Evaluating the Bag Dilemma

One of the most debated environmental issues—choosing between paper, plastic, or cloth bags—exemplifies this dilemma. Although this matter isn't among the most urgent facing humanity, it has attracted considerable research and discussion. After years of investigation, the conclusion to the question “which bags are best for grocery shopping?” seems to be: none at all. Realistically, however, we need to select bags that will contribute to environmental challenges.

When faced with the options:

• Plastic bags, typically single-use (though they might be repurposed at home), are unlikely to be recycled, may end up in oceans, and take centuries to decompose.
• Paper bags, also single-use, can be recycled more easily than plastic, are derived from renewable resources, and decompose more quickly but generate "70 times more air pollution and 50 times more water pollution than plastic bag production."
• Reusable tote bags, which many of us have favored, may carry their own hidden costs. Recent findings suggest that an organic cotton tote would need to be utilized up to 20,000 times to outdo the environmental impact of a single-use plastic bag—a staggering commitment of 384 years of weekly grocery trips!

What kind of problem are we willing to accept? If climate change is your priority, plastic bags might be the best option (with some reuse before recycling). However, you may prioritize deforestation, plastic pollution, land use, or pesticide usage. Or perhaps, like many, you have a stash of reusable bags and aim to maximize their use. Each choice carries its own environmental consequences.

Photo by Mick Haupt on Unsplash

Criteria for Environmental Decision-Making

How should we approach making environmental choices? The awareness that virtually all our actions influence the environment can be overwhelming, but we cannot afford to spend excessive time deliberating every decision. Here are a few criteria to guide our choices regarding the environmental issues we create:

Scale and Severity: Some environmental problems have broader implications than others, with varying degrees of impact. For instance, while solid waste is a pressing concern, it pales in comparison to the scale of climate change. If faced with the dilemma of disposing of plastic bags, an electric car battery, or nuclear waste versus contributing to global warming—which threatens mass extinction, climate refugees, and economic turmoil—I’d opt for landfill waste any day.

Time Considerations: It may seem preferable to choose environmental solutions that have short-term impacts, but another perspective exists. For example, addressing nuclear waste now might help mitigate climate change, which is an immediate threat. Investing in nuclear energy could reduce greenhouse gas emissions, even if it produces waste with long-lasting consequences. While this approach might seem unfair to future generations, it’s based on the premise that they will likely be more affluent and technologically adept, capable of resolving the problems we leave behind.

Permanence: Some environmental issues are reversible, while others are not. The extinction of a species or irreversible landscape destruction are permanent losses. Climate change, however, could potentially be reversed, as could the global temperature rise. Yet the irreversible devastation of a mountain for coal mining leaves no room for recovery. We ought to prioritize decisions that lead to problems we can rectify rather than those that are irreparable.

While it’s disheartening to recognize that every modern lifestyle contributes to environmental challenges, it’s unrealistic to aspire to a completely impact-free existence. Embracing the notion that we must choose which environmental issues to accept allows us to make more informed and responsible decisions.