San Francisco is banning reusable shopping bags to prevent outside germs from entering grocery stores as the coronavirus pandemic affects cities around the country,
The new ordinance from the San Francisco Department of Public Health aims to reinforce existing social distancing protocols by restricting customers from bringing their own bags, mugs, or other reusable items to essential stores, according to a statement.
San Francisco was one of the first cities in the U.S. to ban the use of plastic shopping bags in 2007 to reduce the environmental impact caused by plastic waste, according to SFGate.com.
San Francisco Mayor London Breed (D) on Wednesday extended stay-at-home orders for the public, running until May 3.
“I can’t reiterate enough how important it is for all of us to continue to comply, for all of us to continue to be good citizens, to cooperate,” Breed said.
Today we officially extended the stay at home health order through May 3. I want to thank the people of San Francisco for continuing to do their part to save lives. I know this isn’t easy but we will get through it together. pic.twitter.com/4rggISBnQv
— London Breed (@LondonBreed) March 31, 2020
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Karma is a bitch!
If you are going to Fat Stan’s Disco be sure to wear single use plastic bags in your hair…
Any law, regulation or public policy that is temporarily suspended during this pandemic should be permanently revoked.
Careful, you’ll end up throwing the baby out with the bathwater with that one.
No plastic bags.
No reusable bags.
That leaves paper bags. (Made from trees.)
What’s a tree-hugger to use?
paper bags made from free-range trees is the common sense compromise/solution.
Tree huggers can rejoice, but they won’t, in the use of tree farms. We use tree’s efficient regenerative capabilities to suck evil CO2 out of the air, then cut them down and make things with them that get buried after serving mankind or stay unburned for use in furniture or buildings, which has the effect of carbon sequestration —>everybody happy happy happy.
But NOOOO…
How about if we only use trees that are about to get destroyed by forest fires?
Sir David King was the genius behind Britain’s incredibly stupid climate policy as put into law in 2008 . In particular he got the Government to give tax incentives to promote the sale of diesels.
https://www.thegwpf.com/ex-chief-scientist-our-advice-to-govt-on-preventing-global-warming-was-wrong/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_Change_Act_2008
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/uk-to-ban-new-gas-vehicles-diesel-cars-by-2035-2020-02-04
The British academic science establishment have been strongly supportive of King and the UK Climate act .
Nature , Nature Climate change and the BBC have been among the worlds chief promotors of King type misinformation for the last 25 years.
Plastic bags are non toxic and virtually inert. They pose no threat to the environment. Have excellent potential as fuel for trash to energy. I live in suburban new jersey and don’t see them strew about, not even in the supermarket lot. Because a few people are pigs we all get penalized? that sounds juvenile. Plastic bags have a handle and are much easier to carry than paper. This is all about virtue signally and fake environmentalism caving to the greenie weenies.
Imagine being touched by a reusable bag and liberals only now in a pandemic realizing the bags are filthy and carry germs.
All to eliminate cheap and sanitary disposable bags. That people like.
Reusable bags are just yet another example of the failure of central planning to address environmental problems (and energy). In the days of razor thin disposable bags, my shopping bags ALWAYS got reuse as dog poop bags, kitty littler bags, and waste basket liners. I still have the same needs. Ergo I now use heavy reusable bags for dog poop, kitty litter, and waste basket liners. This is an unintended consequence of central planning. It wasn’t supposed to work this way. I was supposed to reuse my shopping bags at the supermarket and find some other way (what way?) for alternative uses like dog poop, kitty litter, and wastebasket liners. OK there are commercial waste basket liners. But I have to buy them and I have already paid (a nominal amount) for the reusable shopping bag …
I am thinking about, since we are all confined to our homes, writing and submitting a series of articles on the futility of central planning when it comes to energy and the environment. I would start with the CFL debacle and the triumph of the LED. My conversion to LED had less to do with inconsequential energy efficiency and more to do with the 10+ year expected life. I figured I have 130+ bulbs in my home. Incandescents last about a year, so I was changing a bulb about every 3 days. I had to keep a cabinet in the laundry room filled with replacement bulbs at all times. At last I am free. But the government was in bed with CFL manufacturers at the time to push the 5 year CFL bulb and I wanted the 10 year LED bulb. It was quite a journey. Government bureaucrats have less wisdom than the average Joe. Hence central planning always fails.
Aurthor lazily offers link to a 20 page city ordinance as evidence in support of calling out hippocratical ironic stupitude. Dude(tte), how about narrowing to a page, paragraph, or section that supports your assertion?
Reusing bags is a conservative, in its most basic understanding, idea. Waste not, want not. Is anyone really put out by the idea that that shopper six feet away and immediately in front of you is going to infect you with their NPR tote bag? What if it’s a reused paper bag? Are NRA tote bags ok? Get a grip.
10 pennies per paper bag in CA. Governments of all kinds are going to suffer massive shortfalls in tax revenue. This order, if true, isn’t evidence of enviro hypocrisy, its pragmatism.