Bsb113 Economics Ia

In relation to the environmental factor, this regulation was put forward due to the amount of plastic bags handed out by supermarkets in England as in 2014 it rose to 7.64 billion-200 million more than in 2013. Campaigners argued that the bags blight streets, spoil the countryside, and damage

The national government put in place the 5p Plastic bag charge, to try to and improve human health. This law has been very beneficial for human health. It is known that plastic bags take over 500 years to break down in landfills and as a result of that these landfills can cause air pollution and land pollution, which can effect individual’s repository system and other illnesses. By having this law in place landfills are not filled up with so much plastic bag rubbish and as a result can be helping improve human health. More reusable bags.

The reason behind banning plastic pollution in California was triggered by the fact that disposable plastic bags as well as food containers were filling Oceans with a lot of plastic remains. Additionally, California’s tourism economy has suffered tremendously interfering with the forty

Bags the bane of the sea rhetorical analysis on Bag Ban Bad for Freedom and Environment.”

The central government appraised this act claiming that it was a conservative measure. This is seen as a matter of self-importance and not a conservative measure. It is an invasion of the free market. However, it claims that the measure would help solve littering issues without thinking of the negative consequences (Charles, 70). They include the need of buying more plastic bags by car owners who mainly use plastic bags as rubbish can linings. Hence, the ban makes the consumers buy additional plastic garbage bags. Also, there is a chance that expenditure on recyclable bags will increase. The state should protect businesses and consumers from the unfair interference on their economic freedom. The general public was not given a chance to air its views on the matter before it was enacted. Hence, most of the decisions should be made by the local governments. The reason is that these officials are more answerable to the

Each year there is an increase in demands for plastic bags, and therefore more are shipped, creating further environmental pollution concerns. This increase in demand has lead to the phenomenal upsurge in the use and misuse of plastic bags globally, both in developed and developing countries. Statistics show that 4 to 5 trillion plastic bags are produced per annum, whereby North America and Western Europe account for nearly 80% (Geographical, 2005; Reusable Bags, 2005). Cheeseman (2007) states that approximately “380 billion plastic shopping bags are used in the United States annually”; in turn, only 0.6% of this is recycled.

After a bill that would ban plastic bags in California was shot down, Adam B. Summers, author of, “Bag Ban Bad for Freedom and Environment,” explains how plastic bags should not be banned. He uses statistics, ethos, logos and diction to support his claim. Summers uses these devices to create a stronger argument. Summers overall purpose of his passage was to express his view that plastic bags should not be banned and the effects banning or not banning them would have on the environment. By using statistics, Summers creates a more credible argument.

Australians approximately use 6.9 billion plastic bags per year (Errata Nolan ITU, 2002). The high consumption of plastic bags highlights one outstanding issue. The adverse impact, consumption and disposal of plastic bags have towards the environment. This involves the resources used to make

As the United States deals with the overwhelming amounts of waste building up, Nitin et al explain that “plastics take anywhere from 15 to 1000 years to biodegrade” once they are discarded (Nitin). Changes in recycling methods can no longer keep up with the exorbitant amount of waste produced in the United States. This is why some states choose to take their initiative one step further by placing either fees or a ban on the use of plastic bags. Due to the enormous waste the United States produces on a daily basis and the negative outcomes of this trash including adverse health effects, harmful impacts on nature, and the exponential piling of trash in landfills, the US government should ban plastic bags.

The plastics industry, through the leadership of the American Chemical Council (ACC), spends millions of dollars each year to convince policy makers and Californians that solutions to plastic pollution lie in anti-litter campaigns that attribute the responsibility for marine debris on individual behavior. Yet they have devoted little funding to public education and much more on promoting

Continuing with our topic of plastic over consumption and the market, we move on from policy valuation methods to conducting a benefit cost analysis on available strategies. Regulatory impact assessments, or benefit-cost analyses, are sophisticated analytical tools for measuring the benefits and costs associated with a proposed regulation, policy initiative or project, while also evaluating other tradeoffs, such as potential job losses, and other societal impacts. We will narrow down all the possible strategies for reducing plastic consumption, using this as an opportunity to discuss the extreme of government regulation. A market ban on plastic.

Picture this: A person goes out to the store to purchase a couple of necesites. Those necesites then get put into a plastic bag as per usual. They get home and take everything out of the bag. They then trash the bag because it is no longer needed. The plastic bag then ends up in some landfill where it is blown away into the middle of the ocean. The plastic bag then goes on to danger the marine animals. Plastic bags should be banned from stores because there are other ways people can carry their things, they are dangerous to marine animals, and cause pollution.

Introduction: Have you ever wanted to help the environment, but you just didn’t know how? When we go shopping we see a lot of people carrying bags made of plastic. I must admit; plastic bags can be very convenient at times, but the use of plastic bags has it disadvantages. If you knew about the dangers of the use of plastic bags, then I'm sure you will think twice about using plastic bags and use tote bags instead.

Plastic bags, first introduced in the 1950s as a convenient way to store food, have since developed into a global scourge, littering roadsides, clogging sewer drains and landfills and getting ingested by animals and marine life. And in recent years we've discovered they are so prevalent that they now comprise a significant portion of the plastic and other garbage that has collected in huge ocean gyres far from land. The environmental think tank Worldwatch Institute reports that China's decision to ban free plastic bags in 2008 has cut demand by some 40 billion bags, reduced plastic bag usage there by 66 percent and saved some 1.6 million tons of petroleum. Recently California has instituted a ban on on these plastic bags in an effort to reduce c02 emissions and enviromental waste. Convenience stores and grocery stores would be required to charge ten cents per bag. With California instituting this ban on the bags, this will be very beneficial since it will provide better air conditions, encourage people to start reusing and recycling more, and cause less harm to the environment and marine life.

Simply choosing plastic over paper as a convenience is no excuse for discounting the harmful effects of the choice. Some persons reading this will be too young to remember when grocery stores first started asking their patrons if they would prefer the new convenient plastic bags or the old paper sacks in which to carry their groceries. It seemed a simple enough question at the time. The question was merely inquiring of the patron their opinion of convenience. But what if the same exact question being asked was not referring to the convenience of each product, but instead to the detrimental effect of each product? If submitted as a question in relation to which product is worse for the environment, the correct answer is unquestionably plastic. Proponents of plastic will cite deforestation as the evil averted by switching from paper to plastic. They will incorrectly tout the recyclability of plastic bags. Proponents of plastic will push countless studies showing the lower costs of using plastic bags. The only argument they may be able to win is that it is probably easier and more convenient for the consumer to carry groceries in a plastic bag. What they must concede is the overwhelming detrimental effects that plastic bags have on the environment, and that paper is the only correct response to the question “paper or plastic”. Their reasoning on the topics of deforestation, recyclability, and cost can be refuted. The positive effects in selecting to use paper over plastic as a