TRENTON, N.J. — New Jersey’s ambitious plastic bag ban, implemented in May 2022, has led to a surprising outcome: a dramatic increase in plastic consumption and greenhouse gas emissions, according to a study from the Institute for Energy Research (IER). Though the law aimed to reduce environmental harm, it has highlighted the unintended consequences of sweeping environmental regulations when not fully evaluated.
The ban prohibited single-use plastic and paper bags in stores and food service businesses, prompting retailers to offer reusable bags made of non-woven polypropylene. These bags, while intended to be a more sustainable alternative, use 15 times more plastic per bag and produce five times the greenhouse gas emissions during production compared to their single-use counterparts. According to IER, statewide plastic consumption surged from 53 million pounds prior to the ban to 151 million pounds after its implementation.
Compounding the issue, a study by Freedonia Custom Research, cited by IER, revealed that 90% of reusable bags were used only two or three times before being discarded or forgotten, far short of the 16 reuses needed to offset their environmental impact. As shoppers frequently purchased new bags, retailers saw a sharp rise in profits from bag sales, earning an estimated $200,000 per store location annually, with some major chains netting tens of millions of dollars statewide.
The policy also added logistical challenges for consumers. The ban extended to paper bags, leaving shoppers with fewer practical options and sparking frustrations, particularly for those using grocery delivery or pickup services, which often rely on new bags for each order. Meanwhile, environmental concerns deepened as most reusable bags were not recycled and contributed to growing landfill waste.
New Jersey’s efforts mirror similar bans in 11 other states, including California, New York, and Oregon. While such initiatives aim to curb plastic waste, they’ve often led to increases in the use of alternative materials like paper and thicker plastics, both of which can carry significant environmental tradeoffs. Paper bags, for example, require four times the energy to produce and often involve heavy chemical use.
The policy’s health implications have also drawn scrutiny. Studies cited by IER indicate that reusable bags can harbor bacteria and viruses if not regularly cleaned, potentially spreading illnesses. Past incidents, such as an outbreak of norovirus traced to a contaminated reusable bag in Oregon, underscore these concerns.
New Jersey’s experience with its plastic bag ban raises questions about the effectiveness of certain environmental policies and highlights the importance of thorough cost-benefit analyses before implementation.