Scribd
Upload
19 views1 page

Position Paper Sample

The document argues that the plastic ban implemented in Metro Manila is harmful to the environment, contrary to popular belief. Research indicates that paper bags have a greater negative impact on water sources and produce more greenhouse emissions compared to conventional plastic bags. The author calls for the repeal of the 'Total Plastic Ban Act of 2011' based on these findings.

Uploaded by

cmxrqmrw82
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
19 views1 page

Position Paper Sample

The document argues that the plastic ban implemented in Metro Manila is harmful to the environment, contrary to popular belief. Research indicates that paper bags have a greater negative impact on water sources and produce more greenhouse emissions compared to conventional plastic bags. The author calls for the repeal of the 'Total Plastic Ban Act of 2011' based on these findings.

Uploaded by

cmxrqmrw82
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

PLASTIC BAN IS BAD FOR THE ENVIRONMENT

As of the start of 2014, nearly all of the cities in Metro Manila had implemented a
ban on plastic bags, in compliance with the "Total Plastic Ban Act of 2011." This Act
prohibits the sale and use of conventional (high density polyethylene or HDPE) plastic
bags in business establishments, such as grocery stores, fast food outlets and
restaurants, mall stores, and markets, and penalizes violators with amounts ranging from
Php 500 to Php 5 000, including imprisonment. Businesses are allowed to use only paper
bags or biodegradable plastic bags as substitute. While this measure appears to be eco-
friendly, the fact is that the plastic ban does more harm than good.

It is easy to believe that paper bags are more environment-friendly than


conventional plastic bags. After all, paper is natural; plastic is synthetic. Paper bags
degrade easily; plastics, we are told, stay in the environment for many years. However, all
these are just myths. And anyone who cares enough to do basic Internet research can
find out what science actually proves.

The website "All About Bags" (http://www.allaboutbags.ca/papervplasticstudies.html)


compiles a number of research studies, both by private research organizations and
governments, and shows the following:
• Research done by the Scottish Government in 2005 shows that compared to
conventional plastic bags, paper bags have a more negative impact on water
sources. Paper bags consume four times more water in their production stage, and
contribute 14 times greater in the eutrophication of bodies of water. In addition,
the report says that because paper bags can be as much as 10 times heavier than
plastic bags, the former eats up more landfill space and costs more to transport.

• The ULS Report in 2007 shows that the production of conventional plastic bags,
compared to that of paper bags, produces significantly less greenhouse emissions
(39 % for plastic vs. 68% for paper). It also consumes less water: 58 gallons per 1
500 plastic bags versus an overwhelming 1 004 gallons per 1 000 paper bags.

• A 2011 report from the UK Government says that conventional HDPE bags shows
the least negative impact on climate (a measure called "global warming potential")
compared to paper bags and even biodegradable plastic bags.

These findings from credible research bodies prove one thing: Plastic bans do not
make sense. Plastic bans do not work. The smart-and eco-friendly-thing to do now is to
repeal the "Total Plastic Ban Act of 2011."

You might also like