The Observation Deck

Kate McCarthy wrote:Councilperson Rader told me Councilperson George insisted the BSL issue be moved to the Committee of the Whole...

And it has yet to appear on a COW mtg agenda!

Peter Grossetti wrote:

Kate McCarthy wrote:Councilperson Rader told me Councilperson George insisted the BSL issue be moved to the Committee of the Whole...

And it has yet to appear on a COW mtg agenda!

Though it's no longer assigned to the committee whose members were all signatories to the beyond pathetic proposal put forth by the mayor.

Whoever is imposing it, I see a parallel between the proposed bag and dog laws: both are attempting to fix what ain't broke.

Dan Alaimo wrote:Whoever is imposing it, I see a parallel between the proposed bag and dog laws: both are attempting to fix what ain't broke.

Hi Dan, what is "not broke" about plastic bags? As Mike Deenan mentioned, science has proven plastic bags are not a good thing for the environment. So, what, exactly, is not broke?

One problem with government is that when it tries to solve one problem, there are usually unintended consequences--sometimes bigger problems arise.

https://legalinsurrection.com/2017/09/d ... -a-crisis/


"What is the bottom line here? Plastic bags are not the real problem. People are. We have become too accustomed to a disposable society. Habits need to be changed."

https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/envir ... rs-ireland

How does a bag tax solve the plastic bag crisis?

What other problems will it create?

Taxes are not always the best vehicle for social ordering.

Brian Essi wrote: How does a bag tax solve the plastic bag crisis?

If it makes someone think twice and say "no" to a separate bag just for the lettuce or milk. Instead of four plastic bags, maybe someone just takes two. I fail to see how this is a bad thing.

I do want to draw the distinction between litter and environmental harm. Yes, there is a distinction.

In environmental harm, there is an established causal link between the environmental harm and the health of living organisms.

You can search the following acronyms: HHRA and BERA. These describe how environmental harms are identified and measured by the environmental scientist, whether public or private. There is a vast literature on this.

Litter is primarily a public sanitation issue and a quality of life issue.

Whether plastic bags are a litter problem or an environmental harm largely is a quantitative issue, resting on pathways of harm to living organisms.

If the pathways are few or of minimal health impact, then we are probably describing a litter problem.

The proposed solution should be proportional to the actual problem and, of course, should effect a remedy or partial remedy to the problem.

The proposed solution should not have disproportionate detriments nor disproportionate benefits to those who would bear the risks and costs of implementing the remedy.

For the time being, I will leave it at that.

Matthew Lee wrote:

Brian Essi wrote: How does a bag tax solve the plastic bag crisis?

If it makes someone think twice and say "no" to a separate bag just for the lettuce or milk. Instead of four plastic bags, maybe someone just takes two. I fail to see how this is a bad thing.

If that's as deep as the logic gets, then it will be a failure.

Like taxes on tobacco, alcohol and gasoline?

Did Nancy's "Just Say No" campaign solve the drug problem?

Remember, we were saving trees by going to plastic? How did that work out?

If plastic grocery bags are able to be recycled why can't we put them in with rest of recycle? Yes plastic bottles are just as bad it is surprising how many people just chuck them. Do we really need all this plastic? Maybe children should be educated in school and at home how detrimental plastic is to our environment. Go back to glass and paper. Farm trees to make paper.

Brian Essi wrote: If that's as deep as the logic gets, then it will be a failure.

What??? This makes no sense. Is it a failure in California? In Europe? I don't understand your argument at all. So are you in favor of more waste? How would it be a failure?

Matthew Lee wrote:

Dan Alaimo wrote:Whoever is imposing it, I see a parallel between the proposed bag and dog laws: both are attempting to fix what ain't broke.

Hi Dan, what is "not broke" about plastic bags? As Mike Deenan mentioned, science has proven plastic bags are not a good thing for the environment. So, what, exactly, is not broke?

The question might be better put if we ask what evidence do we have that plastics bags are an environmental or litter problem in Cuyahoga County. Is there quantitative and qualitative data with respect to the problem in this county? Has the question of why the current sanitation refuse and recycling system has not been sufficient to mitigate the problem been studied?

If it is a consumer behavior problem, then a conservative economic behavior model like a broad-based disincentive tariff or tax may be appropriate.

If it is a lack of or a decline in government infrastructure, than a tariff or tax on consumers will likely be ineffective unless the revenues are actually directed to the needed infrastructure.

james fitzgibbons wrote:If plastic grocery bags are able to be recycled why can't we put them in with rest of recycle? Yes plastic bottles are just as bad it is surprising how many people just chuck them. Do we really need all this plastic? Maybe children should be educated in school and at home how detrimental plastic is to our environment. Go back to glass and paper. Farm trees to make paper.

Plastic bags can't be put in the mixed recycle because they gum up the sorting machines. Giant Eagle has a large bin to collect plastic bags that are then recycled. Shredded paper should also be separated and recycled in a paper only bin like they have at schools and churches for fund raising.

Matthew Lee wrote:

Dan Alaimo wrote:Whoever is imposing it, I see a parallel between the proposed bag and dog laws: both are attempting to fix what ain't broke.

Hi Dan, what is "not broke" about plastic bags? As Mike Deenan mentioned, science has proven plastic bags are not a good thing for the environment. So, what, exactly, is not broke?

My thoughts are on the previous page. Admittedly my knowledge on this issue is not very deep, and like Mark Kindt I'd like to some of the evidence presented here.

One thought: why not turn it around and pay for the bags' return like a lot of other recycling works. It may not be much but kids might appreciate the opportunity.

Here is one of the relevant pages related to the proposal (copied from the Free Bag website), I post it without additional comment:

Mark Kindt wrote:
Whether plastic bags are a litter problem or an environmental harm largely is a quantitative issue, resting on pathways of harm to living organisms.

If the pathways are few or of minimal health impact, then we are probably describing a litter problem.

The proposed solution should be proportional to the actual problem and, of course, should effect a remedy or partial remedy to the problem.

The proposed solution should not have disproportionate detriments nor disproportionate benefits to those who would bear the risks and costs of implementing the remedy.

Improperly discarded plastics are a, more or less, global problem.

I do not have enough information to offer an opinion on how severe the problem is in Cuyahoga County or whether specific locations in Cuyahoga County would constitute hot-spots for remediation. The problem is considerably broader that just plastic bags, especially for bodies of water.

However, the proposed solution that we are reading about is not an unreasonable approach and is probably within the bandwidth of workable options generally.