Carl Marrara: Plastic bag bans don’t work

There are very few products banned in the United States or the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Beyond the obvious — things like drugs and explosives — the list includes items such as Cuban cigars, shark fins, and ivory. But could plastic bags soon be added? One of these things is not like the others.

In her co-sponsorship memo introducing a bill to ban plastic bags, Senator Judy Schwank (D-Berks) writes, “Single-use plastic bags are one of the most common sources of litter within our Commonwealth.” This raises an important question: Since cars are the most common source of DUI-related accidents, should we ban automobiles? Littering is both unacceptable and illegal, and rightly so. But banning an entire product category simply because it’s often misused is not a rational policy. Shouldn’t the focus instead be on enforcing existing littering and dumping laws — just as lawmakers have enhanced DUI enforcement?

Banning plastic bags isn’t as straightforward as it may seem. The obvious question is: what replaces them? Likely, paper bags. But are paper bags truly better for the environment?

A study by the Danish Environmental Protection Agency found that a paper bag must be reused 43 times to match the environmental impact of a single-use polyethylene plastic bag. A reusable cotton bag? 7,100 times. In 2019, Greenpeace reported that supermarkets in Great Britain sold 1.58 billion “reusable” plastic bags — about 57 per household. These bags would need to be reused 52 times to justify their environmental cost.

Unintended consequences are already evident. In 2024, New Jersey saw a threefold increase in plastic usage for bags after the ban, as retailers switched to heavier woven and non-woven polypropylene bags. Similar outcomes have been observed in California. These heavier alternatives contributed to a 500 percent increase in greenhouse gas emissions during production. Meanwhile, retailers benefited financially — one study showed that a single store could generate $200,000 in profit from selling these reusable alternatives, especially as grocery pickup and delivery services grow in popularity, requiring new bags for every transaction.

On the economic front, Pennsylvania is home to fourteen plastic bag manufacturing facilities employing over 1,500 people. These jobs are part of a broader plastics and packaging industry that supports more than 5,500 workers, contributes over $500 million in labor income, and generates $2.9 billion in economic output. These are well-paying, family-sustaining jobs — averaging over $87,000 annually. And as these are petroleum-based products reliant on natural gas liquids, Pennsylvania’s natural gas and petrochemical development positions the state to attract further investment and job growth.

We all want a cleaner, safer environment. The plastic manufacturing industry in Pennsylvania is among the cleanest and safest globally. There is a way to balance environmental responsibility with economic opportunity — but blanket government bans are not the answer. A more practical solution is simple: use the reusable bag you already own, as often as possible, and dispose of it properly when it’s no longer usable.

Many people mistakenly place polyethylene bags in curbside recycling bins, which can contaminate entire batches of recyclables. The best practice is to reuse plastic bags when sanitary, repurpose them as trash liners, or take them to dedicated recycling collection bins commonly found at grocery and department store entrances.

Ultimately, the best solution is the simplest: self-discipline and moderation. Government intervention isn’t necessary for families to bring their own bags to the store or decline a bag for a small purchase. It really is that simple.

Carl A. Marrara is the Executive Director of the Pennsylvania Manufacturers Association