California
California’s plastic bag ban has been a failed experiment
We can now add plastic bag bans to the list of “well-meaning but failed experiments” being run in California.
Two devastating pieces in the New York Times and Los Angeles Times reveal how the environmentalist fervor to rid California of thin, single-use plastic bags resulted in a 47 percent increase in plastic waste statewide. Before the ban, California produced 314 million pounds of plastic waste. By 2022, plastic waste in pounds was closer to 462 million.
Both outlets pin the blame on special interests lobbying for exemptions to the ban, which resulted in the now common 10-cent plastic bag so many shoppers encounter in checkout lines both in and out of California, and now lawmakers are moving to pass new legislation that would take plastic bags of all kinds out of circulation. If reducing environmental impact is the goal, California should brace for another failure.
Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan has made her disdain for plastic bags quite clear in saying, “Ten years ago, California attempted to ban plastic bags to stem pollution. Yet, these insidious relics persist, choking our waterways, imperiling wildlife, and despoiling our ecosystems.”
Insidious is a dramatic word choice. Consumers know that plastic bags do not belong in waterways, oceans, and blowing across playgrounds. What is actually insidious —meaning to cause gradual, subtle harm — is the impact of plastic alternatives such as woven bags and paper.
Denmark’s environmental ministry found paper bags need to be re-used 43 times to bring their per-use impact on the environment down to the level of single-use plastic bags, meaning what it takes to produce those bags. Any consumer who has set foot inside a grocery store and hauled food back into their home knows that reusing a paper bag 43 times is near impossible. Paper bags are also 2.6 times as expensive for the consumer, which the government of Canada found in their research after similarly dropping the hammer on single-use plastic bags.
Paper requires trees, energy, and water to produce. For a state that is constantly running into issues with energy shortages, electricity blackouts, as well as water shortages, the plan to curb pollution by increasing the burden of other strained systems is the definition of offsetting costs.
Environmental policy tends to work this way. One state or country will crack down on their emissions output, with no care for what happens on the other side of the globe, and the result is no net improvement in overall emissions. There are significant costs to paper products both for the environment and the consumer.
Cloth bags also are not made from thin air. Your standard cotton tote or grocery bag blows paper products out of the water on the cost-benefit. It takes 7,100 uses of the cloth bag to meet the impact of one single-use plastic bag. A consumer would need to use the bag for 136 years of weekly grocery store visits to be as environmentally friendly as single-use plastic is.
“Environmentally friendly” will always require air quotes of some kind when you’re talking about products being produced from raw materials. A cost always exists whether Californians can see them or not.
For example, polypropylene packaging and woven bags are a 100% byproduct of natural gas and petroleum refinement. These are of course great bags and can be bought at a higher price point in most grocery stores and kept in your trunk the next time you go shopping. They do better on electricity, water, and emissions required to make them, but have you ever heard a major California politician champion natural gas and fossil fuels?
The NYT says California “remains at the forefront of efforts to curb plastic waste,” which is a curious way to frame stubborn failure. Consumers prefer single-use plastic bags because they are cheap, efficient, and convenient when they arrive to shop at the store or pick up food for takeout.
What California can’t seem to get a grip on is the infrastructure required to run a modern waste management system, as well as the will to enforce laws that keep the state clean. Take a walk in downtown San Francisco or Los Angeles and look around. What you’ll see is not a problem being created by plastics.
David Clement is the North American Policy Director for the Consumer Choice Center
California
How a snow drought helped set the stage for deadly California avalanche
A weekslong “snow drought” in Northern California’s Sierra Nevada helped set the stage for Tuesday’s deadly avalanche, after several feet of new snow fell on an earlier layer that had hardened, making it unstable and easily triggered, experts said.
READ MORE: 8 backcountry skiers found dead and 1 still missing after California avalanche
The new snow did not have time to bond to the earlier layer before the avalanche near Lake Tahoe killed at least eight backcountry skiers, said Craig Clements, a meteorology professor at San Jose State University, who has conducted avalanche research. Six skiers survived and rescuers were still searching for another one who was still missing on Wednesday.
The group was on a three-day backcountry trek in the Sierra Nevada on Tuesday morning when they were trapped by the avalanche as a winter storm pummeled the West Coast.
The dangers generally are highest in the first 24 to 48 hours after a very large snowfall, Clements said, and authorities had issued avalanche warnings.
Here’s what to know.
What made conditions so dangerous?
When weather is dry and clear, as it had been in the Sierra Nevada since January, snow crystals change and can become angular or round over time, Clements said.
If heavy new snow falls on the crystals, the layers often can’t bond and the new snow forms what is called a storm slab over a weaker layer.
“Because it’s on a mountain, it will slide,” when it’s triggered by any change in the tension above or below, sometimes naturally but also because of people traversing the area, Clements said.
Authorities have not said what triggered Tuesday’s avalanche.
If there had been more consistent snowfall throughout the winter, different layers could have bonded more easily, Clements said. But even when a snow slab forms, the danger often only lasts a couple of days until the new snow stabilizes, he said.
Was climate change a factor?
Although climate change can lead to weather extremes that include both drought and heavier precipitation, it’s difficult to say how and whether it will affect avalanches or where they occur, scientists say.
Clements said this week’s avalanche is fairly typical for California’s Sierra Nevada and he doesn’t believe it can be linked to climate change.
Avalanches are a mechanism of how much snow falls on weak or stable layers, and this one was “a meteorological phenomenon, not a climate phenomenon,” he said.
About 3 feet to 6 feet of snow has fallen since Sunday, when the group started its trip. The area was also hit by subfreezing temperatures and gale force winds. The Sierra Avalanche Center said the threat of more avalanches remained Wednesday and left the snowpack unstable and unpredictable.
What’s happening now?
Crews found the bodies of eight backcountry skiers near California’s Lake Tahoe and were searching for one more following Tuesday’s avalanche, which authorities say was the nation’s deadliest in nearly half a century.
Six from the guided tour were rescued six hours after the avalanche.
Nevada County Sheriff Shannan Moon said Wednesday that investigators would look into the decision to proceed with the trip despite the storm forecast.
The skiers traveled Sunday to remote huts at 7,600 feet (3,415 meters) in Tahoe National Forest, carrying their own food and supplies. At 6:49 that morning, the Sierra Avalanche Center issued an avalanche watch for the area, indicating that large slides were likely in the next 24 to 48 hours.
A free press is a cornerstone of a healthy democracy.
Support trusted journalism and civil dialogue.
California
Bernie Sanders rails against billionaire ‘greed’ amid California tax battle
Billionaires are “treading on very, very thin ice,” Bernie Sanders warned on Wednesday during a fiery speech in Los Angeles, imploring California voters to fight “grotesque” levels of economic inequality by approving a proposed tax on the state’s richest residents.
The Vermont senator railed against the “greed”, “arrogance” and “moral turpitude” of the nation’s “ruling class”, calling it “fairly disgusting” that some ultra-wealthy tech leaders have fled California – or are threatening to do so, if the proposed wealth tax becomes law.
“Never before have so few people had so much wealth and so much power,” Sanders thundered on stage at the Wiltern theater, where a raucous crowd of longtime supporters shouted “shame”.
Though the 84-year-old two-time presidential candidate has railed against the billionaire class for decades, his remarks on Wednesday were an exceptionally scathing – and at times personal – indictment of the top 1%. Comparing America’s highest earners to the oligarchs and monarchs of past centuries, he said the US billionaire elite “no longer sees itself as a part of American society”.
“These guys literally believe that they have the divine right to rule and are no longer subject to democratic governance,” Sanders told a rapt audience.
Sanders framed the wealth tax on billionaires in California, led by the Service Employees International Union-United Healthcare Workers West (SEIU-UHW), as a referendum on American “oligarchy” itself.
“These billionaires are going to learn that we are still living in a democratic society where the people have some power,” Sanders said.
Under the proposal, which has rattled wealthy Californians and split Democrats, residents worth more than $1bn would have to pay a one-time 5% tax on their assets to offset looming federal cuts to health care and support public education and state food assistance programs. California is home to more billionaires than any other state, and analysts say the tax would apply to about 200 residents.
Taking the stage before Sanders, Suzanne Jimenez, chief of staff at SEIU-UHW, said the proposal would ensure billionaires “pay their fair share”.
“If we don’t act, our friends and our family will have to drive twice as far – will have to wait twice as long – for the life-saving care that they’re going to need,” she said. “And for what? So that billionaires can own another yacht?”
Outside the event, organizers collected signatures to put the California Billionaire Tax Act on the ballot in November. The union must gather nearly 875,000 valid signatures to qualify. If they are successful, it would still need to win approval from a majority of California voters.
Even in deep-blue California, the politics are complicated. Opponents, including the state’s Democratic governor, Gavin Newsom, argue the tax would erode the state’s long-term tax base and put California – which boasts the world’s fourth largest economy – at a competitive disadvantage against other US states.
The tax proposal is already facing deep-pocketed opposition from business leaders and tech titans. Google co-founder Sergey Brin and other billionaires are bankrolling a new political group that is backing a series of competing ballot initiatives that would nullify the union-backed proposal. Brin, one of the world’s wealthiest people, is among the recent Silicon Valley magnates to cut ties with the state where he made his fortune.
The proposal’s retroactive structure – taxing wealth accumulated in 2025 – is designed to deter billionaires from fleeing the state before it takes effect, its authors have said, while proponents and critics alike anticipate legal challenges if the tax is adopted.
A nonpartisan analysis from the California Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates that the one-time billionaire tax would “probably” generate tens of billions of dollars for the state. But it cautioned that there was a significant degree of uncertainty if, for example, wealthy Californians departed the state, resulting in hundreds of millions of dollars of losses in state income tax revenues annually. It also notes the complexity and cost of implementation, as valuing complex, non-cash assets such as art, private business, and intellectual property is tricky and time-consuming.
A January poll found that 48% of likely voters support the initiative, while 38% are opposed and 14% remain undecided, underscoring both its appeal and its political risk.
At the Wiltern on Wednesday evening, attendees posed in front of signs that read “Billionaire Tax Now” while the crowd chanted “Tax the billionaires”.
Among the crowd was Morgan, a 29-year-old progressive and longtime supporter of Sanders who declined to give her last name. She hopes his influence can counter the well-financed opposition to the wealth tax. “Their money can do a lot more and go a lot further than ours,” she said of the state’s richest residents.
Chelsea Gods, a content creator and political activist, drove two-and-a-half hours from San Diego to attend the event. “Americans are poor. We are strapped for cash. We are struggling and we are tired,” she said. “People First-policies are the only way to win a political future for people on the left.”
California is familiar terrain for Sanders, who won the state on Super Tuesday during the 2020 Democratic presidential primary.
In his remarks, the populist senator said he didn’t know whether the uber-rich would follow through on their threats to leave California, noting that wealthy New Yorkers had also warned they would flee if democratic socialist, Zohran Mamdani, was elected mayor of the city. They do not appear to have done so.
Sanders also named names and listed assets, drawing boos and jeers as he listed Larry Ellison’s jets and Mark Zuckerberg’s yachts and his Palo Alto compound.
“For these people enough is never enough,” he said. “They are dedicated to accumulating more and more wealth and power and they do that no matter what harm they bring to working families.”
Sanders said Minnesotans opposed to Trump’s federal immigration crackdown showed Americans how to resist authoritarianism. Approving a wealth tax on billionaires, he said, would send a “clear and profound message” that “enough is enough”.
“The billionaire class cannot have it all. This nation belongs to all of us,” Sanders said, before concluding his remarks: “Now the ball is in California’s court.”
California
Multiple skiers missing after California avalanche | CNN
-
Oklahoma2 days agoWildfires rage in Oklahoma as thousands urged to evacuate a small city
-
Health1 week agoJames Van Der Beek shared colorectal cancer warning sign months before his death
-
Science1 week agoA SoCal beetle that poses as an ant may have answered a key question about evolution
-
Movie Reviews1 week ago“Redux Redux”: A Mind-Blowing Multiverse Movie That Will Make You Believe in Cinema Again [Review]
-
Technology1 week agoHP ZBook Ultra G1a review: a business-class workstation that’s got game
-
Politics1 week agoCulver City, a crime haven? Bondi’s jab falls flat with locals
-
Politics1 week agoTim Walz demands federal government ‘pay for what they broke’ after Homan announces Minnesota drawdown
-
Fitness1 week ago‘I Keep Myself Very Fit’: Rod Stewart’s Age-Defying Exercise Routine at 81