It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Are Tote Bags Really Good for the Environment?

page: 2
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 2 2019 @ 10:22 PM
link   
a reply to: DontTreadOnMe

It does seem counterintuitive; and you certainly have a right to question the findings... but "questioning the findings" because they may be counterintuitive ... and perhaps inconvenient ... is the same reasoning skeptics of Anthropomorphic Global Climate Change use when discussing the topic.




posted on Apr, 2 2019 @ 10:56 PM
link   
a reply to: DanDanDat

We need to know more about who did the study.....and who funded it!!!!!



posted on Apr, 2 2019 @ 11:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lysergic
Real men only buy what they can carry in their hands.


Not until you have a wife that wants this and that.



posted on Apr, 3 2019 @ 02:48 AM
link   
Hemp is the answer or bamboo.



posted on Apr, 3 2019 @ 03:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: DanDanDat
Are Tote Bags Really Good for the Environment? Apparently they are not.


For at least a few decades, Americans have been drilled in the superiority of tote bags. Reusable bags are good, we’re told, because they’re friendly for the environment. Disposable bags, on the other hand, are dangerous. Municipalities across the country have moved to restrict the consumption of plastic shopping bags to avoid waste. Many businesses have stopped offering plastic sacks, or provide them for a modest but punitive price. Bag-recycling programs have been introduced nationwide.

But canvas bags might actually be worse for the environment than the plastic ones they are meant to replace. In 2008, the UK Environment Agency (UKEA) published a study of resource expenditures for various bags: paper, plastic, canvas, and recycled-polypropylene tote bags. Surprisingly, the authors found that in typical patterns of use and disposal, consumers seeking to minimize pollution and carbon emissions should use plastic grocery bags and then reuse those bags at least once—as trash-can liners or for other secondary tasks. Conventional plastic bags made from high-density polyethylene (HDPE, the plastic sacks found at grocery stores) had the smallest per-use environmental impact of all those tested. Cotton tote bags, by contrast, exhibited the highest and most severe global-warming potential by far since they require more resources to produce and distribute.


link

So for me this is a perfect example of the danger behind global climate change hysteria.

Negating for a moment the argument of whether or not Anthropomorphic Global Climate Change is real and just assuming that it is real; the hysteria behind it is causing us to make ill informed and counterprouctive decisions.




Part of what you bold there in the article is the problem, cotton requires enormous resources to both grow and manufacture, if political types weren't so greedy none of this would be an issue yet because they are not using the best product for the job we have this mess, all so a few geezers make squllions.
edit on 3-4-2019 by hopenotfeariswhatweneed because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 3 2019 @ 05:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: DanDanDat
a reply to: Halfswede

Not according to the article


According to the report, organic cotton bags have to be reused many more times than conventional cotton bags (20,000 versus 7,000 times),  based on the assumption that organic cotton has a 30% lower yield rate on average than conventional cotton, and therefore was assumed to require 30% more resources, like water, to grow the same amount.





Even adjusting for the benefits of organic cotton production—like less fertilizer and pesticide use (and therefore less eutrophication and water contamination caused by growing it)—conventional cotton came out on top


I didn't say organic cotton was better, just that they did account for fertilizer and pesticide use. The whole study was funded spcifically for the Denmark model which basically assumed 100% recycling in its theoretical transfer and end of life plan. And according to the study assumed 100% efficiency in virgin vs. recycled production material (which was called out in the critical review included as part of the study).

I am not questioning it because it is counterintuitive, but because, as part of the Denmark model use case, they left out the garbage part (the biggest factor) as an evaluation criteria which which is pretty much the biggest negative about plastic bags -- they end up in the landfill .

Also, It's not that the landfill issue couldn't be resolved with a pristine recycling program, but so could the cotton runoff issue. It was grown for thousands of years prior to modern farming methods.

Again, it is not that cotton bags are inherently bad which isn't even the case that the study is trying to make , yet that seems to be the takeaway to those reading because of what was left out.



posted on Apr, 3 2019 @ 08:10 AM
link   
the biggest issue with getting rid of plastic shopping bags, is that they are not getting rid of much of anything at all. all it is, is a sad attempt to make people feel they are doing something, when the reality is that they are not really doing anything at all. or even doing worse. much like most "green" things actually are. here is the thing. most people i know have always used those plastic bags from the store, for their garbage. so by getting rid of them all you are really doing is increasing the sale of plastic "garbage bags". so all that is really happening is that while plastic shopping bags decrease, plastic garbage bags increase. thus being pretty much a neutral impact, with a net result of just as much plastic being used. yet people believe they are doing something good. this is much like the stupid so called "smart car". it was hyped up as being so much better for the environment. when the reality was that the only reason they were initially more "fuel efficient" was due to the fact that they were diesel. as soon as the gas versions came out it became clear that they were no more fuel efficient than things like Civics and Accords. imagine that. the "eco friendly" two seater, practically useless car was just as fuel efficient as a decent 5 person plus decent trunk size cars.



posted on Apr, 3 2019 @ 08:24 AM
link   
Another issue, is that the same big chain grocery stores, are charging for plastic bags, and then you go into the produce department and find peeled oranges and peeled garlic, various cut up stuff, all wrapped in more plastic. There’s a large grocery store near me, that cuts up all the watermelon, packs it in plastic, and then charges multiple times what a watermelon would cost. No whole or even quartered melons, just sliced right up.

I get that there’s people who need someone to make their salads for them, they could be disabled, or just lazy, but I hate seeing oranges, peeled, wrapped in plastic balls.



posted on Apr, 3 2019 @ 09:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: Halfswede
The flaw in this, and I am about as conservative as they come, is that the study was based on "typical patterns of use and disposal". The problem isn't that cotton bags are inherently worse. It is that people tend to use them a few times and then toss them in a corner and get another six months later when they decide to be "green" again thus skewing the per use data.

My wife and I have had 4 cotton bags that my mom made 10 years ago. They are super sturdy and can carry as much as you have the strength to carry. While we occasionally forget, they have been used probably a few thousand times and have no end in sight.

Again, this issue isn't that cotton bags are somehow a waste of time and not good for the environment, it is that most people just don't execute their intent and the resources per shopping trip aren't showing the value with "typical patterns of use and disposal".

No amount of skewed BS study is going to convince me that 4 bags that will rot in the earth in months are worse than the several thousand plastic bags I would have gotten.


I've been using mine now for about seven years. lol



posted on Apr, 3 2019 @ 09:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: snowspirit
Another issue, is that the same big chain grocery stores, are charging for plastic bags, and then you go into the produce department and find peeled oranges and peeled garlic, various cut up stuff, all wrapped in more plastic. There’s a large grocery store near me, that cuts up all the watermelon, packs it in plastic, and then charges multiple times what a watermelon would cost. No whole or even quartered melons, just sliced right up.

I get that there’s people who need someone to make their salads for them, they could be disabled, or just lazy, but I hate seeing oranges, peeled, wrapped in plastic balls.


i see the same in stores, including peeled potatoes, on top of that. (amusingly while you can buy 50kilo bags of rice, potatoes are normally sold only in little bags with two or three smallish ones in the big grocery stores). but here is the funny part about those fruits and veggies you buy peeled, cut up ect, wrapped in plastic, or in plastic bags. and that is the fact that normally they do this to hide the fact that they are going off. they can leave out bad sections, and peel off the skins that would show they are going off. so in reality it's not just causing more plastic waste. you are also getting poor quality, as it's pretty much a last ditch attempt to sell them. and from friends who have worked in grocery stores, they also tend to do this with fresh meat. they cut off sections that are going off, re-wrap it and sell it at the new weight. which again is not only rather scamish, but also adds a lot more to plastic waste, and even Styrofoam and those blood pads waste.

now something i have seen posts on social media friends of mine are pushing is even more of a silly feel good only thing, without actually changing anything at all. they tell you that to be "green" you should not just bring shopping bags with you when grocery shopping. but also bring your own reusable containers, such as Tupperware, and ziplock bags (yes many people do wash and reuse ziplock bags, we do). and then unwrap and unbag things that are in plastic wrap and bags in the store and leave them there only taking the contents with you. and they hail this as reducing plastic waste. seriously these people actually seem to believe that by leaving the plastic at the store, you are saving the environment from plastic waste somehow? now i will give them a bit of credit here for that. since a big part of plastics going into the oceans on these Pacific islands, is the fact that people go through your garbage looking for anything they can sell (and it's almost like a new person going through your trash every half hour or so. i'm as likely to see someone digging through the trash than not). seriously i even put a dead animal out in a garbage bag, and they dumped the carcass out and took the bag it was in. this of course leaves all sorts of plastic and other trash to be blown into the ocean (and everywhere else), or to be taken through the storm drains, rivers and creeks out to the ocean when it rains and/or floods. someone mentioned China's trash filled rivers, i suspect this is a big part of why that is. i know it's the same in India. face it the worst polluters, be it plastics in the oceans, or air pollution and so called greenhouse gasses are not countries like Europe and North America, but all the poorer nations such as Asia and Africa. if you really want to make a difference (whether you believe in human caused climate change or not), stop pretending its the "rich" countries in Europe and North America that are the problem. and thus need to deal with paying huge amounts of money and paying damaging taxes for it. as well as being held responsible for and expected to deal with all the "climate change refugees". and put the blame and responsibility firmly where it belongs. and that is on the poorer nations, especially Africa and in Asia. deal with the actual problems, not mostly make believe culprits.



posted on Apr, 3 2019 @ 01:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: schuyler
It doesn't take into account China, either, which is where the vast majority of "marine plastic" comes from, right down the Yangtse River. When is the last time you or anybody you know threw plastic in the ocean? Never, right? You wanna clean this up you'll have to go to the source. Banning plastic bags in grocery stores is not going to cut it.

Not arguing that China isn't a huge source of pollution, but I've seen first hand the huge garbage scows that dump all kinds of crap in our rivers and lakes and just offshore on bothe the East and West Coasts.

It ain't just China.



posted on Apr, 3 2019 @ 10:21 PM
link   
I hate those plastic bags.. they end up everywhere..in everything. Snagged in trees, clumping up drainage ditches,choking animals, floating in the lakes.. its endless.
I do have cotton totes but my mother made them for me years ago out of recycled jeans. The cotton is going to be grown, made into something, and discarded or donated. We probably have enough discarded clothing that could be remade into something new to halt cotton production for 50 years! This would greatly expand the usage of the material, replace the plastics, and cut crop production and damage too. Win win! If we could just make it happen somehow..



posted on Apr, 3 2019 @ 10:38 PM
link   
Make your tote bag out of old plastic grocery bags


that's good yes?


one of my cats has a plastic bag fetish. probably a common thing, but he loves that sound they make when he shreds them.



posted on Apr, 3 2019 @ 11:18 PM
link   
a reply to: DanDanDat

What a vacuous article!

They talk more about fashion and status symbols other than the environment.



Using a tote made of recycled plastic bags is glossed over for some “I’m smarter than you are” angle that is the epitome of elitism.

Wish MSM would report things as they are instead of some “angle” where they can sell advertising.

A pregnant sperm whale was found dead with nearly 50 pounds of plastic in its stomach in the Mediterranean last week.

Does that mean plastic is still better than natural fiber??



posted on Apr, 4 2019 @ 07:58 AM
link   
a reply to: one4all

Bamboo fibre is a massive fraud.


Turning bamboo into a silky fabric isn’t possible without highly intensive chemical processes, where approximately 13 different toxic solvents are used. The undertaking is a viscose rayon process, turning a cellulose fiber (plant material) into fabric. Any plant or tree—in this case bamboo—can be used as a cellulose source . . .

There is another type of bamboo fabric, lesser used, called natural Bamboo or Bamboo linen, derived from bamboo culms. The fabric holds the same characteristics of linen in that it wrinkles easily and can be laundered. Production of bamboo linen is confined to just one company in China, so little is known about the manufacturing of natural bamboo. They claim not to use any chemical additives in the production process—but information is limited and these claims can’t be supported.
eco-chick.com...







 
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join