Right: Storm in a teacup? There seem to be many who consider there are more important environmental issues than the banning or otherwise of plastic straws, but both sides have waged enthusiastic campaigns.
 Found a word you're not familiar with? Double-click that word to bring up a dictionary reference to it. The dictionary page includes an audio sound file with which to actually hear the word said. |
Arguments against banning plastic straws in Australia
1. The contribution plastic straws make to Australia's and the world's plastics pollution is very small
Critics of the banning of plastic straws by many food retailers argue that such measures divert attention from more significant problems which will be more difficult to address. Plastic straws are a small and for most people completely discretionary plastic product which it is relatively easy to go without. The real issue, critics argue, is the many more necessary and desired plastic products which make up the vast amount of Australia's plastics consumption.
Single-use plastic shopping bags and drinking straws make up less than 1% of the more than 100 kilograms of plastic that each Australian uses every year. According to Federal Government reports, Australians probably use about 40,000 tonnes of single-use bags and straws; Australia uses about 3.5 million tonnes of total plastic.
Most of Australia's plastics consumption comes from the use of other plastic consumer goods which it will be far harder to reduce. Some 66 percent of the total plastic Australians consume is through packaging, which keeps goods and food products transportable, safe and hygienic. More plastic is now going into Australians' growing collections of digital equipment (15 devices per household); safer, more affordable cars (being built with less metal every year), and medical care for an ageing population.
Critics of plastic straw bans note that this pattern has been found in other developed nations. According to a recent report by environmental group Better Alternatives Now (BAN), plastic straws and stirrers (grouped together in this report but not in all bans) comprised about 7 percent of plastic items found along the California coastline, by piece. Compared to plastic bags at 9 percent or plastic bottle caps at 17 percent. When taken by weight, a report by Jambeck Research Group places plastic straws at only .03 percent of aggregate plastic in the oceans themselves, suggesting that straws' lightness and buoyancy lead them to end up overrepresented on the coastline.
The same point was made by Adam Minter in comment published by Bloomberg Opinion on June 8, 2018. Minter stated, 'This well-intentioned campaign assumes that single-use plastics, such as straws and coffee stirrers, have much to do with ocean pollution. And that assumption is based on some highly dubious data. Activists and news media often claim that Americans use 500 million plastic straws per day, for example, which sounds awful. But the source of this figure turns out to be a survey conducted by a nine-year-old. Similarly, two Australian scientists estimate that there are up to 8.3 billion plastic straws scattered on global coastlines. Yet even if all those straws were suddenly washed into the sea, they'd account for about .03 percent of the 8 million metric tons of plastics estimated to enter the oceans in a given year.'
Considered on a global scale, critics claim the impact a ban on plastic straws would have on the pollution of the world's oceans is relatively minor. Some critics of moves to ban these products point to the fact that plastic straws, if measured per item, make up only four percent of ocean debris. Such criticisms suggest that environmentalists should be focusing their efforts on more consequential issues such as fishing debris and many critics assert that, even if enacted globally, plastic straw bans would fail to significantly reduce the plastics contamination of the oceans.
2. The contribution Australia makes to the world's plastics pollution is small
Opponents of plastic straw bans argue that actions such as these over represent the significance of the contribution that Australia makes to the world's plastics pollution problem. According to this line of argument, the vast majority of the world's plastic pollution comes from Asia and Africa and therefore it is on these pollution sources that attention needs to be focused.
In February 2015, Science published a report from a team of researchers in the United States and Australia led by Jenna Jambeck, an environmental engineer at the University of Georgia, which had analysed plastic waste levels in the world's oceans. They found that China and Indonesia are the top sources of plastic bottles, bags and other rubbish clogging up global sea lanes. Together, both nations account for more than a third of plastic detritus in global waters.
The international study calculated that 192 nations produced a total of 275 million tonnes of plastic waste. Regarding Australia's contribution, Australia was not placed among the top 20 of the world's plastic polluters and contributed less than 0.01 million tonnes annually. Ecologist Dr Chris Wilcox, from the CSIRO, observed, 'We don't have a very large population and we have well developed waste disposal systems.'
On August 7, 2018, Statista published a report by data journalist, Niall McCarthy which restated the finding that the largest amounts of plastic pollution tend not to come from established, economically well-developed countries. McCarthy noted, 'In 2010, 8.8 million metric tons of mismanaged plastic waste came from China with an estimated 3.53 million metric tons of it ending up in the ocean. A total of 3.2 million metric tons of mismanaged plastic waste came from Indonesia and it is estimated that 1.29 million metric tons became plastic marine debris. The United States is also guilty of polluting oceans with plastic, but at a much lower level than China. Annually, 0.11 million metric tons of waterborne plastic garbage comes from the United States.'
The countries listed as contributing the largest amounts of mismanaged plastic waste to global waters, ranked in order of the size of their contribution in 2010 were: China, Indonesia, Philippines, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, Egypt, Thailand, Malaysia, Nigeria, Bangladesh and Brazil.
On June 8, 2018, the World Economic Forum published an article highlighting the major sources of the world's plastic pollution. It stated, 'Researchers were able to estimate that just 10 river systems carry 90 percent of the plastic that ends up in the ocean.
Eight of them are in Asia: the Yangtze; Indus; Yellow; Hai He; Ganges; Pearl; Amur; Mekong; and two in Africa - the Nile and the Niger...
The Yangtze is Asia's longest river and also one of world's most ecologically important rivers. The river basin is home to almost 500 million people (more than one third of China's population). It is also the biggest carrier of plastic pollution to the ocean.'
On July 26, 2018, The American Council on Science and Health published a comment by Alex Berezow. Berezow observed, 'Why are these countries such big polluters? Well, they're poor. They don't have good infrastructure for dealing with waste. As countries become wealthier, they are better able to clean up their messes. This is a phenomenon known as the environmental Kuznets curve. Instead of banning plastic straws, we should be focusing our efforts on helping developing countries become wealthier and healthier.'
3. Recycling of plastic straws and other plastics is a better solution
Critics of measures such as the banning of plastic straws argue that with appropriate ingenuity it should be possible to develop a means of recycling these items. On a broader scale, critics are concerned that a focus on banning any plastic product diverts attention from more significant plastic management issues, such as the small amount of the plastics which Australians use which are recycled each year. Banning, they argue, can never be the solution as we cannot eliminate all plastic products from our lives. What we must do is dispose of them responsibly and recycle.
With regard to the recycling of plastic straws, it has been noted that although it is difficult, it is possible. On July 30, 2018, 9 News televised a report outlining convenience store chain 7-Eleven's efforts to recycle plastic straws and disposable coffee cups. The report stated, 'Convenience store 7-Eleven has launched a new nationwide recycling program for plastic straws. Dedicated bins will be installed in more than 200 stores across Australia today, allowing people to recycle straws along with takeaway coffee cups.
The initiative is in partnership with Simply Cups, which earlier this year teamed up with the brand to rescue takeaway cups from landfill. '
The convenience store chains' chief executive officer, Angus McKay, stated, ' A problem this size requires multiple solutions and we want to drive a behaviour change and help people dispose of their takeaway cups and straws responsibly.'
Critics further note, that though recycling plastic straws is desirable, the far more urgent problem is Australia's failure to recycle the huge amounts of plastic waste it creates from other sources. It has been noted that Australia currently recycles only about 12 percent of all the plastic it consumes. The majority of what is collected from Australian homes and businesses is sent to overseas plants for reprocessing and remanufacturing. Only about 150,000 tonnes of the 3.5 million tonnes of plastic Australia consumes annually is recycled in Australia. A new National Waste Policy will set a target of 70 percent recycling of packaging plastic - for which there will need to be massive market and infrastructure development.
The same point has been made within business communities in the United States. An executive at the Plastics Industry Association has claimed that the best way to reduce the flow of plastic waste into the world's oceans is for governments to invest more in recycling and waste management
Scott DeFife, vice president of government affairs for the trade group Plastics Industry Association, stated, 'Banning a specific product that is one small part of the larger problem is not a solution to the marine debris issue.' DeFife went on to claim that such bans give a 'false sense of accomplishment' and that a real solution to the problem will only come when government invests more in managing trash.
4. Plastic straws are necessary for some Australians with a disability
Other criticisms of the banning of plastic straws come from some disability rights activists who object to the adverse impact this ban would have on significant numbers of people with a disability.
It has been claimed that utensils such as plastic straws serve an essential role in the daily lives of some people with physical disabilities, helping them with to eat and drink. They are also used as tools to exercise the lungs. Plastic straws are claimed to be particularly important for disabled people because they are flexible, cheap and widely available.
The difficulties faced by some of those with disabilities before the development and general availability of plastic straws has been demonstrated by Dianne Laurine, a Seattle resident who has cerebral palsy, quadriplegia and no use of her extremities. Ms Laurine's carer, Bill Reeves, has stated, 'She is old enough to remember a time before plastic and everybody just used rubber straws. They ended up being disgusting, hard to clean. The advent of plastic in the 1950s changed her life.'
Alice Wong, the founder and director of the Disability Visibility Project, has explained the importance of plastic straws to maintain her own wellbeing and that of other people who suffer similarly. Wong states, 'Plastic is...an essential part of my health and wellness. With my neuromuscular disability, plastic straws are necessary tools for my hydration and nutrition.'
Critics note that a ban on plastic straws ignores the needs of those who rely on disposable plastic straws to drink independently. Reusable straws made of wood or metal can be harmful, and paper straws lack the flexibility actually to make drinking easier. Further, disability rights activists argue that targeting plastic straws can exclude disabled people from the environmental movement and lead to eco-shaming.
Advocates for those with a disability argue that there are few if any alternatives to plastic straws that are effective replacements. Alice Wong has noted, 'As demand increases for alternatives to plastic, so do the voices from the disability community sharing their concerns about how these bans will create additional labour, hurdles, and difficulties.'
It has been noted that permanent straw options, like metal or bamboo, are too hard for some people who [currently] rely on ... a plastic straw. Injury is also said to be a risk. It has also been noted that biodegradable paper straws have a tendency to disintegrate when placed into heated drinks, which poses a particular hazard for many disabled users, while porous silicone straws require cleaning immediately after use, something which it is often difficult for those with a disability to manage. Disability rights advocate Michaela Hollywood from Muscular Dystrophy UK has similarly noted some of the difficulties people with disabilities confront in their search for an alternative to plastic straws. She has stated, 'Biodegradable plastic straws melt, and many of the other environmentally friendly straws don't bend. There is no one-size-fits-all solution.'
Autism activist Wiley-Mydske has complained that through the imposition of plastic straw bans, the burden of environmental action regarding plastics reduction is being placed unfairly on the disabled. Referring to the potentially life-threatening consequences of the ban on those with disabilities, Wiley-Mydske notes, 'You [able-bodied people] won't even take the bus instead of driving your car somewhere. How many of you are willing to die for the environment?'
5. Common alternatives to plastic straws are not environmentally desirable
Those who oppose the banning of plastic straws argue that many of the alternatives offered are equally, if not more, environmentally harmful.
Some critics claim that paper straws may be as environmentally harmful a product as plastic straws. Paper straws are derived from wood and so involve the destruction of trees which are a carbon sink, helping to free the atmosphere of carbon dioxide, a major greenhouse gas. Plastic straws, on the other hand, are made from a petroleum by-product and so can be seen as a form of recycling or value-adding from the manufacture of petroleum as they are made from materials that have already been extracted and processed for other purposes. It has also been claimed that paper manufacture is more resource hungry in terms of energy and water than making polypropylene.
It has also been noted that though paper straws will decompose they are slow to do so, especially if they have been treated to make them more durable as straws. It is also argued that if they are to decompose, care must be taken with their disposal.
Paper straws are unlikely to be recycled. Aardvark Straws, a company manufacturing an environmentally-conscious paper straw product have noted, 'Even though our straws are made out of paper, most recyclers will not accept food contaminated paper products. So depending on your recycling facility, they may be, but most likely not. That is why we suggest composting our straws instead.'
Courtney Powell, founder of Elevated Enviro, a Canadian waste diversion company, has further stated, 'If these plant-based straws, these paper straws, go to the landfill, they don't decompose. Nothing really decomposes in a landfill. So it is no different than a plastic straw going there.' Powell explained that landfill operations involve spreading the garbage and covering it with dirt or gravel, removing contact with air. Without air, decomposition does not happen.
There have also been significant concerns raised about supposedly biodegradable plastic straws which have been offered as an alternative to conventional polypropylene straws by some pubs and other food outlets.
These straws are typically made of polylactic acid, or PLA. PLA is a polymer made up of small lactic acid units, an organic substance. However, it has been claimed that PLA and other bioplastics can only break down when all oxygen is removed and temperatures are constantly above 60 degrees centigrade for at least 10 days. When it does break down it still leaves behind a harmful residue of 'plastic soup' microparticles that pollute the environment and threaten life at the bottom of the food chain. It has also been noted that PLA straws are not marine degradable.