't for Daniels to lose his job or Hilex to go out of business, but I'm also not content to look at low level mitigation as a strategy to solve the problem. My goal is to keep all plastics, including bags, out of the ocean and the environment at large. If Hilex called 5 Gyres and said, come meet with us, I wouldn't walk in guns blazing, but rather see if we could actually work together to stop this madness. But so far, the engagement by this entity is misinformation campaigns, intimidation of other businesses, and picking on high school students in Idaho. Enough-- damn straight, me and an army of me's aren't going to let that happen.
I hear you on the low income issue. But what I've yet to hear is a low income person come forward and say, 'this hurts me.' This argument is usually purported by people who can afford to buy bags, not ones that can't. And it places like Portland, we gave away lots and lots of reusable bags.
One thing, I am not anti-plastic, but philosophically I have a problem with single or even twice used plastics. Single use plastics are largely the ones that escape the waste stream capture because they're often consumed on the go. And if we as a society are going to allow them, then we need to make the people that produce them make sure they factor in the price of their end of life scenario baked into the spreadsheet.
Ultimately, the solution is a silver buckshot, not a silver bullet. Cheers.
Excellent analysis and
Excellent analysis and spot-on in your respectful critique of what I feel is Gunther's worst journalistic effort in a long time. While Marc is usually an articulate, intelligent, and personable writer - his pretentious tone, waiting-on-the-next-plane research effort, and unfounded points in his plastic bag article make him sound like he's interested in advancing sustainability when convenient, not as his passion and profession. Thanks Stiv for your audacious response and use of better science to support your points.....and the hard truths.
Wow. Great analysis. I wish
Wow. Great analysis. I wish that Gunther had done his homework better instead of simply regurgitating lines from the plastic bag companies.
I'm sold. I will not use
I'm sold. I will not use plastic bags. If I forget to bring them into the store, I will bring the products back to my car (or bicycle) without putting them in a bag.
Sooner or later, I will get into the habit of always remembering to bring reusable bags into the store. I am at about 30% now.