# data[].attributes.body
This picture is a cartoon of a fish in a water bottle. If more plastic is dumped into the ocean more and more fish will be trapped in water bottles. On the bottle it says, “How you can reduce single use plastic and save our planet.” Reduce the use of single-use plastic will save the earth and everything on it.

# data[].attributes.body
This article persuades the reader why plastic bags should not be banned. It does not completely relate to my topic because it only talks about plastic bags. I do like how the author informs the reader that plastic bag alternatives aren't necessarily better than regular plastic bag.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Let us help you live a life you love. Find tools to help you have fun and make the most out of each and every day.

# data[].attributes.body
This article was honestly really helpful to my topic because it provided liable information about my counterclaim. I really like how before you read the article it asks which side of the argument are you on, instead of it being about one side out the argument completely. It shows the reader that banning single-use plastic isn't going to solve the pollution crisis and that companies and corporations should invest in redesigning plastics.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What are single-use plastics?

Single-use plastics are plastic products which are used only once before thrown away. We often speak about this kind of plastic to speak about products like plastic bottles, coffee stirrers, plastic bags or straws.

Around 150 millions of tons of single-use plastic products are produced each year in the world? It represents half of the total world plastic production per year. Only roughly 10-13% of plastic products in the world are recycled.

Why is it controversial?

Most of plastic products are based on petroleum. Also some dangerous chemicals are used to transform petroleum into plastics. This material does not biodegrade. Instead, it breaks into small or microscope particles, releasing the chemicals used to harden the material back into the atmosphere. These particles make their way into our food and water and were already detected in our blood systems.

Moreover, plastic waste makes easily it's way into seas and oceans. Besides polluting water and beaches, these plastic objects harm and kill marine species. Together, plastic represents 70% of all marine litter items.

Why do we talk about it today?

In order to fight against marine pollution, the European Commission proposed a new legislation banning some of the most used and most polluting single-use plastic products. Among the banned products, we can find plastic cutlery, straws, plates, balloon sticks, drink stirrers and plastic cotton buds.

Also, producers of single-use plastics will have to help cover the costs of recycling and waste management, as well as awareness raising for products like cigarettes butts, drink and food containers and wrappers. Member States will have to collect 90% of single-use plastic bottles by 2025.

This directive was adopted by the European Parliament on the 27th of March.

Choose your side

The idea behind the Rift is simple: for each topic of debate, we provide you with an expertise based on a pro-con approach, written by competent and legitimate experts. We want to help you make your own opinion, and guide you on first steps to civic engagement.

What is your opinion before reading the article?
Poll Options are limited because JavaScript is disabled in your browser.

FOR
Paving the way for a sustainable production and consumption of plastics

Larissa Copello de Souza
Zero Waste Consumption and Production Campaigner, Zero Waste Europe
zerowasteeurope.eu

When it comes to plastics, and especially single-use applications, recycling alone is not enough. The production of plastics has increased 20-fold in the past half-century, and it is expected to grow even more. Single-use and short-lived plastic applications have the highest disposal rates, the lowest recyclability, and pose a major challenge to our health, ecosystems and economy.

Downstream solutions alone cannot solve the plastic pollution crisis

In fact, most of the plastics we use are designed to have a short useful life, sometimes even a matter of minutes. Although initiatives to boost collection rates and recycling are welcome, these downstream solutions alone cannot solve the plastic pollution crisis. There is just too much plastic being produced and used to be managed and handled. Instead, we need to tackle the problem at its root. Market restrictions (such as bans) on single-use plastic products are an example of upstream solutions that can help beat plastic pollution and pave the way towards a deeper systemic change in the way we consume resources and create waste.

For Zero Waste Europe (ZWE) transformational change is needed when it comes to the use of materials as a whole. In the case of plastics, as for many other materials, single-use does not make sense. We need to shift towards a sustainable production and consumption that allows us to keep within the environmental boundaries of our planet, with no hazard for people's health or our ecosystems, and in line with a circular economy (where incineration and landfill are not an option). It is our government's' interest to prioritise investment that focus on quality products that are resilient and long-lasting, rather than on short-term applications.

We need to shift towards a sustainable production and consumption that to keep within the environmental boundaries of our planet

Reducing single-use plastic is not only needed and feasible, it also has the potential to boost the local economy, while allowing savings in the management of littering and low-value waste, which has also been stressed in the UN environment report, according to which "bans on single-use plastics can be a step towards more comprehensive policies aiming at reducing the generation of plastic waste and at replacing single-use plastics with more sustainable, environmentally friendly alternatives".

Cutting on single-use plastic products, making plastics responsible by design (long-lasting, reusable, recyclable, toxic-free, and incorporating recycled content), and investing in waste prevention systems, such as reuse, are key to curb plastic pollution and ensure a more sustainable management of resources.

AGAINST
Banning Plastics Does not Solve the System Problem

Use of single-use plastics (think wrappers, straws and bags) has skyrocketed over the last few decades. Our ability to recycle these plastics at scale remains poor. Globally, 8 million metric tons of plastic trash leak into our natural spaces each year, harming wildlife, mucking up the ocean and jeopardizing people's livelihoods.

We can't just ban bad products-we must invest in alternatives

It's encouraging that governments are focusing on passing laws to fight single use plastic. Unfortunately, while these laws may reduce the most visible form of plastic pollution, it could be at the expense of other environmental impacts. That's because, somewhat ironically, disposable plastic bags require fewer resources (land, water, CO2 emissions, etc.) to produce than paper, cotton or reusable plastic bags-by a wide margin.

For example, Denmark's Ministry of Environment and Food found that you would need to reuse a paper bag at least 43 times for its per-use environmental impacts to be equal to or less than that of a typical disposable plastic bag used one time. An organic cotton bag must be reused 20,000 times to produce less of an environmental impact than a single-use plastic bag. That would be like using a cotton bag every day for nearly 55 years. (Note that these figures aggregate the bags' impact on water use, CO2 emissions, land use and more, but they do not include their impact on plastic pollution.)

Banning plastic straws is also increasingly popular. But these bans leave the impression that they solve the plastics pollution problem without much discussion of systematic solutions. As a society, we should think holistically about the products we use and their impacts. We can't just ban bad products-we must invest in alternatives.

We need to invest in redesigning plastics

Governments need to team up with private industry to address more systemic issues. We need to invest in redesigning plastics so that they can be readily broken down into their molecular units and remanufactured into new plastics of the same quality, the essence of a closed loop system. We need better recycling technology that can address the major obstacle of recycling plastics: about 25 percent of plastics collected are contaminated and therefore unusable. We need to reinvest government budgets in the infrastructure and associated policies needed for these systemic solutions. Once these technologies are deployed at a large scale, we can start recapturing the economic value of plastics, incentivizing their recovery and recycling, while minimizing plastic pollution and overconsumption of natural resources.

Banning single-use plastic bags and straws without significant further action is putting a finger on a spigot at a time when we need to suppress the tidal wave. Moreover, it may have the unintended effect of relieving public and government pressure for budget investments and comprehensive policy solutions and innovation by the private sector throughout the value chain.

What is your opinion now?
Poll Options are limited because JavaScript is disabled in your browser.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Single-use plastics: to ban or not to ban? - The Rift

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What are single-use plastics? Single-use plastics are plastic products which are used only once before thrown away. We often speak about this kind of plastic to speak about products like plastic bottles, coffee stirrers, plastic bags or straws. Around 150 millions of tons of single-use plastic products are produced each year in the world?

# data[].attributes.body
This article was posted on October 16th, 2012 so its not as reliable as an article from 2019 or 2020. I don't really like this article because it only talks about banning plastic bags and my topic is about ban plastics in general. I do like how it shows more pros for a plastic ban than cons. But with it being a pros and cons article it agrees and disagrees with my claim.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Two Sides to the Plastic Bag Ban Debate

There are two sides to every argument right? Yet when you stack the advantages of implementing a plastic bag ban against the disadvantages, one thing becomes clear - there really isn't a good reason to oppose a ban on disposable plastic bags. The reality of plastic bags is that while they are in fact recyclable, only a small percentage find their way into a recycling bin. Whereas using reusable bags made from polypropylene () utilize post-industrial/pre-consumer recycled materials that get repeated use. But more on this later in our blog.

Most plastic bags end up in landfills or as litter and no matter how you tabulate the numbers, plastic bags do not safely break down and it costs money to pick up litter. People and groups against banning plastic bags attempt to diminish the harmful and damaging realities of these facts. Most of the reasons bandied about by those who contest plastic bag bans are not so many reasons, as they are counterarguments against valid realities to implementing a ban.

Pros of Plastic Bag Bans

Plastic bag bans enhance the economy: Bans on plastic bags cause an uptick in business for reusable bag manufacturers and lead to increased employment opportunities.

Eliminating plastic bags reduces the cost of goods: Stores have to factor the cost of disposable bags into their prices. By eliminating plastic bags, stores can lower prices, helping shoppers save $18 to $30 annually.

Plastic bags are not biodegradable: When plastic bags become litter, they pollute oceans, rivers, farmlands, cities, and neighborhoods. Bans eliminate bags, which equals less litter and less pollution.

Picking up litter costs tax money: Banning plastic bags will reduce litter and allow for tax money to be redirected to more important areas.

Marine life will improve: Marine animals often mistake plastic bags for jellyfish or plankton, leading them to consume the litter and become ill or die.

Drainage infrastructures run more efficiently: Plastic litter often clogs drainage systems, causing unnecessary flooding.

Plastic bag bans reduce the need for petroleum: Banning plastic bags will minimize the dependency on the limited non-renewable resource.

Decrease the mosquito population: Discarded plastic bags collect rainwater and create a breeding ground for mosquitos, some of which could carry the West Nile Virus or Triple E Virus.

Cons of Plastic Bag Bans

Plastic bans manufacturers scale back: Bans often lead plastic bag manufacturers to scale back business and may lead to layoffs.

The upfront cost to shoppers: Plastic bag bans will require shoppers to purchase reusable bags, which can range from $1 and up.

Find an embeddable Pro and Cons image below.

Let's Get The Facts Straight!

Groups opposed to bag bans have argued that while litter does contribute to the death of thousands of marine animals each year, it is not fair to single out plastic bags as the cause. The "plastic bags aren't only to blame" argument goes on to explain that lost or abandoned fishing gear is also responsible for the wrongful death of marine animals and a plastic bag ban does not address the entire problem. This "all or nothing" rationale is not only weak, but it is also short-sighted.

Just because there is a wide variety of litter in our oceans does not mean we should sit by and not attempt to begin to fix the plastic problem. Solving parts of a problem-with products like eco-friendly reusable bags -ultimately serves to contribute to a greater solution.

Opposing groups have also claimed that cleaning up plastic bag litter is not that expensive and municipalities that claim financial savings as a result of implementing a ban are not portraying the numbers accurately. To that, we say that no matter how much money is spent cleaning up litter, it is too much. When money is directed to cleaning up litter, that means there is less money to fix infrastructure and build communities.

Who Is Behind the Opposition to Plastic Bag Bans?

It is also worth noting that those who oppose plastic bag bans are more often than, not employed by plastic bag manufacturers or lobbyists for the industry. Clearly, plastic bag manufacturers want to stay in business and thwart efforts that would force them to change their business model to one that fits with a more sustainable ideology or go out of business.

Want More of Both Sides Before You Get on Board to Ban the Bag?

If you are still undecided as to whether or not bag bans are a good choice for communities, our country, and our world, read the article Should Cities Ban Plastic Bags which our CEO found intriguing and informative and wanted to share with our FDP community. The article outlines an argument for banning plastic bags by Daniella Dimitrova Russo, co-founder and executive director of the Plastic Pollution Coalition, and is immediately followed by an argument against banning disposable plastic bags by Todd Myers, environmental director at the Washington Policy Center.

We Want to Know What YOU Think!

We want to know which side of the plastic bag ban debate you fall on and why. Please let us know in the comments below or via social media!

[Click on the image for embed code]

Photo Sources: Key Frame Studios, Factory Direct Promos

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Pros & Cons of a Plastic Bag Ban | Factory Direct Promos

# data[].attributes.body
I would say that this article is the best  I chose because it fully explains my topic. It breaks down what my topic is about. This article really helped me understand single-use plastic and everything surrounding it. It explains what single-use plastic is, why its bad, plastic and pollution, why the U.S. should ban it, major corporations that produce it, and how to avoid it. After reading this article, i would say that now I know more about single-use plastic.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What Are Single-Use Plastics?

Put simply, single-use plastics are goods that are made primarily from fossil fuel-based chemicals (petrochemicals) and are meant to be disposed of right after use-often, in mere minutes. Single-use plastics are most commonly used for packaging and serviceware, such as bottles, wrappers, straws, and bags.

Though plastic-a chain of synthetic polymers, essentially-was invented in the mid-19th century, it wasn't until the 1970s that its popularity skyrocketed. Manufacturers began replacing traditionally paper or glass staples with lighter or more durable and affordable plastic alternatives; plastic jugs replaced milk jars, for instance. Since the 1950s, 8.3 billion metric tons of plastics have been produced, and half of that in the past 15 years alone.

There are many uses for plastic that are not only reasonable but important, such as surgical gloves, or straws for people with disabilities. But these cases make up a small fraction of single-use plastic. According to a 2017 study, more than half of non-fiber plastic, which excludes synthetic fabrics like polyester and nylon, comes from plastic packaging alone, much of which is for single-use items.

Why Is Single-Use Plastic Bad?

Single-use plastics are a glaring example of the problems with throwaway culture. Instead of investing in quality goods that will last, we often prioritize convenience over durability and consideration of long-term impacts. Our reliance on these plastics means we are accumulating waste at a staggering rate. We produce 300 million tons of plastic each year worldwide, half of which is for single-use items. That's nearly equivalent to the weight of the entire human population.

Reducing plastic use is the most effective means of avoiding this waste (and the impacts linked to plastic production and use). Carrying reusable bags and bottles is one great way to avoid single-use plastics in our day-to-day lives; more on preventing plastic waste can be found below.

Recycling more plastic, more frequently, reduces its footprint. Polyethylene terephthalate, one of the most commonly recycled plastics and the material that makes up most water and soda bottles, can be turned into everything from polyester fabric to automotive parts. But a whopping 91 percent of all plastic isn't recycled at all. Instead it ends up in landfills or in the environment. Single-use plastics in particular-especially small items like straws, bags, and cutlery-are traditionally hard to recycle because they fall into the crevices of recycling machinery and therefore are often not accepted by recycling centers.

Left alone, plastics don't really break down; they just break up. Over time, sun and heat slowly turn plastics into smaller and smaller pieces until they eventually become what are known as microplastics. These microscopic plastic fragments, no more than 5 millimeters long, are hard to detect-and are just about everywhere. Some microplastics are even small by design, like the microbeads used in facial scrubs or the microfibers in polyester clothing. They end up in the water, eaten by wildlife, and inside our bodies. They've even made their way up to the secluded Pyrenees mountain range and down to the bottom of the Mariana Trench. For wildlife, microplastics can be particularly dangerous; when eaten they can easily accumulate inside an animal's body and cause health issues, like punctured organs or fatal intestinal blockages.

Single-Use Plastics and Pollution

Although single-use plastic pollution accumulates most visibly on our streets, in fact our water suffers even more. Litter can be the first stage in a waste stream that enters waterways as plastics tossed on the street are washed away by rain or travel via storm drains into rivers and streams. Our waterway plastic pollution is particularly concentrated: Just ten rivers carry 93 percent of the world's total amount of plastic that enters the oceans via rivers each year.

In 2015 researchers from the University of Georgia estimated that between 4.8 million and 12.7 million metric tons of plastic per year make their way into the oceans via people living within 30 miles of a coast. The majority of this pollution-dominated by single-use plastic waste-comes from countries lacking infrastructure to properly manage waste, particularly in Asia. India, for example, generates 25,940 tons of plastic waste every day but collects only 60 percent of it. (It's also important to remember that waste management is just one part of the global materials cycle. For instance, a lot of the plastic produced in Asian countries is for products that serve U.S. demand-and the United States often sends plastic waste back to these countries for recycling.)

Marine animals bear the burden of this influx of garbage into their habitats. Beached whales have been found with stomachs full of plastic trash. And recent studies found plastic in the guts of 90 percent of the seabirds tested and 100 percent of the turtles. Alarmingly, scientists estimate that there will be more plastic than fish in the ocean by weight in 2050. Not only is plastic estimated to kill millions of marine animals and seabirds each year, but it's also contaminating seafood that humans have relied on for millennia, particularly with microplastics in animals' guts.

Our addiction to plastic also has negative impacts on the climate. A recent report showed that plastic production contributes to planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions at every point in its life cycle. The process of drilling for plastic's source materials, oil and gas, leads to methane leaking and flaring and is often combined with clearing forests and wetlands that otherwise would have sequestered carbon. Refineries where crude oil is turned into plastic make up one of the most greenhouse gas-intensive industries in the manufacturing sector. And "cracker plants"-which break, or "crack," ethane molecules, a component of natural gas, into the chemical building blocks of plastic products-are energy intensive and highly polluting. In 2015 a mere 24 of these ethane cracker facilities in the United States had the combined carbon output of 3.8 million passenger vehicles. And the recent fracking boom, resulting in a surplus of oil, is fueling a subsequent rise in cracker plants, too. That's bad news for our carbon reduction goals: if plastic production continues unabated, its greenhouse gas emissions could reach 1.34 gigatons per year by 2030 -equal to adding nearly 300 new coal-fired power plants-even as the need to curb global climate change becomes more urgent.

Plastic pollution-whether in our oceans, piling up on our coastlines, or contributing to our climate crisis-impacts vulnerable communities first. Even if plastic doesn't end up in the ocean, recycled plastic is often exported from high-income countries to developing countries to process. But the sheer amount of plastic waste inundates communities until they are drowning under thousands of tons of plastic trash. This is the case particularly in Southeast Asia, which has begun to import much of the plastic that used to go to China for recycling. Not only does the waste destroy the land itself, but when plastic is incinerated (as is the case for unrecyclable plastic at some illegal facilities) its toxic fumes quickly become a health hazard for residents, leading to everything from skin rashes to cancer. Such is the case with many environmental crises: the worst effects are pushed onto overburdened communities with the fewest resources to fight back.

Should We Ban Single-Use Plastics?

Plastic is putting a strain on waste management systems, our oceans, and vulnerable communities the world over. A wave of single-use plastic bans is sweeping the country and the globe-most often on plastic bags, straws, stirrers, and takeout clamshells. (Some places are going so far as to ban single-use plastics entirely; most notably, India intends to go this route by 2022.) Among the U.S. cities to outlaw plastic straws are Malibu, Berkeley, Seattle, and Miami Beach. Plastic bag bans-ideally accompanied by a fee on paper bags-are also catching on. New York State and Hawaii just passed theirs, set to go into effect in 2020, and California's bag ban, which was passed in 2014, has been shown to have reduced plastic bag usage by 85 percent (with some customers opting to pay a 10 cent fee for thicker plastic bags) and has reduced coastal pollution.

What do the bans accomplish? They prevent millions of tons of plastic from entering the waste stream each year. And when it comes to waste that lasts forever, every ton counts. In New York, 23 billion plastic bags are used by residents each year. Not only does banning single-use plastic reduce pollution, but it also reduces demand for plastic production that's contributing to global climate change. But beyond these impacts, the bans have cultural effects. Companies are forced to innovate, rethinking their designs and sourcing sustainable materials. And they help shift consumer mind-sets, as people begin to recognize that exorbitant and avoidable waste is not sustainable.

Large producers of single-use plastics can make a big environmental impact. As part of the Break Free From Plastic movement, Greenpeace volunteers conducted an audit of plastic pollution along coastlines, sifting through tens of thousands of individual pieces across 42 countries to identify the pollution's sources. They discovered that Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, and Nestlé products were found most often. Coca-Cola has said that it alone produces three million tons of plastic packaging each year, equivalent to a terrifying 200,000 plastic bottles per minute. Policies like bottle bill laws-which generally require retailers to add a fee on individual bottles, which can then be partially redeemed by customers when they recycle-are a way to increase corporate responsibility for waste while providing a monetary incentive to recycle. In Taiwan, which was once overflowing with so much trash that it spurred public protest and the nickname "Garbage Island," companies now either manage their own waste or subsidize government-run infrastructure. Accompanied by high social accountability and musical garbage trucks, that strategy has proved wildly effective: the island now reports recycling rates above 50 percent.

Some companies are taking initiative on their own. McDonald's swapped its plastic straws for paper at its United Kingdom and Ireland restaurants. Disney is eliminating single-use plastic straws and stirrers at all its theme parks, resorts and properties. And Starbucks, which uses an estimated one billion plastic straws per year, is phasing them out in favor of paper ones. These actions are a response to calls for change and shifting consumer habits.

Avoiding Single-Use Plastics

Individual choices -and the collective shifts they bring about-add up quickly. Making just one simple swap, like purchasing a reusable water bottle, can spare the environment hundreds of plastic bottles each year. Here are a few more tips for ridding your life (and your community) of single-use plastics for good.

Always pack a reusable bag when shopping. (And yes-reusable totes are better for the environment than plastics, recent media claims aside.)

Cook more often, to reduce your use of plastic-heavy takeout containers.

Buy in bulk. Avoid individually packaged goods, like snack packs.

Though buying online sometimes has a lower carbon footprint than shopping in a store (skip the express delivery option, if you can), online shipments are still chock-full of plastic. Your best bet to reduce your footprint and plastic waste? Walk, bike, or take public transit to buy in-person.

Avoid plastic wrap altogether by storing leftovers in reusable containers. Try reusable and compostable beeswax wrap for an easy and decorative option.

Buy a metal or bamboo reusable straw. Pack it alongside reusable cutlery (like wood, bamboo, or metal chopsticks) for sustainable eating on the go.

Talk to the owners of the restaurants you frequent. Ask if they have nonplastic alternatives to plastic straws, stirrers, or bags.

Speak out in support of local plastic bans, whether by calling your local government representative, submitting an op-ed to your city's newspaper, or simply starting conversations with neighbors.

Let companies that make your favorite products know that you care about the packaging. Tweet, call, or send letters to these companies to ask them to switch to more durable, recyclable, compostable, renewable, and/or recycled-content packaging with less fossil fuel-derived plastic.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Here's everything you need to know about the most ubiquitous (and avoidable) kind of plastic waste: the kind made to be tossed in mere minutes.

# data[].attributes.body
I choose this article because it informs the reader that the United states should ban single-use plastic. The author, Sarah Gibbens, shows certain states that have banned or fined the use of plastic. She also includes states that have put a ban on banning plastic. There have also been groups and organizations that help prevent a pollution crisis. Based off of the information of the article, it convinces the reader why the U.S. should put a ban on single use plastic.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This article was created in partnership with the National Geographic Society.

A battle over plastic-a material so prolific the UN calls the 90 percent of it that ends up as trash a pollution crisis-is under way in Florida.

Coral Gables, a small city of 51,000 people just south of Miami, wants to ban polystyrene from restaurants and grocery stores. The Florida Retail Federation does not, and an appeals court ruling delivered yesterday says they can keep the plastic product, in part thanks to a 2016 state rule that prevents cities from regulating how polystyrene is used.

The court battle demonstrates how cities and states are increasingly clashing over whether it's legal to ban plastic.

California, New York, and hundreds of municipalities in the U.S. ban or fine the use of plastic in some way. Seventeen other states, however, say it's illegal to ban plastic items, effectively placing a ban on a ban. This kind of legal maneuvering is booming. Four states created preemptions this year alone with two only narrowly failing in South Carolina and Alabama.

Often, efforts to preempt plastic bans are aided by the plastics industry, which wants to ensure its products remain widely used.

"First and foremost, we represent the manufacturers of plastic retail bags," says Matt Seaholm, executive director of the American Progressive Bag Alliance, a group affiliated with the plastics industry. "We engage at a local level to provide information to local officials on the merits of any type of an ordinance that is being proposed."

Seaholm said the industry is also looking out for local retailers. He adds plastic bans drive up costs, impose confusing regulations, and put in the hands of the government a decision that should be made by consumers and business owners.

Often partnering with local retail and restaurant associations, the industry is at odds with environmental groups that say single-use plastic must be urgently addressed.

"The plastic industry is putting a lot of their money on preemption, and they're winning," says Jennie Romer, an attorney at the Surfrider Foundation, a group that advocates for pro-environment policies.

Eight additional states are considering preemption measures in the coming years that could make it illegal to ban single-use plastics.

When the small border town of Laredo, Texas tried to pass a bill that banned plastic bags in 2008, they wanted to cut down on the costs associated with cleaning the commonly littered item out of waterways and public spaces.

With lobbying help from the American Chemistry Council, the bill was killed, according to an investigation by the Houston Chronicle.

In 2014, the bill was reintroduced and passed by the city. Even the state's multibillion-dollar cotton and cattle ranching industries supported the ban, saying the stray plastic tumbleweeds clogged machines and cows' stomachs.

Four years later, the Texas Supreme Court ruled that the ban was illegal, saying it violated a 1993 law that prevented cities or counties from banning a container or package. With it, the ruling brought down 11 other local Texas bag bans.

"It was pretty disappointing," says Jason McCombs from Austin's waste management authority. "We lost a pretty important environmental tool to help protect our environment here."

In Colorado, it was also a 1993 statute that pro-plastic lawyers used to argue against city bans.

For most states, however, no decades-old law was on the books to prevent a plastic ban. Some of the fastest legislative action in states like Pennsylvania, Arizona, and Missouri have rapidly developed after city plastic ordinances were adopted. These state bills all cite the need to create uniform laws throughout their states, a major point made by Seaholm.

"If you think about a retailer with stores in multiple jurisdictions, it becomes cumbersome to adhere to different processes," he says. "You end up with a patchwork."

When asked why the plastic industry tries to change state legislation instead of opposing city ordinances, Seaholm says it's to ensure this uniformity.

State-level preemptions are used to block a number of other city-level ordinances, from creating sanctuary cities to imposing sugar taxes.

Romer says large companies are more successful at the state level where legislators are less often confronted by grass roots city activists.

She also points to significant involvement from the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) a right-leaning policy group that provides model legislation to states adopting plastic preemptions. Both the American Plastics Council and the Plastics Industry Association have been members of ALEC.

The effectiveness of bans

In Austin, McCombs says city residents have still embraced reusable bags even though plastic has been reintroduced. Since the ordinance was put in place in 2013, they've seen a 75 percent reduction in the number of plastic bags in collected litter, and they still plan to be a zero-waste city by 2040.

The American Progressive Bag Alliance often challenges the idea that plastic bans are a truly environmental option.

Plastic bags, they argue, have more than a single use. They can be reused for tasks like lining trash cans or picking up dog waste. Their website cites a study in the journal of Environmental Economics and Management that found California consumers often purchased heavier trash bags to compensate.

A statewide ban that led to a 40-million-pound reduction in plastic waste, was offset by a 12-million-pound increase in trash bags, the study found.

The paper ultimately recommended imposing bag fees, like the five-cent charge you pay to use a plastic bag in Washington, D.C. The fee, the paper concludes, would could cost less than buying small trash bags but still encourage shoppers to bring reusable bags.

The Surfrider Foundation also encourages fees instead of outright bans as the most effective way to incentivize consumers to change their behavior.

To fight back against preemptions, legislators have recently begun to draft anti-preemption laws that would allow cities to reinstate bans and fees on plastic items-the dreaded ban on ban of bans.

Eight states have introduced anti-preemption bills, though none have significantly progressed.

National Geographic is committed to reducing plastics pollution. Learn more about our non-profit activities at natgeo.org/plastics. This story is part ofPlanet or Plastic?-our multiyear effort to raise awareness about the global plastic waste crisis. Learn what you can do toreduce your own single-use plastics, andtake your pledge.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
See the complicated landscape of plastic bans in the U.S.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This article was created in partnership with the National Geographic Society. A battle over plastic-a material so prolific the UN calls the 90 percent of it that ends up as trash a pollution crisis-is under way in Florida. Coral Gables, a small city of 51,000 people just south of Miami, wants to ban polystyrene from restaurants and grocery stores.