The Grocery Bag Saga: California’s Regulatory Rollercoaster
Of all the perplexing policies enacted by the California government, the obsessive regulation of grocery bags stands out as particularly bewildering. The latest twist in this ongoing saga is Senate Bill 1053, which will ban plastic carryout bags effective January 1, 2026. Under this new law, shoppers will be allowed to bring their own reusable bags or pay at least 10 cents for a paper bag that contains a minimum of 40% post-consumer recycled material, with that requirement increasing to 50% by 2028.
This new legislation marks a significant reversal from the 2014 law, Senate Bill 270, which aimed to tackle the issue of plastic pollution in the ocean by banning “flimsy” plastic grocery bags. The rationale behind SB 270 was that these lightweight bags not only clogged recycling machines but also became airborne, often ending up on beaches and in the ocean, where they posed a threat to marine life.
The Grocery Industry’s Support
Interestingly, SB 270 garnered support from major grocery chains, which were frustrated by the patchwork of local ordinances regulating carryout bags. Before the statewide ban, 87 cities and counties in California had already implemented their own restrictions. The California Grocers Association expressed that the situation was “untenable,” advocating for a uniform statewide approach. Governor Jerry Brown signed SB 270 into law on September 30, 2014, mandating that grocery stores provide only recycled paper bags or thicker plastic bags that could be reused up to 125 times. The law also required stores to charge customers 10 cents per bag, a fee that was not considered burdensome since the stores retained the revenue.
The Expiration of Recycling Programs
Prior to SB 270, supermarkets and larger stores were already obligated under the 1989 California Integrated Waste Management Act to implement an At-Store Recycling Program for plastic bags. This program required stores to accept returned plastic bags from customers and maintain records for three years. However, in 2020, the legislature allowed this program to expire, raising questions about the state’s commitment to effective waste management.
The Bigger Picture of Plastic Waste
One might assume that plastic bags are the primary culprits contributing to ocean plastic waste, but this is far from the truth. According to a 2018 report by NBC News, cigarette butts have been the most collected item on beaches for 32 consecutive years, accounting for about one-third of all collected debris. This raises an important question: if the goal is to reduce plastic pollution, why aren’t cities and states enacting bans on cigarettes, which are made from cellulose acetate, a type of plastic?
The Influence of Tobacco Settlements
The answer may lie in the financial implications of such bans. States have historically benefited from substantial cash settlements with tobacco companies, which may explain the reluctance to target the cigarette industry. In contrast, the push against plastic bags, utensils, and containers appears to be driven by a lack of similar financial incentives from the oil industry.
The War on Plastics and Big Oil
The recent analysis of SB 1053 highlights a broader agenda: the fight against big oil. Senator Catherine Blakespear, the author of the bill, noted that as California transitions to renewable energy sources, oil companies are not reducing their drilling activities. By 2050, plastics are projected to account for half of global oil demand, surpassing shipping and airlines. This suggests that California’s regulatory efforts are not merely about environmental protection but are also intertwined with a larger battle against the fossil fuel industry.
Governor Newsom’s Actions Against Oil Companies
Governor Gavin Newsom has taken a strong stance against the oil industry, spearheading legislation to penalize oil refiners for “excess profits.” He has also called for regulatory control over refinery maintenance schedules and oil inventories. In September 2023, California filed a lawsuit against five oil companies, alleging decades of deception and environmental damage that have cost taxpayers billions. This ongoing battle against the fossil fuel industry is evident in the recent signing of three bills aimed at further restricting oil and gas operations.
Legal Actions Against ExxonMobil
In a notable development, California’s Attorney General Rob Bonta announced a groundbreaking lawsuit against ExxonMobil, seeking accountability for misleading the public about plastic recyclability and contributing to environmental pollution. The lawsuit references a 1989 advertisement by ExxonMobil that promoted recycling while failing to disclose the limitations of plastic recycling processes.
The Future of Plastic Regulation
As California continues to navigate the complexities of plastic regulation, the implications for consumers are significant. With the potential for rising costs associated with gasoline, plastics, and other goods, the state’s approach to environmental issues raises questions about the balance between regulation and economic impact. While the government may view these measures as necessary for environmental protection, the financial burden on consumers could be substantial.
In this intricate web of legislation and regulation, the grocery bag saga serves as a microcosm of California’s broader environmental policies and the ongoing struggle against plastic pollution. As the state grapples with these challenges, the question remains: how will these regulations shape the future of consumer behavior and environmental responsibility in California?