Talk:Plastic shopping bag

Neutrality

Firstly, much of this contente seems to be the same as that on plastic bag. As I mentioned on Talk:Plastic bag:

This article sounds very biased to me in favour of one particular type of biodegradable plastic. I'm sure they are very good, but I believe there are several disadvantages to this type of plastic which are not mentioned in the article. I don't have enough knowledge of the subject to fix this myself though. Tjwood 10:13, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Is there any point? By the time the bag is anyplace needing to bio-degrade, it's usually accompanined by 99% more stuff that's not biodegradable either, and is in a place so toxic that nothing's going to be able to enjoy the area for centuries anyhow (eg: landfills). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.206.137.129 (talk) 14:45, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

If you think there are disadvantages then be specific - vague generalisations wont do. I cant see anything wrong with the article and I dont see why the same points should not be made under the "plastic bags" heading. People will not read the whole encyclopaedia. MShaw 29 Jan 2006

The article is dominated by the oxo-biodegradable plastic topic, and seems like an advertisement more than anything else. I'd like to see what disadvantages there are to a product like this.

I have removed the NPOV tag from this article, as any editor has had ample time to work out problems there may have with the article. Besides, it seems to have improved with time and looks reasonably NPOV. Any editors who disagree should by all means edit, or even replace the tag, but not if it's just there to call everything below into question. Envirocorrector 15:21, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

What part of the 'Plastic Bag Restrictions' is being disputed for NPOV? All of the cities, countries, and stores listed with restrictions are fully referenced. It seems to me the information in the section is factual and neutral. I think legal bag bans and recent supermarket trends to eliminate plastic bags or at least provide incentive for the use of reusable bags are pertinent to the entry on plastic shopping bags. I'd welcome a way to better organize the page or improve the section, and I'm curious the reason for the Neutrality tag. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Plasticbags (talk • contribs) 00:16, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Further reading links seem biased, as they are maintained by large producers of plastic bags. Consider finding more neutral sites.Paigeinator (talk) 15:34, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes. I have removed industry links from the "Further reading", leaving only good texts.Rlsheehan (talk) 20:58, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

"On land, plastic bags are one of the most prevalent types of litter in inhabited areas, becoming an eyesore to local residents." I find this comment both subjective and dependant on where you live. It sounds very biased. I've never found plastic bags to be (one of the) the most prevalent types of litter. It's also worth noting that many bags are reused for other purposes making their impact on the environment much smaller KBBach (talk) 10:36, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

References

San Francisco

Please note: San Francisco has banned plastic bags. This should be noted under the US section. Thanks! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 168.99.6.61 (talk) 15:48, 28 March 2007 (UTC).

Balanced

April 17, 2007 This should be a factual article about the subject. Efforts should be made to give balanced points of view. This is no place for a policial blog. RLSheehan

I agree. I believe this article is particularly weak in outlining what the problem with plastic shopping bags is, and why solutions are being sought.--Jrsnbarn 01:26, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

April 22, 07 The "disadvantage" section had been rambling and weak. I reworded it to provide the key points which readers should know about. It reads much cleaner now and still provides the same key points. RLSheehan

I appreciate your efforts, but it's important in an encylcopedia to source your material. I have left your 'key points' in, but would appreciate your finding references. If you can find a better source than I have, please add to or even replace mine. However, let it stand until you do.--Jrsnbarn 14:58, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Several good refernce books are listed: read them to understand more about plastics, waste management, and recycling. Rlsheehan May 2,07

The "disadvantage" section is pivitol to this article, whether you are a proponent of plastic bags or not. We need to find specific references so that these disadvantages are verifiable. Asking the reader to read the books listed is more than should be required to check the accuracy of the article. Therefore, if these disadvantages are indeed true, then you should be able to cite the page number and book from where you found them. If you can't, then I think you're making them up. --Jrsnbarn 12:37, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

No. Reference books are usually better sources than a newspaper article or a politial web page. There are also several linked Wikipedia articles for readers to get more detail (that's why they are there). An encylopedia can, and should, have valid summary points to help the reader. Rlsheehan

This article is moving much farther away from any type of balance (which is a WK requirement). Rather than getting into an editing war, I suggest that pet peeves and political agendas be limited to the discussion pages and not placed in the article. Rlsheehan July 20, 2007

I disagree. Nobody thinks the advantages section should be reworded to say "some people think plastic bags are made of plastic." It's because that is factual, cited information. The disadvantages section has the same right to being clearly written, without useless hedging. Why? Because it is also factual, cited information. The only real problem with this article is that the reduction section needs to be split out into the countries immediately below. Envirocorrector 18:07, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

I just moved all the info in the "reduction" section down into the individual countries. Several of those are now tagged for citation, so I hope the original editors have sources. I also reworded a little and think the question of paper vs. plastic is more neutral (which is a point that should always be clear - nobody really knows or agrees on paper/plastic because it depends on whether you care about biodegradability, recycling rates, atmospheric pollution, or just plain usability). Envirocorrector 09:57, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Most studies of paper vs plastic I have seen favor plastic based on source reduction and energy usage. Many people use a waste hierarchy to help prioritize sometimes conflicting facts. When given a personal choice, however, I usually pick paper bags because I reuse them more than plastic. Rlsheehan July 23, 2007

References

Neither reference nor link should be made to commercial sites for bags of any construction. Pkgx 4 May 2007

A review of citations and external liks showed several which are commercial, are not active, or are not valid sources. These have been eliminated. Pkgx 29 May 2007

While I see the point of avoiding commercial content, it's a pity that the very clear information at LINK REMOVED ...among other things, there are catalogue pics of the product, which would be great in the article, but I guess don't make the criteria Feroshki (talk) 07:09, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

No spamming in talk either please --Shakehandsman (talk) 00:49, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

photodegradation

I just deleted the second half of

"Some people are encouraging bags made of biodegradable polythene film as these will decompose when exposed to sun, air, and moisture, and are also suited for composting. However, they do not readily decompose in a sealed landfill and are considered a possible contaminant to plastic recycling operations .

Some materials are designed for photodegradation and degrade with the direct sunlight. These are also considered a possible contaminant to plastic recycling operations."

It looks like a repetition to me, but I wanted to put it out there on the talk page in case I'm missing something that differentiates the photodegradable bags from the biodegradable one. Envirocorrector 10:12, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

bad

-"Plastic shopping bags are most often made of polyethylene, (low-density or high-density).

Although not in use today, plastic shopping bags could be made from Polylactic acid (PLA) a biodegradable polymer derived from lactic acid.[1] This is one form of vegetable-based bioplastic. This material biodegrades quickly under composting conditions and does not leave toxic residue. However, bioplastic can have its own environmental impacts, depending on the way it is produced.

Bags made of biodegradable polythene film, which decompose when exposed to sun, air, and moisture, and are also suited for composting have been proposed as an alternative to conventional plastic shopping bags. However, they do not readily decompose in a sealed landfill and represent a possible contaminant to plastic recycling operations."-

Why does is this here as the first paragraph? What environmental impacts, what is it talking about? Are plastic bags meant to be a problem for the environment, and if so how are they a problem? It seems strange to jump right into this, surely someone that feels the need to research plastic bags may not be aware of any environmental impact. It totally lacks flow and pacing. It should start off with a section on what are plastic bags, they are bags to carry or store things in that are made of plastic and are commonly used for XXXX and are found in a wide variety of places such as XXX, XXX, and XXXX.

The plastics revolution saw the creation of the first mass produced plastic bag in ZZZ for the purposes of XXXX, but it wasn't until XXXX that plastic bags really spread into wide usage.

What are plastic bags made out of and why do we use plastic? Thin carrier bags are made out of XXXXX because they are light, easy to compact and cheap to make. Thicker plastics like those made for hospital equiptment are made of XXXX because the plastic is relatively cheap to make and it keeps stuff sterile and resistant to accidental piercing and contamination. Often XXXXX plastic bags are use in XXXXX and made of XXXXX, because they are more durable and a company logo can be printed on them.

Well you get the idea, not in that format, but cover those things rather than leave people hanging on WHAT plastic bags are, what kind of plastic bags are out there, what are they used for and what are they made of.

During the end of the 20th century people became more aware that certain plastics were bad and are almost impossible to recycle at most recycling plants where they only accept plastic for recycling that will hold its shape, as they take XXXXX amount of years to degrade and release XXXX toxins plus causing damage to wild life as well as looking unnapealing as litter.

In year XXXX the first biodegradable plastic bags were mass produced, and only take XXXX months to biodgrade at a garbage dump. Vegetable bases are planned to be used on plastic bags, or plastic that can be recycled easier, or maybe they are being phased out where possible in Europe but America uses them just as often still. Alternatives for plastic bags are paper carrier bags, resealable and steralized hard plastic/steel.

Anyway, this is the sort of structure and information this page needs. This information is dead easy to get on state websites for almost all english speaking countries and we can also get decent information on environmentally conscious countries like China. It looks like it was just randomly put together over time the way it looks now JayKeaton 11:22, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Plastic: Serial Killer

A radio program in Australia, Background Briefing, broadcast a program in 2003 entitled "Plastic: A Serial Killer". There may be information in this program (transcript available online) that can inform the disadvantages/advantages sections of the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.45.34.178 (talk) 02:57, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

False claims 100,000 dead mammals etc

There is a common myth that 100,000 mammals are killed each year by bags in the North Atlantic. This is due to an incorrect inter[retation of a study and is completely false so I removed it fromt eh article. see the following link for more info: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article3508263.ece

Perhaps someone can find accurate information to replace it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shakehandsman (talk • contribs) 22:12, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

There is not documented study. Actually published patient reports by seaturtle rescue groups show that although seaturtles do ingest plastic, it is not plastic bags as reported

This famous quote was in error by the Australian government and they have a website dediicated to correcting it now at http://www.environment.gov.au/settlements/publications/waste/plastic-bags/analysis.html (the title of the study this claim was tracked back to says it all: Piatt John F., and Nettleship David N.,1989 Incidental catch of Marine Birds and Mammals in Fishing Nets off Newfoundland, Canada" ) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Clear perspective (talk • contribs) 02:42, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

References

Country List

This section has had a POV problem for more than a year without any attempt to correct it. It also is an excessive list of news articles: WP:NOT#NEWS. Please correct these problems. Grantmidnight (talk) 14:36, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Someone keeps trying to develop a repository for listing local bans on bags. That is not the function of the article. This POV section has been removed again. Grantmidnight (talk) 22:40, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Lifecycle Comment

I believe it would be worth noting at the beginning of this article that the plastic shopping bag is only the last container for a product in the overall supply chain. It presents an opportunity for consumer action, but there are other areas of significant packaging in the supply chain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.67.6.14 (talk) 18:14, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Reorganize Content Comment

I suggest the macro-headings and sub-content should be: History, Function (with pre-consumer packaging, and post-consumer uses), Design (Integrated Handles, No Handles, Plastic tab ties, Coated Wire ties), Composition (PE, bioplastics), Durability (single-use, multi-use, photodegradation, biodegradable), Management (Collection & Sorting, Recycling, Incineration & emissions, Landfilling, Composting, Laws - SF, Seattle, Ireland), Ecosystem Effects (Gyre, seabirds and turtle, beach content, fossil fuel use). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.67.6.14 (talk) 22:01, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

when was the first plastic bag made and how? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.63.62.124 (talk) 09:06, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

when was the first plastic bag made and how

please tell —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.63.62.124 (talk) 09:18, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

This article is telling to history of the use of plastic shopping bags in USA. In Europa the plastic shopping bags was in common use already about a decade earlier. Especially the flight travellers with alcohol shopping may have been the first users in 60's. The article polyethylene have some history data. Harry Wasylyk is mentioned as inventor for bin bag. Technically manufacturing of bin bag is very much similar as manufacturing of plastic shopping bag. Hopefully somebody finds some litterature about the history of the invention and the use of the plastic shopping bag. Vilkapi (talk) 16:18, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Legislation

Several times, editors have tried to make this Wikipedi article a news listing of what local laws may affect the use of single use plastic shopping bags. WK policy is not to list this type of thing: previous Consensus has agreed with WK poliicy. We can mention that there is legislation and perhaps have a couple of citations.(done). We cannot try to compile a more extensive list. Pkgx (talk) 19:10, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia should not be a list of local or regional legislation. It is adequate to state that there are efforts by some regional govenments to help control the use of single use plastic bags Grantmidnight (talk) 01:45, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Agreed but it should include a full scope of legislation from recyling (voluntary and mandatory) to taxes/fees and bans —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.225.74.24 (talk) 02:07, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

I agree there should be a comprehensive coverage of relevant legislation, but the edit I recently reverted was (IMO) badly organised and just confused what was already there. It needed to be rewritten, maybe in a separate paragraph. There's nothing wrong with mentioning several notable examples of legislation; it's normal practice in this type of article. I can;t understand why some people see it as a problem. Rwxrwxrwx (talk) 09:33, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes there can be a LIMITED section on legislation that encourages recycling, prohibits littering, and sometimes taxes or prohibits the use of plastic shopping bags. It cannot be comprehensive: that would be too large an article and WK is not a place for posting news stories. Any entry must be notable: Not a local market and not a small jurisdiction. It is sufficient for the article to state that there are many country, regional, and local laws and regulations on the subject - - perhaps with citations to a few representative ones. The section cannot begin to list all of the laws in the world on this dynamic subject. Wikipedia also requires a balanced view without POV problems. Grantmidnight (talk) 18:24, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Read Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. The idea of a comprehensive listing of laws, news articles and regulations on plastic shopping bag usage would violate several parts of WK policy. Pkgx (talk) 17:33, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Fully agree regarding notability and listing, but given that a large number of jurisdiction have enacted laws regulating the use of plastic bags, I think at least two paragraphs should be warranted: one presenting the types of rules (tax, levy, ban, etc.) with notable examples and one presenting the results of the legislations (reduction, increase, no change). I tried to improve the section along these lines. --Elekhh (talk) 09:37, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

I will agree to a discussion of the types of legistlation with a couple of examples. This must not, however, expand to be a listing of every local law or regulation on this subject. Grantmidnight (talk) 17:46, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

patent

What does the following line in the article mean in detail:

US petrochemicals group Mobil overturned the Celloplast US patent in 1977

What is meant here with "overturn". Did they file a law suit and won the case? Or did they invent a different method how to produce those bags, that wasn't covered by the patent? --El bes (talk) 18:00, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

potential resource

Seattle Bans Plastic Bags, and Sets a 5-Cent Charge for Paper by William Yardley published NYT December 20, 2011 "Instead of becoming a leader on the issue, Seattle watched as other cities moved forward ..." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.87.29.188 (talk) 00:34, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

Merge with Plastic Bag ?

I suggest to merge this article with Plastic bag. I fail to see a clear difference between the two. It seems there is only one in size and purpose, but even shopping bags are used for all kinds of other purposes, and the size of shopping bags widely varies (e.g. between the small shopping bags you get in a pharmacy vs. the big ones that you get in grocery stores). Peteruetz (talk) 00:55, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

• No - Plastic bags can be of many different forms, only one of which is a single-use plastic shopping bag. For example a Flexible intermediate bulk container is a plastic bag with little in common with the thin single-use bag you might use at a grocery store. An ostomy bag is also a plastic bag very different in construction and use. The two articles are different and need to be kept separate. Pkgx (talk) 16:53, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
  • There is no support for a merger. I have removed the merge tag. Pkgx (talk) 22:56, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

possible sources

possible sources for history:

• https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2014/10/how-the-plastic-bag-became-so-popular/381065/
• https://www.jstor.org/stable/41221195

and about bans:

• https://www.jstor.org/stable/43294165

-- phoebe / (talk to me) 21:17, 22 February 2024 (UTC)