Plastic bags

Lord_Baltimore

Altarf wrote: »

When you know the second number then you will know whether to jump up and down in excitement or not.

I don't think you should interpret a little optimism as unbridled glee. The initiative will have caused people to think about whether they need to use quite so many bags and this in itself is a start. Always look on the bright side of life eh?

Nick_C

Lord_Baltimore wrote: »

The initiative will have caused people to think about whether they need to use quite so many bags and this in itself is a start.

I disagree, because the real global problem is the growing population, but no one is really talking about that.

Recycling, waste minimisation, energy efficiency; they are all just smokescreens.

Lord_Baltimore

Nick_C wrote: »

I disagree, because the real global problem is the growing population, but no one is really talking about that.
Recycling, waste minimisation, energy efficiency; they are all just smokescreens.

Um, I see what you did there but is it really valid to divert a thread about placky bags into a lament about global over-population? The respective solutions are not really comparable: the former involves an initiative that introduced a 5p charge to discourage unnecessary use whilst the latter requires euthanasia/birth control/annihilation on a mammoth scale.

Call me old-fashioned but I have no idea how to solve the population thing which is why I didn't start a thread on it. If you have ideas, be my guest but stick with the 'smokescreen' discussion here .

Sicard

Quote:
A new report from the University of Colorado at Boulder suggests the plastic bag ban could actually be aiding the increase of greenhouse gas ethane.

Researchers say after a steady decline in ethane from its peak in 1970 — which was attributed to better emission controls — they have seen an increase in ethane in the Northern Hemisphere of about 400,000 tons annually between 2009-2014.

“About 60 percent of the drop we saw in ethane levels over the past 40 years has already been made up in the past five years,” said one of the authors of the study, Detlev Helmig,

Part of the process of making a plastic bag requires ethane to be taken out of the mix, as ethane is too volatile to be safely used. Without ethane being used for plastic bag production, oil and gas companies are forced to burn the ethane off into the atmosphere.

So why can't they use this to power electricity stations?

Nick_C

Lord_Baltimore wrote: »

Um, I see what you did there but is it really valid to divert a thread about placky bags into a lament about global over-population?

Well yes it is. We are burying our heads in the sand if we think we can solve the environmental damage we are doing to the world simply through waste min, recycling, and energy efficiency.

Estimated world population in billions:-

1900 - 1.65
1950 - 2.52
1999 - 5.98
2012 - 7.05
2050 - 9.73

That's the problem. There are too many of us. Population growth is unsustainable.

So yes, if someone thinks the reduction in sales of Single Use Carrier Bags is GREAT NEWS I have to disagree, and make no apology for doing so.

World population increased by another 500 in the time it took me to lopk up the figures and write this reply.

http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/

Nick_C

Laurie_Sicard-Askey wrote: »

Quote:
...

Part of the process of making a plastic bag requires ethane to be taken out of the mix, as ethane is too volatile to be safely used. Without ethane being used for plastic bag production, oil and gas companies are forced to burn the ethane off into the atmosphere.

So why can't they use this to power electricity stations?

I think the answer to your question was in the text you quoted.

Although why the C2 chain (ethane) is too volatile although C1, C3 and C4 chains (methane, propane and butane) are widely used as fuels is interesting.

Le_Kirk

Laurie_Sicard-Askey wrote: »

Part of the process of making a plastic bag requires ethane to be taken out of the mix, as ethane is too volatile to be safely used. Without ethane being used for plastic bag production, oil and gas companies are forced to burn the ethane off into the atmosphere.

If, as stated in this quote, ethane is taken out of the mix when making plastic bags, what happens to it? If you make plastic bags, it is taken out of the mix, if you don't make plastic bags you still have it. Confused? I certainly am, unless I misread the quote or it was misquoted.

Nick_C

Le_Kirk wrote: »

If, as stated in this quote, ethane is taken out of the mix when making plastic bags, what happens to it? If you make plastic bags, it is taken out of the mix, if you don't make plastic bags you still have it. Confused? I certainly am, unless I misread the quote or it was misquoted.

I'm guessing here, but if the Ethane isn't being converted into plastic, then presumably it is either (i) being burned at the point of production, producing CO2 or (ii) being released into the atmosphere.

Methane is a worse greenhouse than CO2. I expect the same is true for Ethane.

So I can see that turning the Ethane into plastic carrier bags and burying them in the ground, where they will take 1000 years to rot, is more environmentally friendly than releasing the Ethane or CO2 into the atmosphere! It's basically carbon capture!

Lord_Baltimore

Nick_C wrote: »

Well yes it is. We are burying our heads in the sand if we think we can solve the environmental damage we are doing to the world simply through waste min, recycling, and energy efficiency.

Estimated world population in billions:-

1900 - 1.65
1950 - 2.52
1999 - 5.98
2012 - 7.05
2050 - 9.73

That's the problem. There are too many of us. Population growth is unsustainable.

So yes, if someone thinks the reduction in sales of Single Use Carrier Bags is GREAT NEWS I have to disagree, and make no apology for doing so.

World population increased by another 500 in the time it took me to lopk up the figures and write this reply.

http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/

Call me trivial but it still seems GREAT NEWS to me that there will be less plastic bags flying around the countryside, floating around our oceans and littering our urban environs. It will bring a small but noticeable improvement to our everyday lives.

I realise this kind of small-time thinking despairs you and that people just don't understand about the really important issues in life, such as the global increase in population.

Or perhaps they do but don't have a solution.

Don't be dismayed; simply use this opportunity to share your solution to the problem of over-population with us and we can just forget about the small stuff and engage in something important.

Or you could start a thread of your own on it?

Pennywise

Lord_Baltimore wrote: »

Call me trivial but it still seems GREAT NEWS to me that there will be less plastic bags flying around the countryside, floating around our oceans and littering our urban environs.

Seeing as smaller/independent outlets are free to carry on giving out carriers, I can't see why there'd be any noticeable reduction in the countryside, oceans, etc. Most people who go shopping in Tesco will be taking their bags home and re-using or disposing properly. Whereas those frequenting off licences and fast food joints, i.e. the ones more likely to just chuck their carriers out of the car window or leave them under park benches, will happily continue to do so. I think they've targeted the wrong users!