Whole Foods To Drop Plastic Bags
Good plan, as described in the Madison Capital Times.
Better than having Big Guvmint mandate it, some readers will argue.
I don't care which way it happens. Just get on with it.
Thursday, January 24, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
15 comments:
Instead of banning, like most liberals like doing, since they know better than the rest of us, why not promote more recycling of these bags? You know James there are many people who use these bags for many other purposes.
I seem to recall back in the 1970's that it was these same eco-nuts who said that we should not use paper but plastic, since using paper bags was killing the trees.
To John P;
Recylcing plastic bags is difficult, as they wind around the machinery.
And why is it that you need to refer to people with whom you disagree as "eco-nuts?"
Do you think that advances your credibility?
James:
I believe you have referred to certain republicans as "wing-nuts". Cant I accuse you of the same thing?
I do not disagree with all environmentalists, I only call the radical ones eco-nuts.
I try to do all I can to protect the environment, within reason. I recycle when I can, I try to conserve heat and electricity in my home, I try to only drive when necessary and use our most fuel efficient car when I do. I have also replaced all of our light bulbs with CF bulbs.
However, I have a BIG problem when people want to ban something for what they believe is the "greater good". I heard this before in the 70's with not using paper bags.
I do not believe in man-made global warming, however, I do believe that we should not waste energy.
For example, we have a large SUV, which we use to tow our boat, and for the space it offers for our two kids and two large dogs. However, I try to only drive it when we maximize its space. I take our smaller car when I am only in it.
I guess my point is, liberals always want to ban things, but never want to find alternatives.
To John P;
I serched my blog and find the use of "Wingnut" once to describe climate change deniers. Not Republicans.
I applaud your personal commitment to save energy.
But there are times that banning certain items from the marketplace is in the greater good. How about DDT? Hopw about lead in gasoline and paint?
CBS ran a documentary the other day with scientists stidying ice core samples at both polar icecaps. They can trace spiking in trapeed greenhouse gases once the samples contain chemicals trapped from the Industrial Revolution on, and current samples have very high readings as the ice is melting very quickly.
I think it's preposterous to think that the burning of coal and oil for decades would have no effect on the atmosphere and the climate, but we won't change eachother's opinion tonight.
The Meijer store where I shop has recently started selling reusable bags for $0.99 each. They are polypropylene (so I can set them on a snowy porch while I open the door and they won't disintegrate like paper), have handles that won't slice through my hands (like plastic bags), and hold a ton. They even have a fold-out divider inside to separate a 2 liter bottle from the rest of the groceries so it won't crush anything, and an external pocket where I put my reciept.
I bought several extra to use around the house and more and more people who see me with them ask how I like them - and I notice more and more people picking up a couple at the store when shopping.
Now I only use a plastic bag if I need a wastebasket bag at home and use reusable all the rest of the time.
To John P,
Would you agree that both technology and our understanding of the effect of human activity on the planet has improved since the '70s?
I've used totally recyclable, non-disposable, washable cloth shopping bags for most of my groceries since the '80s, and since the '90s, have tried to use the same bags for clothing and other shopping as well. If the item comes in a box, I see no reason to have them put that box in a plastic bag, too. Usually cashiers are surprised when I say, "Would you mind using my bag, instead?" but are to quick to respond with, "Oh--that's a good idea!" or "Why not?"
The point is, it makes sense to do what you can to save resources, time and money where and when you can, and not to pay attention to labels such as "Eco-Nut" or "Liberal". Even using my cloth bags as much as I do, I have enough plastic bags in-house to last me a few decades at least--if the world were to stop making or ban plastic bags entirely.
You seem like a reasonable person in your own habits, except for your unlikeable use of labels.
And let's not even get started on which group--liberals or conservatives--wants to ban more things. Think about it, John P. My group may want to ban plastic bags; your group would dictate what I can and can't do with my own body. Who is the more radical?
Betsey:
Your group wants to ban smoking, junk food, trans-fat, Plastic Bags, SUV's ATV's, plastic bottles, etc and some conservatives (pro-lifers) want the life of the un born protected. Give me a break.
I agree that man has some affect on the climate, but I do not think it has as much of an affect as you think it does. There is no scientific consensus on this. Even though Al Gore and the IPCC seems to think there is.
No, you will not change my mind on this and I will not change yours.
There are many who believe that banning DDT was a terrible misstake and in directly caused the death of millions throughout 3rd world countries from certain insects.
Actually, John there is a consensus. Unanimity, no. That;s impossible, Consensus, yes. Overwhelmingly.
That is not true James. Where do you get this from? There was a group of 400 scientist just a few weeks ago that disagree with the IPCC report. Where do you get your info from? People who are actually non political scientists?
I am very much opposed to anyone dropping plastic shopping bags. Usually when that happens the wind carries them off and the bags wind up stuck in trees. This is not at all healthy for the trees or the birds or the squirrels. I also am very much opposed to being exposed to any discussion of John P's wing nuts. This is not that kind of venue.
Thank you.
To John P: The Nobel-Prize winning UN IPCC, with 2,000 scientists participating in working groups, was recently joined by a statement of support from 1,000 US scientists: URL:
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science/scientists-letter-on-climate-change.html
Oh, I forgot the Nobel Prize winning IPCC, the same group that gave it to Yasser Arifat.
It has been shown that many for 2,500 so called scientists were not in agreement and some were not even scientists but activists. In addition some are suing the IPCC for having their name in the report.
We can agree to disagree.
To e.litella
What is the problem with what I am saying? I guess people who disagree with you are wing nuts. Not all environmentalist are eco-nuts, just the ones who what to spread their non proven beliefs on others.
As I said I am doing what I can to conserve energy, that is more than I can say for other so called environmentalists.
The IPCC reports were written by scientists, and vetted and reviewd by other scientists. They were approved by governments. That is what consensus policy-making looks like.
Attacking the UN is a red herring. Many of the key scientists involved were Americans.
to john p--
I don't think there is consensus among the liberals, progressives, environmentalists and whomever else you want to throw together that "smoking, junk food, trans-fat, Plastic Bags, SUV's ATV's, plastic bottles" should be BANNED. Even recent suggestions that smoking be banned in public places such as bars and restaurants are not intended to ban the practice of smoking--just to move it to a place where it won't affect the health and well-being of those who don't CHOOSE to smoke.
Go ahead. Light up and puff away IF YOU CHOOSE. It's your life and health at stake.
Similarly, only women own the right to CHOOSE what to do with their own bodies in the case of an unintended pregnancy. Because in the absence of a CHOICE, the only option remaining is forced pregnancy and childbirth.
If you don't like being told what to do by others--even when it's in the form of a suggestion or a ban in certain places or times--do you really think that you can justly force your religious or personal convictions on another person? "Since you know better than the rest of us" women what to do with ourselves? Give ME a break!!!
Post a Comment