Major Solutions to Plastic Bags Recycling - Dissertation Example

?Are Plastic Bags Posing a Great Threat to our Environment Solutions to Plastic Bags Recycling By Each year trillions of plastic bags are used globally and a majority of those bags end up as litter either by deliberate or casual littering. Plastic bags are non-biodegradable material and have been found to clog storm drains, exacerbating flood damages. Moreover, plastic bag litter creates an aesthetic problem when they litter the landscape. Wildlife both on land and in the water have been known to ingest plastic bags with fatal results. The material from which plastic bags are made, in particular polyethylene, is toxic and contaminates soil and vegetation when improperly disposed of. Making matters worse, recycling plastic bags is problematic because they cannot be recycled together with other recyclable material and when they are recycled they can only be recycled into non-recyclable products. It would therefore appear that the solution to the environmental threats posed by plastic bags is to ban them altogether. However, when one considers the low cost of producing plastic bags and their convenience to shoppers together with the economic opportunities for plastic bag producers, it is worth considering whether or not more resources and efforts should be put into recycling plastic bags. This research study conducts a cost-benefit analysis of the feasibility of recycling plastic bags. Thus this research study will analyze the environmental threats posed by plastic bags, the feasibility of banning or recycling plastic bags and other feasible waste management alternatives. A survey is conducted in which 50 shoppers over the age of 18 participate in a questionnaire calculated to determine how often they receive plastic bags, what they do with them and whether or not they are amenable to purchasing and using reusable bags. The results of the survey are discussed. Table of Contents Abstract 2 I.Introduction 4 II.Research Questions 5 A.Primary Research Question 5 B.Secondary Research Questions 5 III.Statement of the Problem 6 IV.Significance of the Study 6 V.Aims and Objectives of the Study 7 VI.Research Methodology 7 VII.Literature Review 8 A.The Environmental Threats associated with Plastic Bags 9 B.Appropriate Policy Responses to the Environmental Threats of Plastic Bags 11 C.Recycling as a Solution to the Environmental Threats Associated with Plastic Bags 12 VIII.Data Results and Analysis 14 A.Results 14 B.Analysis 15 IX.Conclusion 18 List of References 23 Are Plastic Bags Posing a Great Threat to our Environment?: Solutions to Plastic Bags Recycling I. Introduction Trillions of plastic bags are used globally each year (Ramaswamy & Sharma, 2011). Plastic bags are made of polymer polyethylene and are non-biodegradable (Sharma, 2007). Plastic together with polyethylene waste is accumulating at an alarming rate and is increasingly threatening the environment in a variety of ways (Usha, Sangeetha, & Palaniswamy, 2011). Complicating matters, when plastic bags are recycled, they lose some of its strength and release toxins so that recycled bags have limited use once redistributed (Sharma, 2007). However, researchers have found that polyethylene, specifically low density polyethylene used in the production of plastic bags can be recycled into petrochemicals and used to produce new types of plastic products or turned into “refined fuels” (Achillas, Roupakias, Megalokonomos, Lappas, & Antonakou, 2007). Even so, plastic bags cannot usually be recycled with other recyclable material. Therefore resources must be committed to segregating plastic bags from the general recyclable trash. This takes time, money and manpower over and beyond that which is necessary for recycling the ordinary recyclable trash. In addition, when plastic bags are recycled into usable material, they can only be recycled into non-recyclable products (Reddy, 2011). Sustainable waste management of plastic is a growing global concern because some plastic and polyethylene take thousands of years to degrade and therefore overcrowds landfills and pollutes the environment. Plastic bags can sit in a landfill for 20 years or more before they decompose. However, with exposure to the elements, plastic bags are often carried from landfills by the wind and the rain to other areas of the environment (Cronin, 2009). Plastic bags are not only cheaply produced, but are convenient to use. As a result plastic bags are used widely and represent approximately 80 percent of the packing methods used in grocery, convenience and department stores. The difficulty with plastic bags however, is that millions of the plastic bags used end up as litter and as they break down, they release toxins that contaminate the soil, waterways and marine life (Roach, 2003). This research paper analyses the environmental threat posed by the high usage and disposal of plastic bags and investigates whether recycling is the most feasible solution. This research paper is therefore guided by a primary research question and a number of secondary research questions. II. Research Questions A. Primary Research Question The primary research question is: Are plastic bags posing a significant threat to the environment that can be contained by recycling? B. Secondary Research Questions How are plastic bays a threat to the environment? How serious is the environmental threat posed by plastic bags? Can recycling minimize the environmental threat posed by plastic bags? What other measures can be taken to minimize the environmental threat posed by garbage bags? III. Statement of the Problem Plastic bags are cheap to produce and convenient for consumers to use as a result they are reportedly overused and a major source of litter globally (Ready, 2011). As a “non-biodegradable” product, plastic bags as a source of litter pose a threat to the environment in a number of ways (Reddy, 2011, p. 47). To begin with, plastic bag litter presents an aesthetic impact for tourism. Moreover, plastic bags clog drains and gutters creating difficulties during storm flooding and surges (Reddy, 2011). Plastic can also find its way to the ocean, rivers, lakes and seas and poses a threat to aquatic life particularly when ingested. Plastics are also often consumed by livestock with fatal consequences (Reddy, 2011). Plastic bags also release toxins that can contaminate soil and vegetation (Reddy, 2011). Therefore the proper disposal of plastic bags is entirely important for minimizing the damages posed by the chemical composition of plastic bags. IV. Significance of the Study The excessive use and littering of plastic bags globally has engendered concerns about environmental health and thus a debate over whether or not plastic bags should be banned or subjected to more rigid recycling policies (Krehbiel, 2012). This research study contributes to the debate and provides some insight into whether or not the environmental damages posed by plastic bags outweigh its convenience to consumers. Thus a cost-benefit analysis is conducted in weighing the benefits of plastic bags over the environmental disadvantages of plastic bags and determines whether banning or managed waste disposal is the more appropriate solution to the problem. V. Aims and Objectives of the Study The Aims and objectives of this study are as follows: To identify the environmental threats posed by plastic bags. To identify the benefits of plastic bags. To determine whether or not a ban on plastic bags is the most feasible solution. To determine whether a more rigid waste management policy relative to plastic bags is the more feasible solution. VI. Research Methodology This is an exploratory research project in that this research study explores the environmental threats associated with plastic bags and analyses the benefits of plastic bag consumption. Thus a cost-benefit analysis is conducted weighing the benefits of plastic bag consumption against the environmental threats posed by plastic bags. In order to conduct this cost-benefit analysis primary and secondary sources of data are collected and analysed. Primary data are collected from the distribution of questionnaires among 50 consumers. The sample is stratified, since selection is based on how well the respondents represent consumers. In this regard, participants are not only required to be of the age of consent, but are required to be consumers who shop regularly. An initial sample is selected among 100 individuals with preliminary questions designed to determine that the participants are regular shoppers (see Appendix 1). The 50 most regular shoppers will be used in the collection and analysis of the data collected via the main questionnaire. The main questionnaire is constructed to identify the prevalence of plastic bag use, preferences for plastic bags, use of plastic bags and disposal habits (see Appendix 2). The data collected from the main questionnaire will help to determine the convenience of plastic bags for consumers and whether or not consumers are amenable to recycling policies or whether or not waste management habits cannot be modified justifying a total ban on plastic bags. The only ethical issues are the question of consent and privacy/confidentiality. In this regard, the questionnaire is a blind item and participants will not be required to identify themselves. They will be informed that the data collected via the questionnaire will be used in a research study and the details of the research study. The participants will also be informed that they are free to refuse participation and will be informed that they will not be identified in the study. Secondary data are collected from a review of the literature and includes empirical research studies, facts, history, theories and assumptions relative to the composition of plastic bags, the use of plastic bags, the benefits and disadvantages of plastic bags. In particular, the secondary data will establish the environmental threats of plastic bags, the use of plastic bags and difficulties and solutions related to plastic bag waste management. This secondary data are collected from scholarly journals, textbooks and reports. VII. Literature Review There are a number of factors contributing to the environmental risks associated with plastic bags. These factors include energy costs of production, the “limited lifespan” of plastic bags in terms of consumer usefulness, landfill capacity, the biodegradable nature of plastic, drain clogging, toxins in the chemical composition of plastic, threat to vegetation, marine life and soil among other concerns (Ritch, Brennan, & MacLeod, 2009, p. 168). A consumer “throwaway culture” only contribute to the difficulties involved in both the sustainable development and sustainable consumption of plastic bags (Ritch, et. al., 2009, p. 168). This part of the paper reviews the literature with a view to identifying the environmental threats posed by plastic bags and the feasibility of modifying consumer behaviour for minimizing or removing the threats of plastic bag consumption. Alternatively, the literature is reviewed with a view to determining the extent to which it is feasible to ban the production and/or use of plastic bags altogether. A. The Environmental Threats associated with Plastic Bags The environmental threats posed by plastic bags are well-documented in the literature. For example, Krehbiel (2012) reports that plastic bags have been frequently observed littering lakes, roads, rivers, oceans, seas and have posed a significant threat to wildlife everywhere. Animals eat plastic bags and are at risk of choking or being exposed to the toxic components associated with plastic (Krehbiel, 2012). Plastics are among the most frequently and voluminously used products in industrial, commercial and residential circles (Romer, 2007). Plastic bags typically used for carrying grocery and other consumer goods are usually polyethylene-based and are therefore manufactured out of gas which originates from natural gas or crude oil components similar to those from natural gas. In any event, natural gas or crude oil components are both sources of “non-renewable fossil fuels” (Romer, 2007, p. 439). Polyethylene takes hundreds of years to degrade and resulting plastic bags containing polyethylene take at least 20 years to biodegrade (Bonhomme, Cuer, Delort, Lemaire, Sancelme, & Scott, 2003). Manufacturers find polyethylene appealing because it is flexible for shaping, sizing, forming and coloring (Bonhomme, et. al., 2003). The production and distribution of plastic bags contribute to radiation damages, depletion of the Ozone layer, and damages to minerals and fossil fuels. These environmental damages occur as a result of the fact that plastic bags are produced by using and converting fossils and energy (Muthu, Li, Hu, & Mok, 2009). Even so the most serious threats to the environment posed by plastic bags is found in the disposal of plastic bags and this is primarily related to consumer behaviour and corresponding state policies (Muthu, Li, Hu, & Mok, 2011). However, when consumers decide to properly dispose of plastic bags in the trash and they make their way to the landfill, this can also contribute to environmental damages as plastic bags are entirely “aerodynamic” (Romer, 2007, 443). Regardless of whether deliberately or accidentally littered, when plastic bags are littered, they can cause serious damages to the environment. For example, Turtles and marine birds frequently confuse plastic bags with jelly wish and eat them. As a result many of these birds and turtles die (Romer, 2007). Moreover, as the plastic begins to break down, it remains toxic with more easier ingestible parts exposed to the environment. Marine animals are known to “ingest plastic particles” and since they cannot properly digest and process plastic, the plastic remains in their systems and are transferred up the food chain (Romer, 2007, p. 444). Romer (2007) also reports that an accumulated lump of garbage is currently afloat in the Pacific Ocean which is reportedly as large of Texas and is primarily comprised of plastic bags and garbage. This accumulation of floating garbage was formed via Northern Pacific Gyre mobilization which moves the garbage to the centre of the Gyre. The Gyre “pulls the garbage into international waters” and as a result it has been entirely impossible to identify which state is responsible for cleaning it up (Romer, 2007, p. 444). The production, distribution and disposal of plastic bags have therefore proven to place difficult strains on the environment. The environmental risks range from contamination due to emissions in the production of plastic bags, to damages to wildlife and marine life as a result of littering and the toxins contained in plastic bags. There are also environmental risks associated with clean-up and the accumulation of plastic debris. Drain clogging, together with the fact that plastic bags are made of polyethylene which virtually has perpetual life indicate that plastic bags are a serious environmental threat. B. Appropriate Policy Responses to the Environmental Threats of Plastic Bags Government policies play a significant role in consumer behaviour relative to the disposal of garbage bags. In this regard, there are typically three choices guiding consumer behaviour: reusing plastic bags, recycling and disposing via landfills (Muthu, Li, Hu, Mok, & Ding, 2012). Obviously reusing and recycling appear to be the most tenable options because disposal to the landfills have proven problematic as a result of the resistance to decomposition and the aerodynamic nature of plastic bags. In other words, disposal of plastic bags indirectly and directly results in littering which has proven to be detrimental to the environment. State policies have ranged from taxing the use of plastic shopping bags, mandatory recycling efforts by industries and commercial outlets, to a total ban on plastic shopping bags. For example, Ireland introduced a 15 Euro cent tax on plastic bags in 2002. Previously, consumers were able to obtain these bags free. The Irish tax resulted in a 90% decrease in the use of plastic bags which leads to less litter and reduced environmental damages (Convery, McDonnell, & Ferreira, 2007). Scotland and the UK have taken a different approach to the reduction of plastic bag use and are cooperating with businesses to encourage a voluntary reduction of plastic bag production and distribution. For example, recycling bins are placed at stores or consumers are granted a minimal credit for returning plastic bags (Wehr & Robbins, 2011). In the US, reducing plastic bag use has proven to be more problematic since the US is the world’s third largest plastic bag manufacturer employing more than 1 million Americans and contributing US$379 billion to the US economy annually. The US focuses on education as a means of modifying consumer behaviour. Banning bills have proven to be futile in the US. For example, a 1998 Bill to ban the use of single-use plastic bags in California was rejected by California’s senate in 2010. However, single-use plastic bags are banned in Bangladesh, Taiwan, South Africa and elsewhere (Wehr & Robbins, 2011). It would therefore appear that state policies relative to solving the plastic bag problem with respect to environmental risks are to modify consumer behaviour. This is evidenced by taxing policies which influence consumers to use fewer plastic bags, or bans which ensures that consumers cannot use plastic bags, recycling policies which are intended to encourage positive disposal behaviour, or education intended to heighten awareness of the dangers of improperly disposing of plastic bags. A review of the literature informs however, that recycling is not a viable solution for consumers. C. Recycling as a Solution to the Environmental Threats Associated with Plastic Bags According to Spoolman and Miller (2011) between 500 million and 1 trillion used plastic bags are improperly disposed of globally. Moreover, less than 1% of the plastic bags used by consumers is recycled globally (Spoolman & Miller, 2011). The question is therefore whether or not it is simply consumer irresponsibility or consumer throwaway mentality alone responsible for the low recycling rate of plastic bags. According to Romer (2007), the problem with the low percentage of plastic bag recycling is partially attributed to the fact that plastic bags are not amenable to recycling since they cannot be converted back to reusable bags. Romer (2007) reports that although stores typically have plastic bag recycling collection bins, only a very small percentage of the bags deposited are recycled. Moreover, when plastic bags are deposited in curbside recycling bins they often create problems for the recycling process. Plastic bags are generally regarded as “either not economically or not environmentally efficient to recycle” and as such are usually removed from curbside recycle bins and categorized as “residue” (Romer, 2007, p. 445). Moreover, when plastic bags are not segregated from the general recycling garbage, they usually …become caught in recycling processing equipment, causing recycling sort lines to go offline while waiting for plastic bags to be removed from mechanical gears (Romer, 2007, p. 445). Recycling firms typically spend a great deal of money and resources sorting plastic bags from recycling programmes. For example, Norcal Recycling invests more than US$494,000 each year for sorting staff to remove “non-recyclable materials, including plastic bags from recycling streams” and an additional US$100,000 each year for “clearing machinery jams caused by plastic bags” (Romer, 2007, pp. 445-446). In addition, to the experiences with plastic bags in the general recycling programmes, special programmes for recycling plastic bags have also proven to be complicated. According to Romer (2007), plastic bags are only capable of down-cycling and cannot genuinely be recycled. In other words, plastic bags cannot be converted into new plastic bags, but have to be converted into other plastic objects that may not be recycled again (Romer, 2007). Miller (2005) informs that in addition to the excessive resources needed to process and recycle plastic bags, a majority of plastic have chemicals that require their removal before the plastic product can be recycled. In addition, once recycled, the resins left by plastic bags yield minimal reusable products (Miller, 2005). It would therefore appear that recycling plastic bags is not a viable solution to environmental risks associated with plastic bags. VIII. Data Results and Analysis A. Results The fifty respondents selected were 40 females between the ages of 21 and 55. 15 of the respondents were females aged between 21 and 30 and the remaining female respondents were between the ages of 30 and 55. The 10 male respondents were between the ages of 35 and 60. All of the respondents shopped at least weekly with the female respondents between the age of 30 and 55 admitting to shopping several times a week. All of the respondents indicated that they strongly agreed that they were given plastic bags when they shopped. 35 of the respondents strongly agreed that their purchases were typically placed in more plastic bags than they need and the remaining respondents agreed with this proposition. 45 or the respondents strongly agreed that they preferred reusable bags but that they cost too much money. One male respondent aged 55 disagreed and the remaining respondents 1 male aged 30 and three females between the ages of 21 and 30 were neutral. 30 of the respondents disagreed with the statement that they have reusable bags but do not remember to bring them to the store. 10 of the respondents who were female shoppers between the ages of 30 and 55 agreed that they did have reusable bags but did not remember to bring them to the store. 45 of the respondents strongly agreed that if reusable bags costs less they would purchase them more often. Five of the respondents (four males of varying ages and one female aged 25) were neutral. All of the respondents either agreed (30) or strongly agreed (20) that if plastic bags were only available for a fee they would not use as many. 40 respondents disagreed with the statement that they would not use plastic bags at all if they were only available for a fee. Five male respondents agreed and five female respondents were neutral. The ages of these respondents were too varied to be of any significance. Only two of the respondents (one female aged 34 and one male aged 50) disagreed that they never recycled plastic bags at their stored. The remaining respondents strongly agreed with this statement. Only 3 (two females aged 30-55 and one male aged 25) of the respondents agreed that they recycle plastic bags at curbside recycle bins. Half of the respondents (8 males between 25-60 and 17 females evenly representing all age groups) strongly disagreed that they keep plastic bags until they cannot be used. The remaining respondents were split between neutral and agreed. 45 of the respondents indicated that they strongly agreed with the statement that they dispose of plastic bags in the trash destined for the landfill. 3 agreed, one was neutral and the other two disagreed. B. Analysis The results of the questionnaire indicate that frequent shoppers are inundated with plastic bags and usually leave the store with more plastic bags than they need. Thus research findings as reported in the literature suggesting that policy directions toward modifying consumer behaviour are not entirely addressing the problem (Spoolman & Miller, 2011). It would appear, that while it is necessary to address the behaviour of consumers, it is also necessary to address the behaviour of those who serve consumers. Providing the consumer with more plastic bags than they need will only increase the likelihood that consumers will dispose of plastic bags as soon as possible. Although the results indicate that a majority of consumers will use plastic bags for as long as they can be used, frequent shoppers receiving more and more plastic bags will increasingly confront the problem of having too many plastic bags and will inevitably dispose of them. Complicating matters, the questionnaire results also indicate that consumers will more likely dispose of the plastic bags in the landfill trash as opposed to the recycle bin. Thus when consumers are excessively provided with plastic bags, the disposal to landfills is increased and therefore the risk of littering is increased. These results are consistent with findings in the literature that most of the plastic bags disposed of end up in the landfill and a lot of the plastic bags in the landfill find its way to the general landscape (Ramaswamy & Sharma, 2011). Recycling plastic bags at the store and at curbside recycle bins was not popular among the respondents participating in this study’s questionnaire. These results are consistent with findings in the literature that a very small percentage of plastic bags are recycled (Romer, 2007; Roach, 2003; Miller, 2005). All indications are that education about the limits of and expense involved in recycling or mere bad habit informs consumer behaviour. Or it might just be that the sheer number of plastic bags that consumers end up with makes it particularly difficult to place them in the curbside recycle bin or to take them to the store each time they become too much to keep in the home. To start with, curbside recycling is not picked up as often as regular landfill trash. Moreover, with the cost of gas, it might be entirely inconvenient to return to the store weekly to return plastic bags. In addition, most curbside recycle bins warn that plastic bags are not accepted. It would therefore appear that customer services have a role to play in the plastic bag pollution problems. If these bags were sparingly distributed among consumers it would be less likely that they would instinctively dispose of them in the landfill trash, or simply drop them in the recycle bin at the curbside without giving it another thought. Obviously, consumers who shop regularly and even those who do not shop as frequently end up with too many plastic bags. Not only does this make them eager to dispose of them at their earliest and most convenient opportunity, but it also ensures that they do not have to consider options to plastic bags. Customer services can assist in eliminating the pollution problem associated with plastic bags by offering consumers fewer bags and persistently offering to sell consumers reusable bags. When a cost-benefit analysis is conducted, the cost to the environment, the cost of segregating plastic bags from curbside recycling and the fact that plastic bags cannot be recycled genuinely justifies a ban on plastic bags or at the very least, the reduction in the use of plastic bags (Miller, 2005; Romer, 2007). One solution however, is the mandatory use of fewer raw materials and the use of reusable material in the manufacturing and production of plastic bags. However, this will not solve the problem of the air-borne nature of plastic bags and its propensity for littering the landscape and marine life. The most viable solution however appears to be in modifying consumer behaviour. The questionnaire results of this research study indicate that consumers are amenable to using reusable, earth-friendly bags. However, the cost of those bags and the inconvenience of not having enough to carry goods act as an obstacle to carrying the goods in reusable bags. A lesson can therefore be learned from these results. If plastic bags cost as much as reusable earth-friendly bags and were therefore not as abundantly available as earth-friendly bags, consumers would use plastic bags less frequently and would keep them for as long as they can be used. Thus reduction of the use of plastic bags would follow and this would ensure less damage to the environment. This was the experience in Ireland where plastic bags were subjected to a tax levy (Convery, et. al., 2007). IX. Conclusion Findings in the literature and the results of the questionnaire conducted in this research study indicate that recycling is not a viable solution to the plastic bag pollution problem. While plastic bags are excessively used by consumers and typically end up either directly or indirectly littering the landscape and marine life, consumer behaviour is not the only contributing factor. Customer service providers have a significant role to play in consumer behavior. As demonstrated in this research, consumers are typically given far more plastic bags than they need. Making matters worse, recycling is not a viable option, particularly when consumers have far too many plastic bags in their possession to fit into curbside recycle bins or to return to the store each time they have too many plastic bags to keep. Since recycling does not appear to be a viable solution, it would appear that either a ban on the use of plastic bags, or legislative intervention ensuring that plastic bags are produced using more earth-friendly biodegradable products and recyclable products appears to be a better option than recycling plastic bags as they are currently made. Even so, the energy used and emissions produced will continue to harm the environment. It would therefore appear, that for the time being at least, taxing or charging a fee for plastic bags will have the dual effect of modifying customer services practices of excessive packing and consumer behavior in terms of disposing of plastic bags. Appendix 1 Preliminary Questionnaire Used for Selecting a Stratified Population Sample Age: Gender: How Often do you shop? Several Times a Week:___________ Weekly________ Monthly_________Rarely____________ Appendix 2 Indicate your responses by circling the response that more accurately represents your feelings, experience or knowledge. 1. I am usually given plastic bags when I shop. A. Strongly Agree. B. Agree. C. Strongly Disagree. D. Disagree. E. Neutral. 2. My purchases are usually placed in more plastic bags than they usually need. A. Strongly Agree. B. Agree. C. Strongly Disagree. D. Disagree. E. Neutral. 3. I prefer reusable bags but they cost too much money. A. Strongly Agree. B. Agree. C. Strongly Disagree. D. Disagree. E. Neutral. 4. I have reusable bags but I don’t always remember to bring them to the store. A. Strongly Agree. B. Agree. C. Strongly Disagree. D. Disagree. E. Neutral. 5. If reusable bags cost less I would purchase them more often. A. Strongly Agree. B. Agree. C. Strongly Disagree. D. Disagree. E. Neutral. 6. If plastic bags were only available for a fee, I would not use as many as I do. A. Strongly Agree. B. Agree. C. Strongly Disagree. D. Disagree. E. Neutral. 7. If plastic bags were only available for a fee, I would not use them at all. A. Strongly Agree. B. Agree. C. Strongly Disagree. D. Disagree. E. Neutral. 8. I never recycle plastic bags at stores. A. Strongly Agree. B. Agree. C. Strongly Disagree. D. Disagree. E. Neutral. 9. I recycle plastic bags at curbside recycle bins. A. Strongly Agree. B. Agree. C. Strongly Disagree. D. Disagree. E. Neutral. 10. I keep and use plastic bags until they cannot be reused. A. Strongly Agree. B. Agree. C. Strongly Disagree. D. Disagree. E. Neutral. 11. I always dispose of plastic bags in the trash for the landfill. A. Strongly Agree. B. Agree. C. Strongly Disagree. D. Disagree. E. Neutral. List of References Achilias, D. S.; Roupakias, R.; Megalokonomos, P.; Lappas, A. A. and Antonakou, E. V. (November 19, 2007). “Chemical Recycling of Plastic Wastes Made From Polyethylene (LDPE and HDPE) and Polypropylene (PP).” Journal of Hazardous Materials, Vol. 149(3): 536-542. Bonhomme, S.; Cuer, A.; Delort, A.M.; Lemaire, J.; Sancelme, M. and Scott, G. (2003). “Environmental Biodegradation of Polyethylene.” Polymer Degradation and Stability, Vol. 81: 441-452. Convery, F.; McDonnell, S. and Ferreira, S. (2007). “The Most Popular Tax in Europe? Lesson from the Irish Plastic Bags Levy.” Environ Resource Econ, Vol. 38: 1-11. Cronin, A. (2009). Making a Difference: the Changing the World Handbook. Ontario, CA: Crabtree Publishing Company. Krehbiel, R. (January 2012). “A Solution Not in the Bag: Why Recycling Cannot Solve the Plastic Bag Problem in Washington.” Environmental Washington Research and Policy Center, 1-16. Miller, G. T. (2005). Sustaining the Earth: An Integrated Approach. Pacific Grove, GA: Thomson Brooks/Cole. Muthu, S.S.; Li, Y.; Hu, J.Y. and Mok, P.Y. (2009). “An Exploratory Comparative Study on Eco-Impact of Paper and Plastic Bags.” Journal of Fiber Bioengineering and Informatics, Vol.1(4): 307-320. Muthu, S. S.; Li, Y.; Hu, J. Y. and Mok, P. Y. (2011). “Carbon Footprint of Shopping (grocery) Bags in China, Hong Kong and India.” Atmospheric Environment, Vol. 45: 469-475. Muthu, S. S.; Li, Y.; Hu, L.Y.; Mok, P. Y. and Ding, X. (2012). “Eco-Impact of Plastic and Paper Shopping Bags.” Journal of Engineered Fibers and Fabrics, Vol. 7(1): 26-37. Ramaswamy, V. and Sharma, H. R. (2011). “Plastic Bags – Threat to Environment and Cattle Health Retrospective Study From Gondar City of Ethiopia.” IIOAB Journal, Vol. 2(1): 7-12. Reddy, P. J. (2011). Municipal Solid Waste Management Processing. The Netherlands: CRC Press/Balkema. Ritch, E.; Brennan, C. and MacLeod, C. (March 2009). “Plastic Bag Politics: Modifying Consumer Behaviour for Sustainable Development.” International Journal of Consumer Studies, Vol. 33(2): 168-174. Roach, J. (2003). “Are Plastic Grocery Bags Sacking the Environment?” National Geographic News, September 2, 2003, 1-3. Romer, J. R. (2007). “The Evolution of San Francisco’s Plastic-Bag Ban.” Golden Gate University Environmental Law Journal, Vol. 1(2): 439-465. Sharma, B. K. (2007). Environmental Chemistry. Delhi: Krishna Prakashan Media (P) Ltd. Spoolman, S. and Miller, G. T. (2011). Living in the Environment: Principles, Connections and Solutions. Cengage Learning. Usha, R.; Sangeetha, T. and Palaniswamy, M. (2011). “Screening of Polyethylene Degrading Microorganisms from Garbage Soil.” Libyan Agriculture Research Center Journal International, Vol. 2(4): 200-204. Wehr, K. and Robbins, P. (2011). Green Culture: An A-to-Z Guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Read More