Plastic Bags and Books: Trendsetters in the Making

This week, I chose to explore the blogosphere in search of fascinating and note-worthy articles in the field of environmental protection and preservation. Upon research, I came across two articles that caught my attention about the current trends and the potential outcomes of offsetting the use of plastic bags by businesses, and the printing of environmentally-friendly books by the book industry. The first article that I came across is entitled Book Industry Turns Over a New Leaf, written by Warren McLaren of Tree Hugger, and the second article is entitled Plastic-Bag Bans Gaining Momentum Around the World, written by John Roach of The National Geographic. Although these two articles seem to have little in common, they are, in fact, much applicable under many circumstances. Undoubtedly, these two industries create a substantial amount of damage to the environment: they contribute to the rise in greenhouse gases, some eventually end up clogging landfills, and they destroy precious resources.

As the aforementioned articles illustrate, the current state of these two industries is looking brighter than ever, but progress of this magnitude needs more time and effort to attain its greatest potential. Although environmentally conscience individuals and voices can help implement such change, the major sources of strength must come from the business sector, mainly those of powerful corporations who will adopt more environmentally friendly, ‘pro green’ attitudes. Instigating such changes is not an easy task; while it is in the interest of businesses to adopt environmentally sound methodologies in the long stretch, political action is necessary in the hands of the U.S. government. For instance, if and when the federal government decides to intervene, the utilization of plastic bags may be outright banned or taxed, or the trend of printing books on mostly unrecycled paper may be restricted. Whatever the outcomes, certain organizations and countries have already shown to be trendsetters in a world where environmental protection and preservation is more important than ever. It is riveting to stay apprised of future outcomes. For your convenience, I have attached my comments below.

Comment # 1: Book Industry Turns Over a New Leaf
First off, I was captivated by the plethora of valuable information provided; “The U.S. book industry emits over 12.4 million tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year, or approximately 8.85 pounds of carbon for the average book (.89 lb). Much of this (~63%) is a result of forests losing their biomass carbon store.” The progression of publishing books the outdated way is contrasted by new and improved methodologies, where companies are seeking to curb over-production, recycling unsold books instead of filling up landfills, using recycled and low-weight paper, and ‘maximizing FSC (Forest Stewardship Council) certified or equivalent fiber in their papers.” In this fight, the efforts of The Book Industry Study Group (BISG) and The Green Press Initiative (GPI) are commendable. Primarily through their hard work, the book industry is trekking new waters and thus making progress; even though the book industry is not often directly associated with contributing to the rise in greenhouse gases, they are in fact the fourth largest emitters of carbon dioxide in the United States. It is evident that book manufacturers need so-called responsible paper that minimizes production and environmental impacts.

Although various book publishing companies are keeping up to par, how will their efforts be translated in the newspaper and magazine industries? The significance of this relatively new trend is praiseworthy to say the least, but these efforts must be supplemented through the efforts of the government and of various institutions. Institutions such as high schools, colleges, universities, public libraries, and bookstores must keep their end of the bargain by placing incentives for environmentally concerned publishers, and challenging those that do not embrace these means. Meeting the current world’s demand of millions of books is a daunting task, consequently, in order to meet such demands, trees from endangered rainforests and forests alike are relentlessly cut down (GPI). Notwithstanding, it is imperative to understand that the implementation of eco-friendly books can take on a number of forms. For instance, the system of cap and trade, or the advancement of e-book technologies and devices are possible and tangible avenues of hope.

Comment # 2: Plastic-Bag Bans Gaining Momentum Around the World
Thank you for this concise and insightful article. I was thoroughly enthused to read that “From Australia to the U.K., and all across the United States, politicians and corporations are pondering banning or taxing plastic bags.” These efforts are thanks in part to the “hefty surcharge that began in 2003 in Ireland that has spurred the public to spurn plastic bags almost completely in favor of reusable cloth totes.” Although efforts to ban or tax the use of plastic bags have been a sluggish one in the United States, it is fortunate to note that the progressive city of San Francisco recently celebrated its one-year-anniversary of banning the use of “hard to recycle” plastic bags (NPR). By observing the positive outcomes, these numbers translate to about five million less plastic bags each day! As a result, other cities are considering similar bans or restrictions, while companies are seeking to develop alternative modes of carrying goods. In all probability, states like California, New Jersey, New York, and Maryland are going to be the forefront trendsetters in an effort to ease the damaging effects of plastic bags.

It is no surprise that the United States is making progress at a much slower rate due to the vast geography of the country, the structure of the government, and the various interest groups involved. Amongst the heap of influential voices and players, a system of taxation is more preferable; therefore, environmentally concerned companies such as IKEA (who has already banned plastic bans in favor of durable, recyclable, and reusable blue-colored bags) is one of the obvious trendsetters. The gravity of the carbon footprint of plastic bags is no joking matter: every year, an estimated five-hundred billion to one trillion plastic bags are consumed worldwide, which translates to about one million per minute (NPR). Ideally, one would use and re-use already owned plastic bags, but the current situation is a crisis at hand. Plastic bags slowly but willingly poison the soil and waterways. In the meantime, besides ensuing banning or taxing, one can invest in these heftier, larger, and more durable bags (similar to the ones offered in IKEA and in various other stores like Whole Foods and Trader Joe’s). Although some of these bags will still be made partially or entirely of plastic, they will help the environment in the long run. We cannot continue at the pace we are on.

The Arctic Oil Rush: A Virtual Rat Race

It comes as no surprise that prices of crude oil remain at record rates, the Middle East remains less inviting, and the growing attraction of Arctic energy becomes almost inevitable. With the onset of these trends, the potential supply of Arctic energy has the capability to forever alter the geopolitics of competing countries. Recent events have perpetuated a plethora of ramifications. Approximately two weeks ago, a U.S. based company, called Arctic Oil & Gas Corp. (AOAG) controversially laid claim to “nearly all of the Arctic Ocean’s undersea oil.” According to Vast Oil Potential in Arctic, this Las Vegas based company thus attempted to surpass the ranks of other countries in a virtual rat race to see who will profit the most from the promise of the vast amount of petroleum resource. As such, readers undoubtedly wonder, what really lies underneath the ice, closer to the rapidly melting center of the Arctic’s “icy and forbidden waste?” The most optimistic estimates concur that “no less than twenty-five percent of the world’s yet-to-find oil and gas reserves (400 billion barrels of oil equivalent) are hidden beneath the ice. But that may be too hopeful. A more modest recent estimate is about half that (around fourteen percent of the world’s yet-to-find reserves) with about two-thirds of it in gas and the other third, or less, in liquid resources.” This controversial claim by AOAG, which has undoubtedly raised numerous eyebrows across the international sphere, is beyond the territorial claim of Canada, Russia, and other polar nations, as The Japan Times Online notes. More so, these recent, pathetic revelations unravel that various countries around the world, including one of the forerunners, the U.S. will attempt to exploit the environment to its fullest extent by sucking on the bloodlines of the oil industry before truly delving into the era of alternative energies and taking strides towards a green initiative.  

In its latest statement regarding the polar seabed’s “enormous reserve potential,” for petroleum deposits, Arctic Oil & Gas asserts “The Arctic Ocean floor is increasingly believed to hold vast reserves of untapped oil and natural gas, which is expected to become accessible as new deep-sea drilling and hydrocarbons production technology becomes available.” In order to accomplish these aims, workers must tap into “organic rich sediments" that covers all of the Arctic Ocean seafloor, which was once "great fresh water matted Azolla-rich pond, capturing untold billions of tons of organic sediments." As such, the political ramifications of Arctic drilling by various countries will unravel faster than we may have previously thought; scientists

have predicted that global warming could leave the Arctic virtually ice-free within twenty years. The aforementioned source, Vast Oil Potential in Arctic asserts, this prospective “has hastened a scramble among nations with a polar coast namely Canada, Russia, the U.S., Norway and Denmark, which controls Greenland- to try to strengthen their scientific claims under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea to extended territorial sovereignty over the Arctic Ocean floor.” In light of these new facts and numbers, a recent European Union report, noting the tense atmosphere of the major international players, mainly among the U.S. and Canada, warned about the potential clashes over Arctic resources. The concerns of the United Nations are well grounded in fear and hope; a spokesperson for the Council on Foreign Relations, declared, “Unless Washington leads the way toward a multilateral diplomatic solution, the Arctic could descend into armed conflict.” If the trend resumes towards the monopolization of oil and gas in the Arctic region, this may indefinitely disrupt, halt, or stop legislation and the fight for sustainable energy development. America’s dependence on oil through the means of fossil fuels is like a nicotine addiction; they think they can stop if and when they choose, but ultimately fail to do so.

Although some progress is made to combat the vitality of fossil fuels in an increasingly energy-hungry world, one invariable truth is that “long-term thinking has never been more important in the energy-industry” given that “energy companies routinely invest billions of dollars in mammoth projects that often have life spans of thirty years or more.” Other harsh realities include the intense acceleration of global energy demand; the world’s population could reach more than nine billion by 2050. The intense rise in population is growing at more alarming rates than energy demand. In addition, current trends regrettably indicate that until the demise of fossil fuels, they will continue to be main source of energy for decades to come; “fossil fuels presently meet about 80% of global energy demand, whereas biofuels, wind and solar energy currently supply less than 1%.” By perpetuating the environmental protection and conservation movement, alternative energies have the potential to supply a far greater demand. These mostly untapped sources of energy are hindered from the existence of fossil fuels. As much of the existing blood lines for extracting oil become more limited and decline in strength, the means of tapping into the world’s future resources located in the Arctic, become more “energy-intensive, difficult and costly to develop,” as a source for the BBC News 

comments. These harsh facts should provide sufficient reason to rally around policies that encourage investment in new technologies of a new caliber that will meet our growing demand for energy, yet at the same, prioritize energy conservation and environmental protection. As James Smith of BBC News comments, no single company or industry will be able to meet the challenge of “satisfying the world’s rising demand for energy while simultaneously reducing CO2 emissions,” such that governments need to formulate the appropriate means (international policies) to ensure a “a relatively smooth transition from a high-carbon global economy to a low-carbon global one.”

Although we need well-defined and proactive policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, it is imperative to remain wary of the fossil fuel industry and their claims of carrying about environmental conservation and protection, these so-called untruthful campaigns. While the Arctic Oil & Gas claim that they have a “viable, politically, environmentally and commercially sound solution for easing the global energy emergency by careful shared development of the Arctic oil and gas resources contained in the Arctic Oceans Commons area,” their incentives, actions and policies point elsewhere. Companies like the AOAG and Shell may tout their ‘green’ initiative in the media, yet behind closed doors, they lobby to cast doubt and block any sustainable energy initiative. The cycle of extracting the world’s future energy supply by means of fossil fuels, stuck in the context of a virtual rat race, is reaching even more lowly limits.