Plastic and Styrofoam Legislation - How it Goes

Plastic and Styrofoam Legislation

Recent state legislative actions across the U.S. aim to limit the use of products that pose environmental hazards. Here are some highlights:

  • California State Assembly passed Bill 1108 last week. Bill 1108 originally aimed to ban the use of both phthalates in children's toys and the endocrine disruptor bisphenol A. However during its torturous trip through the legislature, 1108 was excised of all bisphenol A references in the face of effective lobbying by the American Chemical Council. So the resulting measure applies only to phthalates. Last week's vote overturned a previous Assembly defeat of the Bill May 30th.
  • San Francisco's new Food Service Waste Reduction Ordinance, bans the use of Styrofoam (polystyrene foam), by restaurants and food vendors. Seattle is aiming for a similar ban, which is already in effect in Portland, OR, Berkeley, CA, and Oakland, CA.
  • Baltimore and Annapolis, MD are considering banning plastic bag use in their city. San Francisco passed a bill last April limiting plastic bag use by groceries and pharmacies.

In response to news of the Maryland ban, a state Alderman objected:

"We have more pressing problems...[like] growing greener to help with the air. Getting into the minutia of plastic bags is beyond our scope..." He asked, "So like now, we're going to have the plastic bag police?"

He really cares about "growing greener"? And is not getting rid of tons of wildlife choking, people killing flood producing, ocean clogging plastic bags "growing greener"?

Shop owners in Maryland also complained, saying that removing the plastic would deprive people of "choice". Uuuyyyy, whatever. People have choice in American Idol, they really care about that.

Plastic Minutiae

Once legislation passes, implementation and enforcement does usually face an uphill battle from more lobbyists, industry lawsuits, businesses, and individuals. In August of 2005 Acronym Required reported on Maharashtra's plastic bag ban efforts. In the wake of severe flooding in Mumbai caused in part by plastic bags clogging drains, the Indian state banned them.

Organizations today try to enforce the ban by raiding businesses, however there are loopholes in the law that basically enable ubiquitous plastic bag use by shop owners. It's an ongoing battle in India, as everywhere, to remove handy, profitable items from the market, destructive as they may be.

Despite slow progress, cities and countries find that controlling plastic bag use is more economical than cleaning up the litter that accumulates in rivers, in oceans -- everywhere in fact -- mountains and mountains of plastic. Simultaneously, the public public is more cognizant of the dangers of Styrofoam and plastics, especially the health effects of certain chemicals that give plastic products their special plastic-ness, like Bisphenol A and phthalates.

More awareness hopefully translates to more action, since all of these bills, throughout their legislative perambulations, require sustained action on the part of politicians, citizens, and environmental groups. The plastics and chemical lobbies devote significant time and money to convincing us that banning these chemicals is bad for the economy and is based on 'unsound science' -- despite an abundance of scientific studies on derogatory effects and the existence of viable alternatives. To date, industry admonishments are too often reported verbatim by reporters and politicians as the "science" of "the other side".

Shun Plastic, Catch West Nile Virus?

But the other side is solely about business -- companies in various industries pay money to these lobbies to assure that the industry continues to profit from the sale of plastic products. The Environmental Working Group (EWG) released a leaked memo from ACC in 2003 that outlined the ACC's plans to undermine California's environmental protection legislation efforts. It presented a plan of action to redefine the issues, generate support, and challenge adversaries on what it perceived as growing public support for the "precautionary principle" in California. The memo prescribed a slew of action items, and asked member companies to fund the efforts. Here are some excerpts...

"3. Use satire and humor to demonstrate how, taken to its logical extreme, application of the PP [precautionary principle] would set Californians back to the stone ages. Tactics, through third-parties, would include websites, posters, bill boards, radio placements and internet communications..."

"5. Provide a steady stream of information: studies, reports and other media products to advance the message and agenda of the coalition. Approach and educate conservative columnists and talk radio hosts on the issue to stimulate debate...."

"6. Recruit and energize the business community by creating and publicizing a coalition-sponsored business roundtable or lecture series and/or conferences to educate potential allies about the PP and the consequences of its implementation. These could be...done in conjunction with other business associations and/or California based think tanks."

"12. Fund a documentary and associated media blitz that examines "shocking" negative past consequences of the PP...Possible topics include: the Peruvian outbreak of cholera; African nations' battle with malaria without DDT, vis-a-vis the possible spread of West Nile virus..."

Pretty conventional marketing, but not science. The American Chemical Council (ACC) represents 150 industries and has a $100 million dollar budget to promote their business agenda, according to SourceWatch. The American Plastics Council (which merged with the ACC a few years ago), represents companies such as BASF Corporation, Bayer Material Science LLC, The Dow Chemical Company, DuPont, ExxonMobil Chemical Company, NOVA Chemicals Company, SASOL North America, Inc., Shell Chemicals L.P., Solvay America, Inc., Sunoco, Inc., TOTAL Petrochemicals USA, Inc. and the Vinyl Institute. These are all wonderful companies, to be sure, and they provide useful materials for many products. But they are lawfully beholden to their own shareholder obligations, their determined mission is annual profit and increased growth to meet shareholder expectations.

Environmental integrity and health is not their driving goal, obviously, and their "science" is often so only in label. Reporters, politicians, and publications, too often get away with ignoring or denying the fact that industry's scientific methods are more often than not, let's say, idols of the marketplace.

-------------------------------------------

Acronym Required previously published several articles about bisphenol A, plastics, and California's efforts to ban bisphenol A and phthalates. Among them are Flying for Plastic Snack Packs, about airline travel, "San Francisco Phthalates & Bisphenol A Ban", November, 2006, Plastic Bottles- Protecting Your Baby, by the ACC" January, 2005, Bisphenol-A and Phthalates Bill in California, January, 2006, and San Francisco Bans Bisphenol, Phthalates, July, 2006, discussed this ordinance.

follow us on twitter!

Archives