Letters from Faye Chiam (Ms), Straits Times Forum 11 Jun 08;
I READ with astonishment Mr Daniel Wang's misguided notions about plastic bags in his letter, 'Phasing out plastic bags: A dissenting voice' (June 9).
What is wrong with plastic bags? Plenty.
Made from polythene, a petroleum product, the bags may take as long as 1,000 years to degrade. In the meantime, many end up stuck in trees and rivers, killing birds and sea creatures that are unfortunate enough to ingest them or become entangled in them.
Non-biodegradability of plastic bags may be less of a problem in Singapore as our waste is incinerated, but incineration plants bring about environmental problems of their own, not least air pollution.
In the Philippines, for example, incinerators have been banned because of perceived health risks.
More importantly, incineration is an environmentally unsustainable method of treating waste. Contrary to Mr Wang's belief, burning does not make waste go away. Incineration can reduce the volume of incinerable waste, but the residue non-incinerable waste and incineration ash still need to be landfilled.
The National Environment Agency predicts that at the current rate, we will need a new incineration plant every five to seven years and a new landfill every 25 to 30 years.
As pointed out by Mr Wang, many households reuse plastic bags to bag their refuse. However, the sheer number of plastic bags we use suggests that much of it is excessive and unnecessary.
Every year, 4.5 million people in Singapore consume 2.5 billion plastic bags. That so few people can use so much plastic says a lot about our wasteful habits.
For all his erroneous views, though, Mr Wang is perhaps right about one thing - that the problem is not plastic bags. The problem is behavioural. The solution then is for us to change our behaviour and learn to refuse plastic bags that we do not need and use reusable bags instead.
Who says burning plastic does no harm?
Letter from Dell Marie Butler (Miss), Straits Times Forum 11 Jun 08;
MR DANIEL Wang's rejection of a ban on plastic bags (Phasing out plastic bags: A dissenting voice, June 9) reflects the deep-set misconceptions on the environment held by large sections of the Singaporean populace.
I question how the issue of non-biodegradability 'does not arise' simply because all of Singapore's domestic refuse is incinerated.
Mr Wang overlooks the very rationale for introducing and supporting the biodegradability of goods.
The fact of the matter is that incineration is incredibly pollutive; burning plastic is as damaging to the environment as burning a fossil fuel, since it is made of oil.
This is in itself argues for measures which would decrease the production of plastic bags in the first place. With spiralling oil prices threatening a spectre of hyperinflation, any move towards decreasing a reliance on oil is, I believe, reasonable, timely and necessary.
I would also like to raise issue with his claim that we should assess the situation from a Singaporean context, and not ban plastic bags simply because it has become 'fashionable' to do so.
How has Mr Wang come to the conclusion that other countries have banned plastic bags because it is 'fashionable'?
I believe he has confused substance with style. It is widely recognised that banning plastic bags is but a baby step to minimising waste and pollutive burning. But it is a step which several countries have already embraced.
As Mr Wang himself acknowledges, there are sacrifices which must be made and lifestyle alternatives to be found when plastic bags are banned. That several countries have yet chosen to tackle these challenges head-on suggests tenacity and reflects a top-down commitment to environmentalism and sustainable practice - not, as Mr Wang seems to suggest, a flippant pursuit of a transient trend.
Environmental degradation is not a seasonal trend; it is a clarion call to all societies to make fundamental changes.
Of course, it is important to address how Singaporeans can best adapt to the challenges which they must meet, as an oil crisis and environmental degradation beckons.
But Mr Wang would do well to keep in mind that it is the entire world which faces the portending crises. Greenhouse gases released by incineration threaten all inhabitants of our globe.
If Singaporeans are to truly step up to be citizens of the world, then they must begin to adopt the environment as citizens of the world.
Phasing out plastic bags: A dissenting voice
Letter from Daniel Wang, Straits Times Forum 9 Jun 08;
IT IS my view that many, including the Singapore Environment Council, have misunderstood this whole issue of plastic bags.
When environmentalists first objected to their use years ago, the issue with them was that they were non-biodegradable. Then, later, the issue became waste minimisation.
Both these issues are not applicable in Singapore's context.
First, 100 per cent of our domestic refuse is incinerated and so the question of non-biodegradability does not arise.
Will the burning of plastic bags harm our environment? The answer is - very unlikely, not at the very high temperatures that these bags and other domestic wastes are burned.
Second, on the issue of waste minimisation, many of us re-use the plastic bags that we get from supermarkets. We use them to line our kitchen bins and the wastepaper bins in our rooms.
The National Environment Agency has always reminded us to bag our kitchen waste before disposing it through the rubbish chutes. So, these plastic bags that we get from supermarkets come in very handy.
I agree, however, that small plastic bags, and those that are thicker, cannot be re-used to line bins and should not be offered by shops, where possible.
Let us sit back and re-examine the rationale behind calling for a ban on plastic bags. Let us not jump in and do something just because it is fashionable or what other countries in the world are doing. If we don't get any more plastic bags from supermarkets, how are we to bag our refuse?
Dependence on plastic bags in unsustainable
Letter from Yeo Chi Ming, Melbourne, Australia
Straits Times Forum 14 Jun 08;
I REFER to Mr Daniel Wang's letter on Monday, 'Phasing out plastic bags: A dissenting voice', and would like to point out some errors in his argument.
While it is true that 100 per cent of our waste is incinerated, it does not disappear into thin air after incineration. The waste is simply reduced in volume so it takes up less space at the landfill on Pulau Semakau, to lengthen the time to fill it up.
Mr Wang's assertion that burning waste, including plastic bags, does no harm to the environment is also false because burning plastic, at whatever temperature, releases harmful chemicals like dioxins that pose a risk not only to the environment, but also to our health.
While I do not favour an outright ban on plastic bags, for we need them to line our trash bins, I would argue that supermarkets and other retailers stop giving them out with purchases. I have been offered ridiculously small plastic bags which have no potential for re-use, just to hold cups of takeaway soya-bean milk (which I turned down).
My suggestion is to make plastic bags available only by buying them at a premium (and not a token sum), so people will buy only what they need. Retailers should be mandated to issue only biodegradable paper bags. And most important, the authorities should start a nationwide recycling and education campaign where Singaporeans must separate recyclables from other waste before disposal, as in many other developed countries.
I suggest anyone with an interest in this issue do a search online for the article, 'Trash and burn: Singapore's waste problem', which is available from several sources. Our current lifestyle and dependence on plastic bags is unsustainable, both to Singapore and to the earth as a whole.
Reusable bags not meant to completely replace plastic bags
Esther Tan, Projects Manager, Singapore Environment Council
Today Online 14 Jun 08;
I REFER to the letters “It’s all in the bags (June 4) and “Reusable bags still not as eco-friendly as recycled bags” (June 5). The Singapore Environment Council (SEC) thanks the writers for their views.
The aim of the Bring Your Own Bag Day (BYOBD) campaign was never to completely eliminate the use of plastic bags. Rather, the goal is to reduce the number of plastic bags tossed out each year.
This would include smaller plastic bags that have a lower rate of being reused. Currently, Singaporeans use 2.5 billion plastic bags a year, which works out to be roughly 600 per person, per year.
While there is probably a percentage of consumers like the letter writers, who only take enough plastic bags for their use, there is also a percentage of consumers who take more than what is needed.
Some shoppers make trips to the supermarket to buy groceries for an entire week and for them, a handful of reusable bags is not enough to carry their purchases. By making the reusable bag ubiquitous enough, there should not be any excuse for shoppers not to use them.
On the point that the Government should impose a plastic bag tax, the SEC feels it may not be a sustainable solution.
Continued education and awareness-raising may yield slower results but it will have a longer-lasting effect. Furthermore, unless a different way of collecting refuse can be implemented in public housing blocks, plastic bags will always be required to bag trash.
The SEC agrees that there is no need to buy reusable bags when one already has these bags at home. The concept of reducing waste should extend to all packaging and consumer products, not just plastic bags.
If one already has enough reusable bags at home, our advice is not to buy or collect any more. Consumers should use their own discretion to refuse reusable bags that are given for free. Excess reusable bags can also be given to other family members or friends. In this way, one can help spread the message to others.
We would also like to point out that the non-woven bags commonly sold at supermarkets are made from polypropylene (PP), which is technically a recyclable material. There is another type of shopping bag made from natural fibres such as jute or hemp. Bags made from 100-per-cent natural fibres can actually be used for composting.
Bags made from recycled material are not readily available in Singapore. Bags made from scrap (reusable) material such as tarpaulin are available but usually come at a premium price as these are marketed as exclusive fashion items.
All of these have the potential to be reused hundreds to thousands of times more than the average plastic bag and consumers can decide which will best suit their needs.
Why blame plastic bags? Fault lies in their careless use
Letter from Paul Chan, Straits Times Forum 16 Jun 08;
THE letter, 'Who says burning plastic does no harm?' (ST Online Forum, June 11), by Miss Dell Marie Butler smacks of gross exaggeration of one negative aspect of the ubiquitous plastic bag.
Before we condemn plastic bags further, let us review the good things about them.
They contribute to happy grocery shopping and have been good bin-liners and handy disposable bags for the past 50 years.
Plastic bags are one of the most energy- and material-efficient products. In terms of cost, hygiene, odour, weight, waterproofing, ruggedness and convenience, paper or fabric bags cannot hold a candle to it.
If people respect and treat plastic bags properly, drains and animals would not get choked up. It's the man that kills - not the gun.
It is more a question of education than shunning the product. Why blame the humble plastic bags?
Only 2 per cent of crude oil in the world is used to produce plastic bags. Eighty-five per cent of crude is burnt as fuel or used for heating.
The change to paper or biodegradable bags would not help reduce global warming because manufacturing 'bioplastic' materials produces more carbon dioxide and uses up more land and water resources.
Chopping down four times more trees to produce plastic- equivalent paper bags and burning them later may cause more greenhouse gases.
Supermarkets would do the society a great service if they encourage customers to reduce, re-use and recycle plastic bags.
No rationale for total ban on use of plastic bags
Reply from SEC, Straits Times Forum 16 Jun 08;
THE Singapore Environment Council appreciates the various views reflected in last Monday's letters, 'Phasing out plastic bags: A dissenting voice' and 'Outright ban better'.
Unlike other countries, the majority of Singaporean households require and reuse plastic bags to hold refuse before disposing it into rubbish chutes or bins. So, we do not see the rationale for a total ban on the use of plastic bags in Singapore.
Having said that, we do observe that some shoppers have the tendency to take more plastic bags than they need. In addition, a lot of the small-volume plastic bags are often used only once and not used to bag rubbish. As a result, plastic bags that are not reused are usually thrown away and this is a waste of resources.
In order to promote environmental consciousness, the Singapore Environment Council decided to initiate the weekly Bring Your Own Bag Day campaign, in partnership with major retailers and supermarkets. The aim is to reinforce the message that shoppers should take plastic bags only when needed and to remember to take along their own shopping bags.
In this way, everyone can help reduce wastage and conserve resources for future generations.
I would like to thank the writers for their interest in the subject.
Howard Shaw
Executive Director
Singapore Environment Council
Read more!
Posts
visitors since Nov 07