Seattle is once again at the forefront of building an environmentally sustainable society with its current efforts to implement a 20-cent fee on disposable bags. Originally intended to begin on Jan. 1, it has been delayed pending a vote. Opponents of the measure obtained enough signatures to get the issue on the Aug. 18 ballot. While those who oppose it may have some legitimate concerns, the disposable-bag fee is still a good idea and should be approved by Seattleites.

The motivation for a bag fee is derived from the environmental impacts associated with disposable bags. Plastic bags are the most notorious culprits, since they are derived from fossil fuels such as natural gas or petroleum and can persist in the environment for decades. They can also be a public safety hazard. Bangladesh banned plastic bags in their capital city because they were contributing to flooding by blocking drainage lines.

Paper bags do not fare much better. A 2005 report by the Scottish government found that paper bags performed worse than equivalent plastic bags in nearly every environmental category they investigated. Even compostable or biodegradable options are not necessarily better than their petroleum-based cousins. The environmental impact depends highly on the material source, the manufacturing process and the disposal method. The benefits of a compostable bag are reduced if it is thrown in the garbage.

This “paper vs. plastic” debate over the most environmentally friendly bag material obscures the bigger picture that reusable bags are better than disposal ones. This is supported by a 2004 report by the consulting group Ecobilan for the company Carrefour, comparing the environmental impacts of disposable plastic, disposable paper and reusable plastic bags. They found that reusing the plastic bag as little as four times reduced its environmental impact below either disposable bag. Reusing the twenty times led to a 90 percent reduction in nearly all environmental categories studied.

The best way for Seattle to minimize the burden of grocery bags is to promote the use of reusable bags. The proposed disposable-bag fee is one of the best ways to accomplish this. Alternative methods can have unintended consequences. A selective fee on only plastic bags can lead to an increase in other, more environmentally damaging bag materials. A ban is both restrictive and expensive to enforce. Voluntary or educational measures are usually not sufficient enough to make a large impact.

The disposable-bag fee is also supported by a 2008 report by the Herrera Environmental consulting group prepared for the Seattle Public Utilities. The report found that a bag fee would be the cheapest way to reduce the use of disposable bags, from options such as more education to an outright ban on plastic bags. A 20-cent fee is large enough to induce people to switch to reusable bags but is not as restrictive as a complete ban.

Opponents of the plan do bring up a legitimate concern that the environmental benefits of the proposed fee may be small. For example, plastic bags usually make up less than 1 percent of litter and solid waste, so a reduction in bag consumption is not likely to have a large effect on these problems. However, the disposable-bag fee represents action that can be taken now to reduce our environmental burden and should be viewed in conjunction with other city-wide efforts, such as recycling and composting.

Disposable bags are not only wasteful, but burden future generations via their environmental persistence. The disposable-bag fee is the best way to make a substantial reduction in our paper- and plastic-bag consumption.

Reach columnist Mike Noon at opinion@dailyuw.com.