Food Packaging Ban
AB 904 (Feuer-D) OPPOSE
Bottom line message:
AB 904 (Feuer-D) creates an unworkable and impractical mandate on restaurants by precluding most of the food packaging used today, and would require the use of inferior, more expensive products that will threaten food safety and punish restaurants. Furthermore, this bill will not reduce the amount of litter in California.
Background:
Several local cities and counties have recently passed or tried to pass various types of bans on food packaging that are not deemed recyclable or compostable. Late last year, the California Ocean Protection Council issued a report on marine debris which plays a role in killing marine life and polluting California’s bays and beaches. The Council pointed to several studies claiming that as much as 80 percent of marine debris is plastic, of which they claim a significant portion is food packaging.
In response, Assemblyman Feuer introduced AB 904 which would require all food service providers to use food packaging or takeout containers that are considered recyclable or compostable (as determined by your local jurisdiction’s curbside recycling pickup program). This bill would also require every food service establishment have the ability to take back any food packaging or takeout containers for recycling or composting at the food service establishment itself. Finally, the bill would require a recycle/compost rate of 25 percent for all food packaging in California by 2012.
Talking points:
Bans do nothing to address the true problem of littering and do not reduce litter
While the bill aims to reduce the amount of litter, it will actually only change the composition of the litter that is being thrown on the ground and into our rivers and oceans. The problem is the people who are littering; it is an issue of individual responsibility and this bill will only change the type of material being littered. The focus should be on the enforcement of littering laws, educating the public about the harms of litter, the promotion of clean-up efforts and the placement of more trash receptacles in high litter areas, such as beaches.
This bill actually creates a de-facto ban on most food packaging
While the bill presents itself as only requiring food packaging to be recyclable or compostable, most local jurisdictions do not have the ability to recycle or compost most types of plastics that are used for food packaging today. Under the bill, any food packaging used must be accepted by the local jurisdiction in a curbside recycling or composting program. In other words, since most local jurisdictions can’t accept most food packaging for recycling or composting, this bill will, in effect, result in the ban of most food packaging.
Alternative packaging is not available, not functional, and more costly, threatening food safety
Alternative packaging does not have the functional ability to meet food service needs. For example, certain alternatives melt at temperatures slightly over 100 degrees, a problem with many hot food and drink products. Paper products break down quickly unless they are lined with a plastic resin that would be banned from use under this bill. Also, these alternative products do not retain heat well, causing foods to spoil and potentially resulting in food poisoning. Furthermore, available alternatives are more expensive.
Current local bans are creating more litter
In the city of Oakland, local food service establishments are required to use packaging that is only biodegradable or compostable. Food service establishments are now forced to use those alternatives, however because they don’t work as well; restaurants are forced to use two to three times the amount of packaging in order for it to be effective. This actually is causing more litter in Oakland than before due to the increase in the amount of packaging used.
Compliance will be confusing and impossible
A restaurant chain that has locations in different local jurisdictions would have to consult each and every local jurisdiction to see which food packaging materials would comply and which would not. It would be impossible for a restaurant chain that has locations in several jurisdictions to purchase uniform food packaging that would be acceptable in all jurisdictions, causing massive confusion and many unintended negative consequences for the restaurant industry.
Take back provision is illogical and could be a health hazard
Requiring every food service establishment in the state to have a recycling program that will accept customers' used takeout containers is ridiculous. “Takeout container” implies that a customer is leaving the food service establishment with the food and will not come back to the site to return the recyclable parts of the food packaging. Under the requirement that food service establishments meet a recycle rate of 25 percent for all food packaging by 2012, restaurants will be forced to become recyclers, sorting trash based on what is recyclable or not. This process could violate local sanitation and food safety health codes.