HCal wrote: ↑June 10th, 2022, 6:37 pm
I don't think the grocers have that much lobbying power here. California is a progressive state, and the legislature isn't going to backtrack on an environmental initiative just because companies complain, especially after it was approved in a referendum.
That looks like a promo video from Hilex Poly, not a scientific source of information.
The video shows the process used to recycle the plastic bags. The process and equipment is real. The video shows there is a process and you can see it through. I am sorry it is not what you want to believe, nor is it what the liars who are speaking for plastic bag bans say to city councils and state legislative bodies say (they keep lying that the bags aren't recyclable), but it is the reality that there is a process and it is a fairly straightforward one to recycle the bags.
The grocers combined with the union absolutely have that much lobbying power. The grocers, specifically Safeway and the statewide lobbying group for the grocers, and UFCW are why the law was even passed in the first place in 2014 or whenever it was. You may not recall, but the law failed once during that legislative session because UFCW did not support it. Some kind of backroom deal was made with UFCW to get them to support it, the bill was heard a second time in that session whenever it was (2014 or whenever), and then passed.
The union has not been particularly happy with reusable bags during the COVID pandemic either. That was part of why many stores kept using thin bags months after they were supposed to use them back in 2020. Also part of why to this day many stores still refuse to handle customer reusable bags. They should probably put gloves on and handle the reusable bags. Oh wait, the gloves are made of a plastic like material too. I wonder how much plastic is in the gloves (that would be used once by the cashier to handle one customer's reusable bags)... see why this whole bag regulation is such a complete failure?
The outcome I see that will make everyone with power happy (except the consumer- they will be the loser- since they would still have to pay a bag fee) is a statewide bag tax. Period. No regulation on the type of bag as long as it is recyclable (via the in-store drop off). This would be similar to what is in place in Chicago and Washington, DC already. The thin bags are still dispensed, but there is a tax in place of 5 or 10 cents per bag. The tax is remitted to some government fund to "promote environmental efforts" and in the mean time the store is able to just provide bags that cost a few cents. The CA grocers since they currently get to keep the entire bag fee may have some negotiation power here and could say okay so what is being proposed is a 10 cent tax- we get 5 cents of it, the government gets 5 cents of it, and at that point the government has a new revenue stream, the grocers are being "paid" by the consumer for bags and the bag cost is more than covered, and those super thick bags disappear. Paper bags (that use a gallon of water each to make) would also likely be harder to find under that scenario since the 5 cent fee the store would receive would not be enough to pay for a paper bag.
Now with this bag regulation you have two regional CA chains who put language on their bags (or the bag manufacturer provided the language to go on the bags) that is completely in line with the state law's language, yet they are being sued for that language. That is not right. That ends up costing consumers additional money as the retailers have to mess around with a lawsuit. The consumer always pays. And this sort of thing is why businesses tend to fight against additional regulation. It isn't just the regulation itself that ends up costing more money, it is side effects like this lawsuit. If there was no bag regulation, this lawsuit and its costs would not exist. And you could say well they shouldn't dispense the super thick plastic bags, then there would be no lawsuit. But the state law explicitly allows the super thick plastic bags and the state law would have never come into place, without allowing the super thick plastic bags...
At least we can agree that the super thick plastic bags need to go...
I just don't see paper bags as the correct replacement. Between the excessive water use, the cutting down of trees, and the other side of the poor utility of the paper bags (great to carry dry goods, but fall apart when wet, and not great for space purposes, attract bugs, etc.) those aren't the answer either. And the sanitation concerns have largely killed reusable bags of the plastic flock lines variety and cloth bags are not sold much. The 90's environmentalists who pushed the plastic bags combined with the retailers figured out the best solution and it was the thin plastic bag.