- Studies show paper bags require more energy, water and materials to produce than plastic, and they emit greenhouse gases when decomposing in landfills.
- Cotton totes must be reused over 100 times to offset their carbon footprint, and many end up unused, negating their environmental benefits.
- Policies often lead to increased use of thicker plastic trash bags or impractical paper alternatives, failing to reduce overall waste.
- One-size-fits-all bans ignore practical consumer needs and overlook the importance of reuse and recycling over material substitution.
- Instead of bans, policymakers should promote recycling innovation, voluntary reuse and sustainable alternatives like hemp-based bags.
For years, progressive policymakers and environmental activists have waged war on plastic bags, pushing paper and reusable totes as the morally superior choice. But as even The New York Times now admits, the truth is far more complicated — and paper bags «might not be as green as you think.»
This revelation should force a reckoning with the unintended consequences of heavy-handed government bans on single-use plastics. Rather than solving an environmental crisis, these policies often replace one problem with another while burdening consumers with higher costs and inconvenience.
The hidden costs of paper bags
The push to eliminate plastic bags gained momentum in the early 2000s, with cities like San Francisco leading the charge. Today, nearly a dozen states and hundreds of municipalities have enacted restrictions. But as studies reveal, paper bags—the default alternative—are far from an eco-friendly panacea.
A 2011 study by Britain’s Environment Agency found that paper bags require three reuses just to match the environmental impact of a single-use plastic bag. Why? Manufacturing paper demands more energy, water and raw materials. A 2018 Danish study echoed these findings, ranking low-density polyethylene plastic bags as having the smallest environmental footprint among eight options — including paper.
Even in landfills, paper isn’t the clear winner. While plastic bags remain inert, paper decomposes and emits methane and CO2, potent greenhouse gases. And though paper recycling rates (43%) outpace plastic (10%), most bags still end up in landfills.
Samantha MacBride, a waste expert at Baruch College, warns that plastic bags perpetuate fossil fuel dependence: “That system needs to retract if we’re going to have a future.” Yet the alternative — mass-producing paper bags — may simply shift the environmental burden elsewhere.
The reusable tote trap
Reusable bags were supposed to be the ultimate solution. But as they’ve proliferated — handed out as corporate swag or impulse purchases — their environmental benefits have been undermined by overproduction.
Cotton totes, often touted as sustainable, require 131 to 149 reuses to offset the carbon footprint of a single plastic bag, per British and Danish studies. Why? Cotton farming is resource-intensive, and most bags are shipped from Asia, adding to their carbon load.
Dr. MacBride suggests opting for locally made hemp or bamboo bags — or better yet, repurposing old fabric. But how many consumers will go to such lengths? The reality is that most reusable bags sit unused in closets, negating their supposed benefits.
The conservative case for consumer choice
The deeper issue here isn’t just about bags — it’s about government overreach and the failure of one-size-fits-all environmental mandates.
Steven Cohen, a Columbia University policy expert, notes that paper bags often fail the durability test: “‘Is this thing going to make it home?’” For city dwellers carrying heavy groceries, flimsy paper is impractical. Meanwhile, plastic bans have led to surges in purchases of thicker, heavier garbage bags — ironically increasing plastic waste.
Michael Overcash of the Environmental Genome Initiative argues that reuse is the real key, not material. “If you reuse a cotton bag a hundred times… that means 100 paper or plastic bags didn’t have to be made,” he said. But that requires personal responsibility — not heavy-handed regulations.
A smarter approach
The left’s war on plastic bags is a case study in unintended consequences. Paper bags and reusable totes aren’t the eco-saviors they’ve been marketed as, and bans often punish consumers without solving the core issue: waste management.
Instead of top-down mandates, policymakers should:
- Promote recycling innovation to improve plastic and paper recovery rates.
- Encourage voluntary reuse without punishing those who rely on plastic for cost or convenience.
- Invest in domestic manufacturing of sustainable alternatives like hemp-based bags.
The Times’ admission is a rare moment of clarity in the environmental debate. It’s time to reject symbolic bans and embrace practical, market-driven solutions — before the next well-intentioned policy backfires.
As one disillusioned shopper joked: “I’ve given up. I now just eat all my groceries right there in the store.” If only the environmental movement’s policies were as harmless as that punchline.
Sources include: