DOCSLIB.ORG

Life Cycle Assessment of Supermarket Carrier Bags: a Review of the Bags Available in 2006

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Life Cycle Assessment of Supermarket Carrier Bags: a Review of the Bags Available in 2006 Life cycle assessment of supermarket carrier bags: a review of the bags available in 2006 Report: SC030148 The Environment Agency is the leading public body protecting and improving the environment in England and Wales. It’s our job to make sure that air, land and water are looked after by everyone in today’s society, so that tomorrow’s generations inherit a cleaner, healthier world. Our work includes tackling flooding and pollution incidents, reducing industry’s impacts on the environment, cleaning up rivers, coastal waters and contaminated land, and improving wildlife habitats. This report is the result of research commissioned and funded by the Environment Agency. Published by: Author(s): Environment Agency, Horizon House, Deanery Road, Bristol, Dr. Chris Edwards BS1 5AH Jonna Meyhoff Fry www.environment-agency.gov.uk Dissemination Status: Publicly available © Environment Agency Keywords: February 2011 Carrier bags, life cycle assessment, LCA ISBN: 978-1-84911-226-0 Research Contractor: All rights reserved. This document may be reproduced with prior Intertek Expert Services permission of the Environment Agency. Cleeve Road Leatherhead, KT22 7SB The views expressed in this document are not necessarily those of the Environment Agency. Tel 01372 370900 This report is printed on Cyclus Print, a 100% recycled stock, Environment Agency project manager: which is 100% post consumer waste and is totally chlorine free. Dr Joanna Marchant Water used is treated and in most cases returned to source in Environment Agency better condition than removed. Kings Meadow House Kings Meadow Road Further copies of this report are available from: Reading, RG 1 8DQ The Environment Agency’s National Customer Contact Centre by emailing [email protected] or by Tel 0118 9535346 telephoning 08708 506506. Product Code: SCHO0711BUAN-E-E Evidence at the Environment Agency Evidence underpins the work of the Environment Agency. It provides an up-to-date understanding of the world about us, helps us to develop tools and techniques to monitor and manage our environment as efficiently and effectively as possible. It also helps us to understand how the environment is changing and to identify what the future pressures may be. The work of the Environment Agency’s Evidence Directorate is a key ingredient in the partnership between research, guidance and operations that enables the Environment Agency to protect and restore our environment. This report was produced by the Research, Monitoring and Innovation team within Evidence. The team focuses on four main areas of activity: • Setting the agenda, by providing the evidence for decisions; • Maintaining scientific credibility, by ensuring that our programmes and projects are fit for purpose and executed according to international standards; • Carrying out research, either by contracting it out to research organisations and consultancies or by doing it ourselves; • Delivering information, advice, tools and techniques, by making appropriate products available. Miranda Kavanagh Director of Evidence Advisory Board This project was informed and assisted by an Advisory Board set up by the Environment Agency. Iris Anderson Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) Peter Askew Department for Business, Innovation and skills (BIS)1 Jane Bickerstaffe Industry Council for Packaging and the Environment (Incpen) Terry Coleman (Chair) Environment Agency Jeff Cooper Environment Agency2 Julia Faria Local Environmental Quality Division, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra)2 Bob Gordon British Retail Consortium (BRC)3 Keith James Waste & Resources Action Programme (WRAP)4 Marlene Jannink Department for Business, Enterprise & Regulatory Reform (BERR)5 Charlotte Lee-Woolf Sustainable Consumption and Production, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra)3 Joanna Marchant Environment Agency Rob Mynard Waste Strategy Division, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra)2 Julie Osmond Welsh Assembly Government3 Marc Owen Waste Strategy, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra)3 Gerry Newton-Cross Environment Agency6 Julian Parfitt Waste & Resources Action Programme (WRAP)7 Nigel Smith British Retail Consortium (BRC)2 1 From January 2007. 2 Until April 2007. 3 From December 2009. 4 From December 2006. 5 Until December 2006. 6 Until April 2007. 7 Until November 2006. Stakeholder Consultation Group In addition to the Advisory Board, a Stakeholder Consultation Group was set up to support the project. Membership of the Stakeholder Consultation Group was by invitation. The purpose of the Stakeholder Consultation Group was to provide a two-way communication platform. Executive Summary This study assesses the life cycle environmental impacts of the production, use and disposal of different carrier bags for the UK in 2006. In recent years, the relative environmental impacts of lightweight carrier bags and other options has been debated. By the Spring of 20098 leading supermarkets had halved the number of single use carrier bags used. However, questions still remain about the environmental significance of lightweight carrier bags, especially with regard to the wider debate on global warming. The report considers only the types of carrier available from UK supermarkets9. It does not examine personal bags nor carriers given out by other high street retailers. The report does not consider the introduction of a carrier bag tax, the effects of littering, the ability and willingness of consumers to change behaviour, any adverse impacts of degradable polymers in the recycling stream, nor the potential economic impacts on UK business. The following types of carrier bag were studied: • a conventional, lightweight carrier made from high-density polyethylene (HDPE); • a lightweight HDPE carrier with a prodegradant additive designed to break the down the plastic into smaller pieces; • a biodegradable carrier made from a starch-polyester (biopolymer) blend; • a paper carrier; • a “bag for life” made from low-density polyethylene (LDPE); • a heavier more durable bag, often with stiffening inserts made from non woven polypropylene (PP); and • a cotton bag. These types of carrier bag are each designed for a different number of uses. Those intended to last longer need more resources in their production and are therefore likely to produce greater environmental impacts if compared on a bag for bag basis. To make the comparison fair, we considered the impacts from the number of bags required to carrying one month’s shopping in 2006/07. We then calculated how many times each different type of carrier would have to be used to reduce its global warming potential to below that for conventional HDPE carrier bags where some 40 per cent were reused as bin liners. Finally the carriers were compared for other impacts: resource depletion, acidification, eutrophication, human toxicity, fresh water aquatic ecotoxicity, marine aquatic ecotoxicity, terrestrial ecotoxicity and photochemical oxidation (smog formation). 8 Based on 2006 baseline figures. 9 The study also included a paper carrier bag which are generally not available from UK supermarkets. The study found that: • The environmental impact of all types of carrier bag is dominated by resource use and production stages. Transport, secondary packaging and end-of-life management generally have a minimal influence on their performance. • Whatever type of bag is used, the key to reducing the impacts is to reuse it as many times as possible and where reuse for shopping is not practicable, other reuse, e.g. to replace bin liners, is beneficial. • The reuse of conventional HDPE and other lightweight carrier bags for shopping and/or as bin-liners is pivotal to their environmental performance and reuse as bin liners produces greater benefits than recycling bags. • Starch-polyester blend bags have a higher global warming potential and abiotic depletion than conventional polymer bags, due both to the increased weight of material in a bag and higher material production impacts. • The paper, LDPE, non-woven PP and cotton bags should be reused at least 3, 4, 11 and 131 times respectively to ensure that they have lower global warming potential than conventional HDPE carrier bags that are not reused. The number of times each would have to be reused when different proportions of conventional (HDPE) carrier bags are reused are shown in the table below. • Recycling or composting generally produce only a small reduction in global warming potential and abiotic depletion. Type of carrier HDPE bag (No HDPE bag HDPE bag (100% HDPE bag secondary reuse) (40.3% reused as reused as bin (Used 3 times) bin liners) liners) Paper bag 3 4 7 9 LDPE bag 4 5 9 12 Non-woven PP 11 14 26 33 bag Cotton bag 131 173 327 393 The amount of primary use required to take reusable bags below the global warming potential of HDPE bags with and without secondary reuse Contents CONTENTS ......................................................................................................................6 Abbreviations ................................................................................................................10 1 INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................11 1.1 Project background..............................................................................................11 1.2 The different types of carrier bags .....................................................................11 1.2.1
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Plastic Laws: Definitions
    ELAW: Terms and Definitions from Plastic Laws Country Name of law if clear Link to law Term used Definition Estonia Waste Act https://www.riigiteataja.ee/en/eli/520012015021/consolideagricultural plastic means silage wrap film, silage covering film, tunnel film, net wrap, and plastic twine Australia, WA Environmental Protection (Plastichttps://www.slp.wa.gov.au/pco/prod/filestore.nsf/FileURL/mrdoc_41671.pdf/$FILE/Environmental%20Protection%20(Plastic%20Bags)%20Regulations%202018%20-%20%5B00-c0-00%5D.pdf?OpenElement Bags) Regulations 2018Barrier bag a plastic bag without handles used to carry unpackaged perishable food Environment Management (Container Deposit) Regulations Fiji 2011 https://files.elaw.org/app/index.do#storage/files/1/Shared/Documents/Legal/plastic/Laws_ByCountry/Fiji?pbeverage container means a jar, carton, can, bottle made of glass, polyethylene terephalate (PET) or aluminum that is or was sealed by its manufacturer External Policy: Environmental Levy on Plastic Bags Manufactured South Africa in South Africa https://www.sars.gov.za/AllDocs/OpsDocs/Policies/SE-PB-02%20-%20Environmental%20Levy%20on%20Plastic%20Bags%20Manufactured%20in%20South%20Africa%20-%20External%20Policy.pdfBin Liners A plastic bag used for lining a rubbish bin. Bahamas, The Environmental Protection (Control of Plastic Pollution)biodegradable Act, 2019 single-use plastic bag that is capable of being decomposed by bacteria or other living organisms Ville de Montreal By-Law 16- Canada, Montreal 051 http://ville.montreal.qc.ca/sel/sypre-consultation/afficherpdf?idDoc=27530&typeDoc=1biodegradable
    [Show full text]
  • Waste Wise Coordinator Job Description Information Provided During Waste Wise Farmers’ Market Program Introductory Meeting for Market Sellers, March 15, 2008
    Appendix 2 STAFFING & TRAINING Examples of market seller and volunteer monitor training materials, plus Waste Wise Coordinator job description Information Provided During Waste Wise Farmers’ Market Program Introductory Meeting for Market Sellers, March 15, 2008 Why is CUESA launching a Waste Wise program? • An estimated 90% of materials discarded at market could be composted, but is going to landfill instead. • When food scraps go to landfill, they produce methane, which is 23 times stronger than CO2. • CUESA is committed to sustainable agriculture – would rather capture these food scraps and materials and make them available for reuse to grow foods. • Opportunity to educate public regarding benefits of closing the food loop. • A desire to reduce disposable products, including plastic bags and one-use containers. Phase out of plastic bags will begin in 2009, and CUESA needs your help to do this. • Market shoppers are hungry for it. What will the Waste Wise program include? • New Waste Wise Stations with three bins: one each for compost, recycling and waste. • Educational materials highlighting the lifecycle of food from scraps to compost to food. • Tips for shoppers regarding how to purchase and store food in reusable containers. • Reusable bag give-away (10,000 bags). • Educational, fun activities including bag parade, slide show of recycled art, screening of The Story of Stuff, etc., as part of the Kickoff Celebration. • Resource guide for other farmers’ markets interested in launching compost & recycling collection. • Potential program to acknowledge sellers who use only compostable packaging. What will the new WW program affect market sellers? • Sellers have the ability to make or break this program based on how food is packaged.
    [Show full text]
  • Single-Use Plastic Bags and Their Alternatives Recommendations from Life Cycle Assessments
    Single-use plastic bags and their alternatives Recommendations from Life Cycle Assessments Acknowledgments Authors: Tomas Ekvall, Christin Liptow, Sofiia Miliutenko (IVL Swedish Environmental Research Institute AB) Reviewers: Anna Rengstedt (BillerudKorsnäs), Caroline Gaudreault (NCASI), Francesco Razza (Novamont), Majurkaa Kujanpaa (StoraEnso), Yuki Hamilton Onda Kabe (Braskem). This publication is commissioned and supervised by the United Nations Environment Programme and the Life Cycle Initiative (Economy Division): Feng Wang, Llorenç Milà i Canals, Joséphine Courtois, Heidi Savelli. Recommended citation: United Nations Environment Programme (2020). Single-use plastic bags and their alternatives - Recommendations from Life Cycle Assessments. Design and layout: Joséphine Courtois This publication has been developed with the kind financial contribution of the Government of Norway. Copyright © United Nations Environment Programme, 2020 This publication may be reproduced in whole or in part and in any form for educational or non-profit services without special permission from the copyright holder, provided acknowledgement of the source is made. United Nations Environment Programme would appreciate receiving a copy of any publication that uses this publication as a source. No use of this publication may be made for resale or any other commercial purpose whatsoever without prior permission in writing from the United Nations Environment Programme. Applications for such permission, with a statement of the purpose and extent of the reproduction, should be addressed to the Director, Communication Division, United Nations Environment Programme, P. O. Box 30552, Nairobi 00100, Kenya. Disclaimer The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of United Nations Environment Programme concerning the legal status of any country, territory or city or its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Biodegradable, Oxo-Degradable and Compostable Bags Observed Over Three Years in the Sea, Open Air and Soil
    Biodegradable, oxo-degradable and compostable bags observed over three years in the sea, open air and soil European scientists have conducted the first ever long-term study into the 28 November 2019 breakdown of alternative plastic bags compared to conventional plastic Issue 536 bags, across multiple habitats — open air, soil and sea. Oxo-degradable, Subscribe to free compostable and biodegradable bags are often marketed as being recycled back weekly News Alert into nature more quickly than normal bags; however, the long-term environmental studies to back this up are lacking and there is concern regarding microplastic Source: Napper, I. and pollution from these alternative plastic bags. Thompson, R. (2019). Environmental Deterioration Single-use plastic bags, made from polyethylene, were introduced in the 1970s of Biodegradable, Oxo- and have become common in daily life worldwide. In 2010 alone an estimated 98.6 biodegradable, billion bags were placed on the European market, which equates to 198 plastic bags per Compostable, and year for the average European1. Europe produces 25 million tonnes of plastic waste every Conventional Plastic Carrier year and only 30% is recycled, with a huge 70% going to landfill or being incinerated2. Lots Bags in the Sea, Soil, and of end-of-life plastics end up in the environment, with a large amount finding its way into Open-Air Over a 3-Year the oceans and terrestrial habitats. If current production trends continue by 2050 there Period. Environmental could be more plastics in the sea than fish. Science & Technology, 53(9), pp.4775-4783. Accumulation of plastic debris in marine habitats has been identified as a major issue by the UN Environment Assembly and in the G7 leaders’ declaration.
    [Show full text]
  • Plastic Shopping Bag Survey
    Plastic Shopping Bag Survey 1. Check the box that best describes where you live. Response Response Percent Count Bucoda 0.8% 29 Lacey 24.8% 939 Olympia 30.4% 1,152 Rainier 1.7% 65 Rochester 2.9% 108 Tenino 2.1% 80 Tumwater 7.0% 265 Yelm 7.1% 267 Unincorporated Thurston County 17.4% 658 I do not live in Thurston County 5.8% 221 answered question 3,784 skipped question 0 1 of 142 2. Please rate the following statements: Strongly Strongly Rating Response Agree Neutral Disagree N/A Agree Disagree Average Count I always recycle my plastic 43.3% 30.9% 11.3% 7.9% 4.5% 2.1% 1.97 3,449 grocery bags. (1,495) (1,066) (390) (273) (154) (71) I am concerned about the amount 57.0% 27.5% 8.9% 3.0% 3.4% 0.2% of litter and trash plastic bags 1.68 3,429 (1,954) (943) (306) (104) (116) (6) create. I always use reusable bags when I 20.3% 33.7% 24.0% 13.8% 6.7% 1.4% 2.52 3,431 shop. (698) (1,157) (825) (472) (230) (49) Making plastic bags uses too many 42.2% 24.3% 20.1% 5.4% 6.4% 1.7% 2.08 3,373 resources. (1,422) (819) (678) (183) (215) (56) I always reuse my plastic bags for 63.7% 27.3% 4.9% 1.5% other purposes, like picking up pet 1.7% (58) 1.0% (34) 1.47 3,452 (2,198) (942) (168) (52) waste or lining my trash can.
    [Show full text]
  • A Life Cycle Assessment of Oxo-Biodegradable, Compostable and Conventional Bags
    Intertek Expert Services Gary Parker Intertek House, Cleeve Road, Sustainability Director Leatherhead, Surrey, KT22 7SB, United Kingdom Intertek Expert Services A Life Cycle Assessment of Oxo-biodegradable, Compostable and Conventional Bags By Chris Edwards and Gary Parker May 2012 ©Symphony Environmental Ltd Executive Summary 1 Having read the Life Cycle Assessment prepared by Intertek for the UK Environment Agency and published in 2011, Symphony Environmental was concerned that some of the purposes for which oxo-biodegradable plastic is designed had been excluded from the terms of reference, and that the LCA did not therefore fully reflect the environmental benefits of oxo-biodegradable plastic. Symphony therefore requested Intertek to conduct a further Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) study comparing the environmental impacts of conventional HDPE plastic, oxo-biodegradable HDPE plastic, and bio-based compostable plastic, for use as carrier bags and bread bags. 2 Conventional plastic carrier bags and bread bags are widely used in the UK, with carrier bags often given away free of charge by supermarkets. Many of these bags contain a pro-degradant additive such as Symphony’s d2w which causes the bag to degrade abiotically and then biodegrade after its useful life without affecting the functionality of the bag. 3 Bio-based bags are a relatively new product made from agricultural crops or a blend of crop- based and oil-based material. 4 This study considers the cradle-to-grave life cycle of each of the three alternatives. The functional unit is a 19.1 litre bag for carrier bags and an 800 gram capacity bag for bread bags.
    [Show full text]
  • Report on Plastic Bag Restrictions Environment &Energy Commission
    REPORT ON PLASTIC BAG RESTRICTIONS ENVIRONMENT & ENERGY COMMISSION City of Columbia & County of Boone City Hall, Conference Room 1A Table of Contents Recommendations .................................................................................................................................... 2 Introduction & Purpose ............................................................................................................................. 2 Feature Analysis ........................................................................................................................................ 3 Public Education and Outreach ................................................................................................................. 5 Common Ordinance Structure .................................................................................................................. 5 1. A partial ban of single use plastic bags, a fee for paper bags, and a fee for compostable plastic bags that meet the (ASTM) International Standard Specification for Compostable Plastics D6400 (commercially compostable) ................................................................................................................. 6 2. A full ban of single use plastic bags and a fee for paper bags, fee for compostable plastic bags that meet the (ASTM) International Standard Specification for Compostable Plastics D6400 (commercially compostable). ...............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Performance of Rigid Plastic Packaging
    Contractor’s Report to the Board Evaluation of the Performance of Rigid Plastic Packaging Containers, Bags, and Food Service Packaging in Full-Scale Commercial Composting Produced under contract by: California State University Chico Research Foundation March 6, 2007 S TATE OF C ALIFORNIA Arnold Schwarzenegger Governor Linda S. Adams Secretary for Environmental Protection • INTEGRATED WASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD Margo Reid Brown Rosalie Mulé Wesley Chesbro Board Chair Board Member Board Member Jeffrey Danzinger Gary Petersen (Vacant Position) Board Member Board Member Board Member Mark Leary Executive Director For additional copies of this publication, contact: Integrated Waste Management Board Public Affairs Office, Publications Clearinghouse (MS–6) 1001 I Street P.O. Box 4025 Sacramento, CA 95812-4025 www.ciwmb.ca.gov/Publications/ 1-800-CA-WASTE (California only) or (916) 341-6306 Publication #432-07-003 Copies of this document originally provided by CIWMB were printed on recycled paper containing 100 percent postconsumer fiber. Copyright © 2007 by the California Integrated Waste Management Board. All rights reserved. This publication, or parts thereof, may not be reproduced in any form without permission. Prepared as part of contract IWM-C2061 (total contract amount: $65,000, includes other services). The California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) does not discriminate on the basis of disability in access to its programs. CIWMB publications are available in accessible formats upon request by calling the Public Affairs Office at (916) 341-6300. Persons with hearing impairments can reach the CIWMB through the California Relay Service, 1-800-735-2929. Disclaimer: This report to the Board was produced under contract by California State University Chico Research Foundation.
    [Show full text]
  • Life Cycle Assessment of Plastic Bag Production Anna Ruban
    Life Cycle Assessment of Examensarbete i Hållbar Utveckling 74 Plastic Bag Production Life Cycle Assessment of Plastic Bag Production Anna Ruban Anna Ruban Supervisor: Gloria L. Gallardo Fernandez Uppsala University, Department of Earth Sciences Master Thesis E, in Sustainable Development, 30 credits Printed at Department of Earth Sciences, Master’s Thesis Geotryckeriet, Uppsala University, Uppsala, 2012. E, 30 credits Examensarbete i Hållbar Utveckling 74 Life Cycle Assessment of Plastic Bag Production Anna Ruban Supervisor: Gloria L. Gallardo Fernandez Life Cycle Assessment of Plastic Bag Production ANNA RUBAN Ruban, A., 2012: Life Cycle Assessment of Plastic Bag Production. Master thesis in Sustainable Development at Uppsala University, 36 pp, 30 ECTS/hp Abstract: The main focus of this report is to establish a comparative study of traditional and biodegradable vest-plastic bag production through the utilization of a life cycle assessment (LCA) approach. The measurements were made for the Ukrainian limited liability company “Polymer”, as a representative manufacturer, in order to calculate the environmental impact of plastic bag manufacturing, and identify the more environmental friendly item. This research is based on a literature review of the special characteristics of life cycle assessment and its methods and methodologies, a field study, which included two semi-structure interviews, and measurements and comparison of the harmfulness of traditional and biodegradable bag production. The software SimaPro 7.3.2 and IMACT 2002+ method were chosen in order to accomplish the research purpose. The results of the study show that traditional vest-bags produced by the researched enterprise are less environmentally friendly. Their production process has a bigger impact on environment and human health than that of the biodegradable bags.
    [Show full text]
  • City of Orillia Biodegradable Bag Study
    CITY OF ORILLIA BIODEGRADABLE BAG STUDY December 2003 Solid Waste Management Division TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................1 2.0 BACKGROUND...........................................................................................1 2.1 CERTIFICATION OF COMPOSTABLE BAGS .......................................................1 2.2 POTENTIAL FOR COMPOST CONTAMINATION ..................................................3 2.3 MUNICIPALITIES IN ONTARIO TESTING BIODEGRADABLE BAGS.........................4 2.3 BAG BRANDS STUDIED.................................................................................5 3.0 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES........................................................................6 4.0 METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................6 4.1 BAG STRENGTH TRIAL .................................................................................7 4.2 WINDROW TRIAL .........................................................................................7 5.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ....................................................................8 5.1 BAG STRENGTH TRIAL .................................................................................8 5.1.1 Yard Waste Bags ................................................................................8 5.1.2 Kitchen Waste Bags............................................................................9 5.2 WINDROW TRIAL .......................................................................................10
    [Show full text]
  • Fy20 Atm Article Plastic Bag Ban Proposed
    ARTICLE VII. ELECTED BOARDS, Section 3. BOARD OF HEALTH c. Plastic Bag Reduction: The purpose of this bylaw is to reduce the use of single-use, thin-film plastic, check-out bags by all retail establishments in the Town of North Attleboro and to promote the use of reusable bags. 1. Definitions: a. "Thin-film single-use plastic bags", shall mean those bags typically with handles, constructed of high-density polyethylene (HDPE),low-density polyethylene(LDPE), linear low-density polyethylene( LLDPE), polyvinyl chloride (PVC), polyethylene terephthalate(PET), or polypropylene(other than woven and non-woven polypropylene fabric), if said film is 4.0 mils or less in thickness and are intended for single-use transport of purchased products. b. Biodegradable bag" means a bag that: 1) contains no polymers derived from fossil fuels; and 2) is intended for single use and will decompose in a natural setting at a rate comparable to other biodegradable materials such as paper, leaves, and food waste. c. "Reusable bag" means a bag, with handles, that is specifically designed for multiple use and is made of thick plastic, cloth, fabric or other durable materials. d. “Retail Establishment” shall mean any business facility that sells goods directly to the consumer whether for or not for profit, including, but not limited to, retail stores, restaurants, pharmacies, convenience and grocery stores, liquor stores, seasonal and temporary businesses. 2. Use Regulations a. Thin-film single-use plastic bags shall not be distributed, used, or sold for checkout or other purposes at any retail establishment within the Town of North Attleboro.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Standards for Biodegradable Plastic Carrier Bags
    www.gov.uk/defra December 2015 Review of standards for biodegradable plastic carrier bags Presented to Parliament pursuant to section 18 of the Single Use Carrier Bags Charges (England) Order 2015 1 © Crown copyright 2015 You may re-use this information (excluding logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence v.3. To view this licence visit www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/ or email [email protected] This publication is available at www.gov.uk/government/publications Any enquiries regarding this publication should be sent to us at Carrier Bags Team 2B Nobel House Smith Square London SW1P 3JR PB 14341 Contents Executive summary ............................................................................................................. 1 Background .......................................................................................................................... 2 The mandate .................................................................................................................... 2 The method .......................................................................................................................... 3 Technical reports ................................................................................................................. 4 Overall summary of technical reports ............................................................................... 4 Main overarching conclusions .....................................................................................
    [Show full text]