[heather11duchon]

Arbitrary policies such as straw bans or soda taxes not only impede individual choices regarding what to drink and how to drink it, but inevitably unleash a host of unintended consequences. By making soda more expensive, for instance, pop taxes may promote increased beer consumption. And Philadelphia’s soft drink tax is threatening access to healthy food by low-income inner city residents by drastically cutting profits at downtown grocery stores. The same goblin of perversity will make itself felt in the wake of a straw ban as well.

[Wofi]

Anyone who would prefer not to have a straw in their drink is welcome to instruct their local bartender or barista accordingly. But for many folks, straws remain both useful and necessary. Numerous disability groups have loudly noted how the anti-straw movement threatens their ability to consume beverages. Miriam Osborne, who has a muscle condition called arthrogryposis and can’t hold a cup in her hands, angrily told The Toronto Star that talk of a straw ban “is just lame liberal activism” bent on “vilifying people who need straws,” such as herself. In many other situations, particularly health care, straws and other single-use plastic devices represent a tremendous advance in terms of sterility and functionality. Does anyone really want their doctor reusing old gloves, catheters, IV tubes or surgical gowns? Didn’t think so. [links]

[gilbertj0hn]

The anti-straw movement is on the march at the municipal level as well. Vancouver is in the process of ridding itself of plastic take-away items such as straws, coffee cups, drink stirrers and lids. Starting with a requirement that food vendors ask before providing customers with straws, the city’s goal is to move to a British-style “distribution ban on non-compostable straws and utensils” by 2025. As its current consultation document states: “When they become litter, straws and utensils can be ingested and harm turtles, birds and other sea life.”

[atomesix87]

The point seems clear enough. Straws and other plastic utensils are murdering oceans and sea creatures and we need to get rid of them as quickly as possible. Given all the evident concern and conviction—not to mention a damning YouTube video of a Costa Rican sea turtle with a plastic straw up its nose—fact-checking these claims seems almost impolite. But here goes.

[6174Kauri]

Every two years Toronto performs a very useful and rigorously scientific audit of street litter. Small plots are randomly set down throughout the city and examined for type and origin of garbage. The results are once again entirely exculpatory towards straws. In 2016 under the ‘small litter’ category across all 300 plots, Toronto’s garbage surveyors found 900 pieces of chewing gum, 800 cigarette butts, 734 pieces of paper … and a mere four straws. These straws constitute 0.1 per cent of total urban litter. Given that the 2014 study found a total of 10 plastic straws, the available evidence suggest straws’ urban garbage footprint is falling rapidly. Surely this is good news. And evidence no further action needs to be taken. here

[sniff]

When May’s government unveiled a soft drink tax earlier this year, it deliberately exempted milk shakes from the tax because public health officials expressed concern that young girls in particular weren’t getting sufficient calcium; they worried a new tax on milk shakes could curtail beneficial milk consumption even further. In banning straws, however, the British government looks set to inadvertently undo the benefits of its own exemption—since it is all but impossible to drink a milk shake without a straw. Even governments can’t suck and blow at the same time.

[Boytoat]

When it comes to restrictions on single-use bags, like Brownsville $1 fee-per-bag or Dallas' recently passed nickel-per-bag fee, Abbott has a narrower view: He doesn't think Texas law allows fees for bags at all, though it's still not totally clear if single-use bags are indeed "containers or packages" in the law his office refers to.

[joey]

Abbott's opinion also says "a court is likely to conclude that a single-use plastic bag is a container." But only the courts or the Legislature can clarify that with any finality. (Lawmakers have also tried to eliminate any ambiguity by prohibiting single-use bag bans, with their latest attempt at a "Shopping Bag Freedom Act" coming during the 2013 session. But the legislation did not make it out of committee.) more

[jhoki]

"Plastic bags weren't really on the radar screen" in 1993, said Sledge. "It's hard to think that a bag's not a container. It holds stuff. But I don't think that is the intent of the statute." more

[thrillkisser]

The Texas Retailers Association did not respond to an emailed request for comment Friday afternoon. That group has strongly opposed bans or restrictions on single-use bags and had also sued Austin over its bag ban, though it later withdrew the petition. The group also prompted state Rep. Dan Flynn, R-Van, to ask Abbott's office for an opinion in March. here

[kermit]

The action came despite advice not to enact the ban from scientists at the Consumer Product Safety Commission, which regulates toys.

[bombus]

But lawmakers had other ideas. [links]

[pjwaffle]

Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) talked about "potential harm to testosterone development and the male reproductive tract."

[binarysecurity]

To revist this article, visit My Profile, then View saved stories.

[costner1367]

If your chief concern is climate change, things get even muddier. One of the most comprehensive research papers on the environmental impact of bags, published in 2007 by an Australian state government agency, found that paper bags have a higher carbon footprint than plastic. That’s primarily because more energy is required to produce and transport paper bags. [links]

[gtwickline]

“People look at [paper] and say it’s degradable, therefore it’s much better for the environment, but it’s not in terms of climate change impact,” says David Tyler, a professor of chemistry at the University of Oregon who has examined the research on the environmental impact of bag use. The reasons for paper’s higher carbon footprint are complex, but can mostly be understood as stemming from the fact that paper bags are much thicker than plastic bags. “Very broadly, carbon footprints are proportional to mass of an object,” says Tyler. For example, because paper bags take up so much more space, more trucks are needed to ship paper bags to a store than to ship plastic bags.