The Masked Tulip Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 This needs to go in off-topic but it deserves even 5 minutes in the main forum. Why you need to use your ‘environmentally friendly’ cotton carrier bag 171 times to be green Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1358885/Why-need-use-environmentally-friendly-cotton-carrier-bag-171-times-green.html#ixzz1EX9rwqRn Link to post Share on other sites
Tiger Woods? Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 This needs to go in off-topic but it deserves even 5 minutes in the main forum. Why you need to use your ‘environmentally friendly’ cotton carrier bag 171 times to be green Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1358885/Why-need-use-environmentally-friendly-cotton-carrier-bag-171-times-green.html#ixzz1EX9rwqRn Just another piece of the CO2 focussed madness. The thing about cotton is that it doesn't become a long lived part of the great pacific garbage vortex. I'd be happy to make a little more CO2 to use something more biodegradable than a plastic bag. Link to post Share on other sites
OnlyMe Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 Using a thin plastic bag equates to generating 1.57kg of carbon dioxide. Don't believe that number. Link to post Share on other sites
The Masked Tulip Posted February 20, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 Surely cotton has to be better all round. As a kid we had a family shopping bag. Heck, we even kept the one egg box and took it back for refills time and time again until it wore out. Link to post Share on other sites
billybong Posted February 20, 2011 Report Share Posted February 20, 2011 Using a thin plastic bag equates to generating 1.57kg of carbon dioxide. Don't believe that number. Me neither. They're saying it equates to about the weight of food you could normally carry in a thin plastic bag. If that's the case every time a thin plastic bag goes out of the shop the CO2 generated, contents and all, must be a power stations worth. So a single cotton bag produces 171x1.57kg of CO2 = getting on for 1/3rd of a tonne of CO2. GLOBAL WARMING ALERT!!! The whole article is a total stretch - to say the very least. Worthy of a Daily Mash special report. Link to post Share on other sites
RufflesTheGuineaPig Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 This needs to go in off-topic but it deserves even 5 minutes in the main forum.Why you need to use your ‘environmentally friendly’ cotton carrier bag 171 times to be green Like everyone else, I don't use them to protect the environment, I use them because they don't fall apart while I'm halfway accross the carpark with heavy shopping. Link to post Share on other sites
ChumpusRex Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 Using a thin plastic bag equates to generating 1.57kg of carbon dioxide. Don't believe that number. That number is preposterous. A typical thin film plastic carrier bag as used by the major supermarkets, as their standard bags, weighs about 8 grams. Typically you need petroleum equal to 2x the film weight to manufacture it. From there, CO2 emissions are about 3x the weight of the fuel source. (We'll ignore transportation energy costs, as bulk transport is so energy efficient that its costs are negligible). So, 1 typical carrier bag produces around 50 grams of CO2 - slightly more if you include transportation and disposal costs. Of course, that's for a thin film bag - one of the heavy duty, large 'bag for life' type bags is a very different story. These are much heavier - and I'd easily believe 10-20x the weight, which make the figure of 1.57 kg pretty reasonable. Link to post Share on other sites
Beggar Thy Children Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 .Why you need to use your ‘environmentally friendly’ cotton carrier bag 171 times to be green OK, what's the problem, I probably have used each of my 'bags for life' far more than 171 times. Link to post Share on other sites
Frank Hovis Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 OK, what's the problem, I probably have used each of my 'bags for life' far more than 171 times. Um, yes. And I prefer them anyway for the strength reason noted. Link to post Share on other sites
Papa Serf Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 Like everyone else, I don't use them to protect the environment, I use them because they don't fall apart while I'm halfway accross the carpark with heavy shopping. +1 The plastic bags of late are useless, really thin. Link to post Share on other sites
Bloo Loo Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 +1 The plastic bags of late are useless, really thin. need to double bag a box of cornflakes.....A: the handles stretch and B: the corners penetrate the bag. Link to post Share on other sites
Lepista Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 "Bag for life" is pointless when you look at the packaging of the other items you get. What percentage of the landfill is from plastic bags, compared to, say, meat packaging? At least you can recycle the plastic bags around the house. Link to post Share on other sites
Bloo Loo Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 "Bag for life" is pointless when you look at the packaging of the other items you get. What percentage of the landfill is from plastic bags, compared to, say, meat packaging? At least you can recycle the plastic bags around the house. good point....although maybe we'd be better of adding meat sticks in the form of Bankers and Political associates to the landfill. Link to post Share on other sites
SarahBell Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 I wish I could convince everyone that "reusing" a plastic bag as a bin bag isn't actually useful. We have a series of bags for life from various supermarkets ... it's only tesco that replace them free when they wear out though... Making a cotton bag from an old piece of cotton clothing is probably more sensible than buying a specific bag. There was one village where they made loads of them and gave them away to get rid of carrier bags. One of our poundshops charges 1p for bags. The stats about CO on bags seem to be irrelevant. Carry that 1 cotton bag with you every where and you'll probably use it a couple of times a week... so it'll be sorted in a year... The same plastic thin bag isn't going to be up to that sort of use. Link to post Share on other sites
Rare Bear Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 Like everyone else, I don't use them to protect the environment, I use them because they don't fall apart while I'm halfway accross the carpark with heavy shopping. I take the trolley to the car. Link to post Share on other sites
gruffydd Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 MT, The Welsh Assembly commissioned a quashed report on glass recycling. Found the most eco-friendly method of disposal was landfill rather than recycling. Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh Link to post Share on other sites
gruffydd Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 I reuse my plastic bags - quick, new LCA needed! Link to post Share on other sites
57percent Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 Anyone have any real numbers on this stuff? I do most of my shopping unplanned. If I'm passing a shop, I'll buy a couple of plastic bags full of shopping and walk home. Surely this is better than driving the car there with bags for life in the boot? On the biodegrading thing. If you bury something in the ground do you care if it degrades or not. In fact, isn't it better if it doesn't? Link to post Share on other sites
Tired of Waiting Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 This needs to go in off-topic but it deserves even 5 minutes in the main forum. Why you need to use your ‘environmentally friendly’ cotton carrier bag 171 times to be green Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1358885/Why-need-use-environmentally-friendly-cotton-carrier-bag-171-times-green.html#ixzz1EX9rwqRn A similar "mistake" is ignoring that heat from incandescent light bulbs is not a "waste" in Britain for at least 3/4 of the year. Link to post Share on other sites
SarahBell Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 A similar "mistake" is ignoring that heat from incandescent light bulbs is not a "waste" in Britain for at least 3/4 of the year. If you huddle round a lightbbulb maybe. But heat rises in Britain for at least 4/4 of the year. Link to post Share on other sites
pablopatito Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 I wish I could convince everyone that "reusing" a plastic bag as a bin bag isn't actually useful. Why not? Link to post Share on other sites
SarahBell Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 Why not? You use it only once. It's the same as throwing it away after one use. Reusing it should involve using it many times until it wears out. Link to post Share on other sites
abaxas Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 Tough reusable bag that is easier to pack your shopping in. Or Crap non biodegradable bag that splits throwing your cornflakes all over the car park. You decide. I already have and not for green reasons. Link to post Share on other sites
schmunk Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 You use it only once. It's the same as throwing it away after one use. Reusing it should involve using it many times until it wears out. My local council requires 'black bin' rubbish to be bagged. Are you suggesting that, rather than reusing carrier bags, I should be purchasing bin liners, which are also made of plastic? Or do you have a better solution? Link to post Share on other sites
Tired of Waiting Posted February 21, 2011 Report Share Posted February 21, 2011 If you huddle round a lightbbulb maybe. But heat rises in Britain for at least 4/4 of the year. And air also circulates for (exactly) 4/4 of the year. This heat argument is not mine. It is well known. And generally accepted as correct. Yours is a different argument: insulation. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.