Editor,

"Is it enough to stop at paper bags?”, my answer is "No”. It’s not enough at all. Last time I responded to Alline’s article advocating for plastic recycling, but one commenter misconstrued my comment to mean that I was supporting the use of plastics.

Contrary to that, I am an environmentalist and can never advocate for anything that will eventually be detrimental to the environment. As you have indicated above and from various literature, one of the biggest threats posed by plastic bags is their disposal.

If plastics are not properly disposed then they are a big threat to soil and animals. Again, they are not easily degraded and have recycling difficulties. But when you assess the production and use of paper bags too, you will find that they pose great dangers to the environment.

Paper which is made from pine trees involves direct cutting of trees. Plastics are made from synthetic hydrocarbons (polymers of ethene), therefore there is no direct cutting of trees. Unless one will argue that as long as the tress are not cut from Rwanda. That way, I don’t care.

The cut pine trees would be absorbing hydrocarbons which are dangerous to the ozone layer. Secondly paper bag making produces 80% more greenhouse gases than plastic bag making.

Studies also show that production of paper bags consumes four times more energy than production of plastic bags. Production of paper bags consumes three times more water than production of plastic bags.

Yes the ban should be maintained but ways of recycling the imported PVCs and other plastics should be put in place. 

James Ford Munanura, Makerere UniversityKampala, Uganda

Reaction to Alline Akintore’s opinion, "Is it enough to stop at paper bags?” (The New Times, June 3)