Plastic reality

Before the discussion ensued little did we realise how much our lives have become hooked on plastic bags. No wonder that the amount of bags consumed per year staggered into the millions. There is no contesting the fact that plastic is convenient and that its technical specifications can easily be worked to suit the purpose it is designed for.

The shock tactic employed by Government to jolt us out of this unconcern brought considerable reaction. We were caught unaware and only once our finances were threatened were we made to stop and rethink the way we consumed our plastic bags.

Many of us cried foul at the way the measure was implemented. There were little words of encouragement on the decision that was unfolding. Plastic is an essential commodity and few of us seemed prepared to lose it.

The good that this measure was aimed to achieve was overshadowed by the fact that now one had to rethink how to dispose of daily refuse. If safeguarding the environment called for such drastic measures then perhaps the environment is not for me.

Industry reported that such a drastic step was to impact directly on employment. The frenzy blurred the true opportunities that result from change. The options that the eco-contribution encouraged were not worth considering. All of a sudden the plastic bag became the essential commodity that was generating economic activity. Our focus shifted on the additional expense that this new measure was to impinge on those who chose not to act.

Although plastic used in manufacturing processes was never meant to be axed, Malta was already counting the costs rather than identifying ways of how to recycle this plastic. What made the news were the additional potential costs incurred and not how innovative industry had become to close the loop through recycling or to minimise waste going to landfill or how they managed to readjust the charge through compliance.

Although not aimed directly at them, the unconscious use of plastic bags by their customers must have resulted in a significant saving to retailers too. Those retailers who took the plunge and adopted schemes of a reusable bag should be commended.

By imposing a charge on plastic, Government sought to assist those who were experiencing a disproportionate burden as a result of the environmental initiatives they took. We, as customers, are encouraged to support the same by seeking environment-friendly oriented retailers.

Consumers are encouraged to refuse carriers bags and seek new convenient ways of how to do away with this option. Other customs abroad opt for plastic re-useable/collapsible crates, trolleys, cardboard boxes, cloth bags and similar containers. Some retailers may also opt to explore biodegradable options. At 52 million bags per year, the cost of a bio-degradable carrier bag will be significantly reduced if the demand increases. If this is opted for, old practices may prevail because the charge will be minimal and the retailer may decide to give out carrier bags for free. Yet being wasteful and inconsiderate on how we consume bags is not to be encouraged.

Much concern was raised that due to this measure waste disposal cannot continue as it was. This is not necessarily the case, although it is acknowledged that the aim of this measure is to help us rethink how to save on the amount of bags we use to throw away our stuff in.

One way of doing this is to economise on the amount that goes in the bag. Voluminous items like light packaging (aluminium and metal cans, newspapers and magazines, glass jars and bottles of whatever kind) belong to the bring-in site and not the garbage bag. Already, over half the bag can be conserved with significant savings to you too. Since April, Government has allocated Lm1,500 to each locality specifically to have one bring-in site installed for your convenience. The allocation of bins will grow in the next year or so!

Degradable and biodegradable bags (as well as garbage bags) are already a better option in which to pack our refuse. We should look at ways of how to adapt to these. Government cannot supply these bags direct. However, by penalising those options that harm the environment Government has made the alternatives an obvious replacement.

It is incorrect to say that plastic bags are recycled. Once soiled, there is no available technology locally to recycle the bag. No supplier or user in Malta recycles soiled plastic bags. The recycling of rejects from the manufacturing process of plastic bags does not safeguard any of the 52 million bags put on the market annually from landfill. Unlike other plastic containers, such as bottles, plastic bags have never been recovered from the waste stream and recycled.

From a more technical viewpoint, one must keep in mind that plastic bags occupy a lot of landfill space due to the air they trap. The inhomogeneous content of the waste mass due to the parcels of waste wrapped in indestructible plastic too is of concern. Air pockets are a fire hazard in landfills and plant must be used to destroy these bags as early in the fermentation process as possible to get the biodegradable reactions going in time.

For those of us who agree that plastic bags damage the environment then no charge is high enough to ensure that this commodity is eradicated. If we do not agree, however, putting a minimal charge will not discourage their use and the measure becomes more of a revenue generator for Government. Wise choices are called for and these will certainly lead to the decrease of the widespread and indiscriminate use of plastic bags. What now seems as an added burden should emerge as an immensely positive step in safeguarding our health and our environment.

It is worth remembering that:

¤ The eco-contribution on a degradable carrier bag is of 1c per bag.

¤ Biodegradable bags carry no charge.

¤ Plastic used for manufacturing purposes such as those used for products for export and industrial products is exempt.

¤ Plastic bags used for packing sliced bread, ham, cheese, chicken and similar items are exempt.

¤ The law does not affect the agricultural sector or farmers who operate from glass houses or use plastic to cover their produce.

Ing. Christopher Ciantar is head of strategy and development at WasteServ Malta Ltd.