Part I
A) Think about your opinion about the use of plastic bags for the most purpose.
1. Why do you think this way? For instance, have you ever read any scientific studies on the environmental impact of different types of “carry bag” or formed an opinion based on what a friend told you?
In my opinion, the use of plastic bags is bad and not save for the environment. Bags are easily caught by the wind and scatter throughout. This is not counting the litter issue that comes with plastic bags. I have found plastic bags in the different bodies of water (ocean, lakes, & rivers) which are then harmful to the wild life. Growing up I learned that paper bags are saver for the environment. The best bag to use it the ecofriendly bag which is made of cotton and may be used over and over. I don’t believe I have ever read any scientific studies on the environmental impact of different types of “carry bags”
2. What type of bags d you prefer to use? I prefer paper bags, however in today’s society, most stores only carry plastic bags or the cotton reusable bags. Years ago it was told that cocker roaches would lay their eggs in the warehouses where the paper bags are stored which caused the stores to stop using them.
B)
1. Three arguments that support of banning
plastic bags in most circumstances are:
a) With the banning of plastic
bags would help preserve wild life in our oceans, streams and parks. Tens of thousands of whales, birds, seals and
turtles are killed every year from plastic bag litter in the marine environment
as they often mistake plastic bags for food such as jellyfish.
b) By
banning plastic bags there would more room in landfills as plastic bags are not
biodegradable. Statistics show that 38% of
our landfills are due to plastic bags.
c) Enough
plastic is thrown away each year to circle the earth four times. That statistic is enough to put a light on
the subject and have society open their eyes about plastic in general. There are small plastic beads even in facial
scrub that we use each day.
2. Does
this information reinforce or contradict your opinion? How?
The above information definitely reinforces my
opinion on plastic bags and the effect it has on the environment. With less plastic being put out into the
environment the numbers of injured wildlife would decrease and the pollution of
our waterways, steams and oceans would become a better place to visit.
3. How is
the reasoning supported scientifically?
a) The reasoning has been
scientifically supported by statistics (collecting data).
b) From research
from factories, stores and waste removal.
com, Google. "Plastic Bags and Landfills
Statistics - Google Search." Plastic
Bags and Landfills Statistics - Google Search. Web. 7 Dec. 2015.
4) List
(2) exceptions to the plastic bag ban in Austin:
Restaurant Bags, Laundry, & newspaper bags
are just a few of the exceptions that may be made out of plastic in Austin.
C)
1. The (2) arguments made in
supporting of “banning the ban” on plastic bags in most circumstances are:
a) Plastic bags have a lower carbon footprint
than paper bags and some may argue that there is a much lower carbon footprint
on the reusable bags.
b) Plastic bags are 100% recyclable which in
turns defeats the argument of landfills being over crowded. The hard part is getting society to recycle.
c) Plastic bags
take less energy and raw material to make.
2. How is reasoning supported scientifically?
a) One reason that supports scientifically
evidence is by weighting out the difference of paper and plastic bags.
b) The other would be looking at the environment
impact the two different bags would have on society.
D)
1. Summarize (2) findings of the UK
Environmental Agency:
The UK Environmental Agency publication stated
that reusing plastic bags gives a better benefit than recycling bags. It states that the starch polyester bag has
the largest impact on global warming potential out of all the lightweight
carrier bags. A paper bag has to be used
4 times if not more to reduce its global warming potential below that of a
plastic bag.
2. State (2) items in this article
that surprised you:
The (2) items
that surprised me were the environmental impact of all types of carrier bag is
dominated by resource use and production stages. Example: Transport, secondary
packaging and end-of-life management generally have a minimal influence on
their performance. And starch-polyester
blend bags have a higher global warming potential and abiotic depletion than
conventional polymer bags, due both to the increased weight of material in a
bag and higher material production impacts.
E)
The two countries’ that have bag usage
policies are:
Italy - In 2011, Italy banned
plastic shopping bags made from non-biodegradable plastic and mandated the use
of compostable plastic in the manufacture of the bags. The bags are still on the market being used
by retailers and consumers. The move was made to support a growing bioplastics
sector within the country.
Rwanda - This is one of the few
countries where a complete bag ban, enacted in 2008, has been respected and is
strictly enforced. Its success is largely due to the commitment of residents.
Paper bags are in use as the alternative.
Part II
A. Company/Organization, product name:
Fiji Water Company, Fiji Bottled Water
B. Summary of the ad in at least four sentences.
In 2007, the firm promised to become “carbon negative” by reducing its carbon dioxide emissions and planting enough trees to give an overall benefit to the atmosphere. The firms plan was to plant four square miles of trees in Fiji by 2010 which would fulfil its claims for three years. However, in March, Fiji Water’s environmental advisers, Conservation International, told Dispatches that only 1.4 square miles had actually been done – less than half the amount expected – with no indication of when the rest might be planted. “Fiji Water is committed to offsetting the carbon that’s emitted in their transporting and in their manufacturing by reforesting and protecting other forests outside of that area. Some analysts claim that producing and delivering a litre of bottled water emits hundreds of times as much greenhouse gas as a litre of tap water.
C. Greenwashing score and justification for each characterization of the score.
I would give this a Greenwashing score of a 4. This reason for a score of 4 is due to the fact that in their ad it states that the water is coming straight from the streams in Fiji. They also state that (and have failed) to plant the amount of square miles of forest per their mission statement. Yes Fiji Water Company has given to some small villages but as a whole most of the counter in that area are still depended on emergency water. As of 2010, FIJI delivered on its carbon-negative goal by initiating an extensive reforestation work in partnership with Conservation International.
D. MLA citation of sources:
Bloxham, Andy. "Fiji Water Accused of Environmentally Misleading Claims." The Telegraph. Telegraph Media Group, 20 June 2011. Web. 7 Dec. 2015.
