.
Feedback

Poll: Should Your Town Ban Single-Use Plastic Grocery Bags?

Solana Beach becomes first city in the county to ban plastic grocery bags at stores, restaurants.

After Solana Beach became the first city in the county to ban single-use plastic grocery bags at retail outlets, Councilman Mike Nichols said:  “I’m proud … that we’re doing this. I hope that we’re not the last.”  In Lemon Grove, Patch columnist Corky Lang recently wrote:  “I have to draw a line in the sand. This wasteful practice is killing our environment, and quite simply has to stop.” Will Solana Beach’s action lead to a ban-the-bags movement here or end up in the trash bin of local history?

fryder April 28, 2012 at 12:43 pm
It would save the businesses the cost of buying the plastic bags.
Cassandra April 28, 2012 at 01:02 pm
Reusable bags, hands down. They are better for the environment and eliminate the need for plastic and/or paper bags. They are sturdier and rarely break. They don't add unnecessary additional plastic and/or paper bags to landfills. You are also preventing the bags from potentially harming wildlife in the event that your plastic bags find their way to the ocean or other wildlife habitats. Plastic bags are oil-based, and that will become an increasing issue as our oil numbers continue to drop. Just recently, there has been a push from Shell to begin drilling in the Arctic -- a sensitive area of the planet with ice melting earlier and earlier every year -- because we need that oil. But if a spill like the Deepwater Horizon spill in 2010 occurred there, the area would be utterly devastated.
To me, there's no competition. Reusable bags are best.
Tom Yarnall April 28, 2012 at 01:40 pm
I wash them only if I put dog poop in them.
Wendy Birnbaum April 28, 2012 at 01:46 pm
Although I have several reusable grocery bags in my trunk, I too was forgetting to bring them into the store. I put a reminder on my phone which notifies me every time I pull up to my grocery store now....".BRING BAGS", it barks! Voila now I remember!
W. Mike Marshall April 28, 2012 at 02:11 pm
Well intended, I bought the reusable bags but always forgot them in the van until one day as the clerk was loading up groceries my 12 year old daughter insisted on running out to get them and use them! Yeah for us! I was impressed at how strong they were, no plastic bag ripping, no trash and it held the groceries more securely without getting crushed, so I am now a big fan of reusable+just turn into out and wash once in a while and they stay clean! I'm SOLD!
Debi April 28, 2012 at 03:07 pm
I personally use reusable bags. I just see this ban as more government intrusion of what I can and can do.
Larry April 28, 2012 at 03:51 pm
Not eveyone has the reusable bags, so businesses will have to offer an alternative to plastic.
Larry April 28, 2012 at 04:08 pm
Here's the good news, Santee won't be passing such a ban.
anthony p banaga April 28, 2012 at 04:51 pm
Lets ban them, the sooner we can adapt.
Josephina DiSalvo April 28, 2012 at 08:59 pm
Ansolutely and ASAP It is our duty to our health & survival safeguard the sealife and earth we rely on to sustain McKay Jenkins book What's Gotten Into Us
Www.mckayjenkins.com. Is a powerful source of current information on plastic and it's toxicity on human and environment This is not a economical or political issue, it is a human survival issue BAG IT documentary aired on KPBS has details of the life cycle of plastic from bags to water bottle containers and their life cycle and negative impact on us in Carlsbad to a village in China and ocean between suffering the continuation illnesses and affects more articles like this are needed posing the questions and linking us to information, remedies and action each one if us can impliment
Larry April 28, 2012 at 09:18 pm
Eh, not so much.
Larry April 28, 2012 at 09:19 pm
Nah, we got a smoking ban and power plant to fight.
Doug Curlee April 28, 2012 at 11:00 pm
congratulations, josephina..
that is the longest single sentence i've ever seen written in my life.. i've read it three times..i;m still not sure what you said.. but it was a long trip getting to it.. doug
Larry April 29, 2012 at 11:21 am
I have one word for you people, takeout.
What will restaurants serve takeout foot to us in if these bags are banned? What's next, the styrofoam containers that takeout food is served in? "Save the enviornment!" Heck with that, a guy's gotta eat.
againstthegrain April 29, 2012 at 02:21 pm
Single use bags are on the way out of use in the US, though perhaps not as fast as needed, but the trend is definitely moving in that direction, at least on the E/W coasts. European grocery and department stores were years ahead of the US with multiple bagging options, including free single-single use bags (which few customers seem to opt for because the bags tend to be thinner and even more flimsy than the single-use bags in the US). Most Europeans I know and have observed seem to prefer the option to purchase sturdier reusable plastic bags at the checkout stand for a nominal charge and later reuse the bags over and over. Increasingly, US stores and customers have adopted a similar strategy, and, at least in the stores I frequent, customers seem to be readily embracing the sturdy reusable bag option. Single-use bags might be reusable for some purposes like lining wastepaper cans, etc, but they are more often than not prone to leaks, developing holes & big splits, making them rather unreliable for substantial reuse. Composting, recycling, and purposefully not buying products with excessive packaging reduces the necessity for many plastic waste bags.
BTW, I've noticed that very few grocery stores in Europe provide any bagging service at all - the customers must bag their purchases themselves, no matter how large the number of grocery items. Maybe that has something to do with the European habit of reusing sturdier bags.
Tom Yarnall April 29, 2012 at 09:00 pm
Woe is me. Another personal favorite being taken away by the brain washed environmental freaks. What's next, the black garbage can liner? Say it ain't so!!.
Komfort May 9, 2012 at 10:31 am
Sickening...
http://www.m.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/news/20120508/norovirus-outbreak-traced-reusable-grocery-bag?src=RSS_PUBLIC
Selina Forte May 9, 2012 at 12:41 pm
A little misleading, don't you think? It was because the bag was in the restroom where the first girl got sick. However, to avoid things like this, put your bags in the wash from time to time.
Marianne West May 9, 2012 at 01:10 pm
I used to own a small business and the cost of plastic bags is enormous. Shoppers should bring their own bags or baskets. It is not difficult once you get into the habit. Most of Europe can do it- so can we. If you own a business and want to offer an alternative, offer it for sale with a profit.
Komfort May 9, 2012 at 01:12 pm
Since the title of the article, and the article itself, and what you gleaned from the article form a perfect chorus, I fail to recognise what is misleading.
I do like your suggestion to use more of our limited water to wash the bags. That seems like a good way to send more pollutants down the drain, also. A win-win.
Larry May 9, 2012 at 01:37 pm
"more pollutants down the drown"?
As in the sewer?
Komfort May 9, 2012 at 01:58 pm
Misquoting me is misleading.
Larry May 9, 2012 at 02:54 pm
Sorry, I drowned when I should have drained.
Selina Forte May 9, 2012 at 03:43 pm
I really don't see how throwing a couple bags in with laundry you are already doing is throwing more pollutants down the drain.
Kevin George May 9, 2012 at 03:53 pm
This Country used to be all about choice.
How about this: Those that want to use environmentally friendly reusable bags use reusable bags. Those that want the convenience of plastic or have another use for them use plastic. The problem starts when some people think they know what other people need.
Steven Bartholow (Editor) May 9, 2012 at 04:04 pm
But, shouldn't the shop have the CHOICE not to provide plastic bags?
Kevin George May 9, 2012 at 04:52 pm
Absolutely Steve, the shop can voluntarily do what they want in regard to bags, but that is not the question here.
When you are talking about a City sanctioned ban you have removed choice from everyone. That store could choose to not provide bags, hopefully the people in favor of reusable bags would patronize that store because of that fact and improve business. Others may not patronize them because they don't provide bags. That's my point, give people a choice and let the market decide. as opposed to deciding for everyone what they need or prefer.
Komfort May 9, 2012 at 04:59 pm
And Tom Cruise didn't see how the cars used in "Days of Thunder" could be part of the problem either.
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=2026&dat=19900419&id=3yYuAAAAIBAJ&sjid=r9AFAAAAIBAJ&pg=3070,2632007
M Clark April 6, 2013 at 11:27 am
I agree. I reuse my plastic bags for many things that otherwise I'd need to purchase some type of moisture proof bag, including picking up dog crap. I also have read several reports of food borne illness being spread by the reusable cloth like bags. San Francisco with the highest infection rate, leader in the reusable bag idea. So add in the energy of washing the cloth bags to avoid cross contamination. You might as well throw in the expense of getting sick too because you know taking the bags back and forth from the car to the washer and back into the trunk, so they are available will not happen for the average busy shopper. I wise these Eco-fanatics would realize they are not going to change climate by their piddley efforts. If you could remove all carbon footprint on the entire globe it would not even make a half of a degree of change. Man is not as powerful as he thinks.
M Clark April 6, 2013 at 11:38 am
Just make the grocery bags biodegradable and get a life! So much BS energy on crap. I'm not going to do the cloth sacks. I already have refused the pay for your bag thing and made the checker load the shit into the cart without bags and put it I in my trunk. I do the same at Costco because I am not dealing with the cumbersome boxes the try to push off on me.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Encinitas Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Dr. Michele Drake June 19, 2013 at 11:50 am
The benefit garage and bake sale is this Saturday, June 22 from 7 a.m. to noon at 1463 Golden SunsetRead More Drive in San Marcos (San Elijo Hills). Here's the link to the event: http://encinitas.patch.com/groups/events/p/drake-center-garage-sale-to-benefit-autism-therapy-dog_3a2145e8
Dr. Michele Drake June 19, 2013 at 11:50 am
All donated items can be dropped off at The Drake Center, located at 195 N. El Camino Real inRead More Encinitas.
Mary E June 19, 2013 at 04:01 pm
do you get a donation receipt for tax purposes?
Vicki Campbell June 17, 2013 at 04:42 pm
Prop A will help residents and stop greedy developers from buying city council. Vote YES
Rick Moore June 18, 2013 at 09:27 am
I wholeheartedly agree with the recommendation that folks read the initiative. When you readRead More sections 6 and 9, you will see that Prop A sets a 30-foot or 2-story ceiling across the entire city, overriding lower height limits in many areas. The Downtown Specific Plan limits residences to 22-26 feet, as detailed on the DEMA website, so Prop A would actually allow the building of taller homes. It makes no exemptions or allowances for historic buildings like La Paloma, church towers or other structures over 30 feet high; the only exceptions are medical complexes and public high schools (see clause 6.2). Rebuilding or renovating (more than 50%) would require expensive public votes. Should the SRF be required to pay for an election to rebuild the Lotus Tower? Such contingencies are allowed for in our Historic Overlay Zone, which would clearly be overridden by Prop A. So is the Encinitas Preservation Association's plan to convert one of the boathouses to a museum. Again, Prop A would require an election (see section 4.1, clause e), which the EPA cannot afford. Prop A would thus favor large developers who have the money, time, lawyers and other resources to campaign for their project. How many nonprofits and small businessmen can afford to spend a minimum $30,000 just to get their project on a general election ballot (upwards of $300,000 for a special election like this one)? Yes, folks, please read the initiative, especially Section 9, which lays waste to anything that conflicts with it. That's why this has been dubbed Propzilla. I trust that most Encinitas citizens are smart enough to see that this meausre is deeply flawed, problematic and counter-productive. We can find much better ways to limit growth and preserve community character.
BlueAngel2 June 18, 2013 at 10:20 am
SAVE ENCINITAS FROM RANCID DEVELOPERS. VOTE YES ON PROP A!
BlueAngel2 June 15, 2013 at 09:47 pm
It would NOT surprise me. I thought we dumped Stocks. Why is he still around?
Encinitas YES on A June 16, 2013 at 02:44 pm
My YES on Prop. A sign was stolen yesterday. Other YES on Prop. A signs are disappearing. YetRead More another deceptive and untruthful mailer from the opponents of Prop. A was in my mail box. There's a shrillness and desperation in their opposition. They can't rely on facts and fair play. Polling data not looking good?
BlueAngel2 June 16, 2013 at 03:17 pm
YES ON PROP A will be victorious!
BlueAngel2 June 8, 2013 at 11:20 am
It just goes to show if Stocks or any of his puppets are involved, you will not hear the truth aboutRead More this proposition. They continue to confuse the issue. Please do not throw your vote away to ruin our city and enhance the developer's pockets who do not care what they do to our beautiful Encinitas. Vote YES on PROP A!
Status Quo June 19, 2013 at 11:53 am
Looks very much like your Prop A will pass, though 'BA2's tactic seems to be part of the problemRead More also.
TB-ENC June 7, 2013 at 02:01 pm
How is this not a racist group with Hispanics in California at 14 million second behind whites atRead More 14.8 million. We only need one chamber to represent all Californians.
BlueAngel2 June 8, 2013 at 02:09 pm
So any group other than white is a racist group?
Miranda Klassen June 5, 2013 at 10:39 am
Congrats to all on the groundbreaking. Reesey has done an incredible job with making Lux what it isRead More today!
BlueAngel2 June 4, 2013 at 10:40 am
Vote YES on PROP A! The City Council is not experienced in real estate, zoning, construction orRead More development to make decisions for us.
CardiffCreature June 4, 2013 at 10:44 am
Prop A will not control growth. It will make sure that BOTH the council and the public get toRead More directly weigh in on the deals being brokered between big developers and the city. This won't end the indirect developer subsidies, but it sure will help.
Lynn Marr June 6, 2013 at 02:26 am
Yes, it will help to slow growth, by making sure that the public approves raising height limits orRead More upzoning, for developments over the parameters of a MAXIMUM of 30 ft. and two stories. Lower set height limits will not be repealed, because they are not in conflict with the initiative or the General Plan. David Ahlgren's fear and speculation is not backed up by one single fact. He just raises the usual building industry "mantra" of alleged risks created by unnamed "unintended consequences." Council's attempt at a preemptive ordinance does NOT guarantee that will be placed on the ballot in 2014, and does NOT eliminate other loopholes such as the "less-than-5-acre" exception, the "categorization of intensity of use" exception, and the height limit exception. The only loophole that Council's drafted ordinance affects is Council's ability to vote by a 4/5 supermajority on upzoing if it is done with respect to a "significant public benefit." Not only is Council's recently drafted ordinance NOT guaranteed, in that a future Council could reverse it, if it is not enacted through a public vote, but also Council's attempt at preempting the "right to vote on upzoning and raising height limits initiative" DOESN"T eliminate the other loopholes that still exist in our General Plan, Policy 3.12., which exceptions I've spelled out, here.