In 2018, the #StopSucking campaign took over the world. This push to end plastic straws was endorsed by numerous celebrities and notable figures such as Tom Brady and Ellen Pompeo. With this social media trend came a wave of businesses promising to stop their use of plastic straws: Starbucks, Disney, American Airlines, Hyatt, Hilton, Aramark, IKEA, Marriott International, Royal Carribean, and more.
But in the grand scheme of plastic pollution, straws are a miniscule contributor. A study conducted by Jenna Jambeck, environmental engineering professor at the University of Georgia, estimated that eight million metric tons of plastic waste ends up in oceans and coastlines around the world each year, and it has been calculated that straws make up only 0.025 percent of that. The main contributors to plastic waste are fishing nets and plastic bottles, with fishing nets making up 46% of plastic waste in certain areas of the ocean.
Since ditching the plastic straw does little to help the environment and is a relatively easy change to make, the question stands: are these companies trying to lower their environmental impact or raise their monetary gains? Do companies actually care about an environmental change or is it all just a PR stunt?
Starbucks is the biggest coffee company in the world, and, according to their website, has “made sustainability a priority since [their] very beginning,” but that is not necessarily the truth. Starbucks claims to promote recycling, reusability, and to create “meaningful and sustained change.” Although the company likes to take pride in its self-proclaimed sustainability, Starbucks has failed to meet its own standards.
Although Starbucks makes their paper cups seem as though they are recyclable, even going to the extent of having a picture of someone recycling said cup on their website, they can only be recycled at three out of 450 paper recycling mills in the United States because of a plastic coating the cups have on the inside. In 2008, the company promised to create a 100% recyclable and biodegradable cup by 2015, but they failed to fulfill this promise. As of March earlier this year, four years after the promised development date, Starbucks was testing a 100% recyclable cup at certain stores, but it is it yet to be implemented worldwide.
While Starbucks is among the companies that has promised to stop using plastic straws, their solution could potentially be worse for the environment. Their replacement will be plastic “strawless lids” made of more plastic than straws. Reason magazine found that the lid and large straw combo weighed 3.55 grams while the new large strawless lid weighed 4.11 grams. As stated by a Starbucks spokesperson, the reasoning behind this is that these lids will be easier for recycling machines to pick up, whereas straws frequently slip into the waste stream. But as many environmentalists are pointing out, just because these lids can be recycled does not mean they will be.
Starbucks is not the only company that is ditching plastic straws and trying to appear eco-friendly but not living up to their environmental standards. Most companies trying to look sustainable have some sketchy activities going on in the background, such as Aramark buying tuna from a supplier which kills sharks while fishing or IKEA logging from a three hundred year old protected Russian forest.
So why are companies promoting themselves as being sustainable if they are doing things that are having a negative impact on the environment? Simple: to make their businesses more appealing. I asked Cade Haase, sophomore here at BGHS, if he would be more likely to support a business if that business is environmentally friendly. He responded with “Yes. I think it’s important for companies to be environmentally safe to try to keep the Earth clean.” Out of a poll of 75 students asking them the same question, 63% said yes.
It is evident that people care about how businesses interact with the environment. By presenting itself as being environmentally friendly, a company can reasonably assume that it would see at least a small increase in sales on that basis, and that is why, for the most part, corporate environmentalism exists.
But in the grand scheme of plastic pollution, straws are a miniscule contributor. A study conducted by Jenna Jambeck, environmental engineering professor at the University of Georgia, estimated that eight million metric tons of plastic waste ends up in oceans and coastlines around the world each year, and it has been calculated that straws make up only 0.025 percent of that. The main contributors to plastic waste are fishing nets and plastic bottles, with fishing nets making up 46% of plastic waste in certain areas of the ocean.
Since ditching the plastic straw does little to help the environment and is a relatively easy change to make, the question stands: are these companies trying to lower their environmental impact or raise their monetary gains? Do companies actually care about an environmental change or is it all just a PR stunt?
Starbucks is the biggest coffee company in the world, and, according to their website, has “made sustainability a priority since [their] very beginning,” but that is not necessarily the truth. Starbucks claims to promote recycling, reusability, and to create “meaningful and sustained change.” Although the company likes to take pride in its self-proclaimed sustainability, Starbucks has failed to meet its own standards.
Although Starbucks makes their paper cups seem as though they are recyclable, even going to the extent of having a picture of someone recycling said cup on their website, they can only be recycled at three out of 450 paper recycling mills in the United States because of a plastic coating the cups have on the inside. In 2008, the company promised to create a 100% recyclable and biodegradable cup by 2015, but they failed to fulfill this promise. As of March earlier this year, four years after the promised development date, Starbucks was testing a 100% recyclable cup at certain stores, but it is it yet to be implemented worldwide.
While Starbucks is among the companies that has promised to stop using plastic straws, their solution could potentially be worse for the environment. Their replacement will be plastic “strawless lids” made of more plastic than straws. Reason magazine found that the lid and large straw combo weighed 3.55 grams while the new large strawless lid weighed 4.11 grams. As stated by a Starbucks spokesperson, the reasoning behind this is that these lids will be easier for recycling machines to pick up, whereas straws frequently slip into the waste stream. But as many environmentalists are pointing out, just because these lids can be recycled does not mean they will be.
Starbucks is not the only company that is ditching plastic straws and trying to appear eco-friendly but not living up to their environmental standards. Most companies trying to look sustainable have some sketchy activities going on in the background, such as Aramark buying tuna from a supplier which kills sharks while fishing or IKEA logging from a three hundred year old protected Russian forest.
So why are companies promoting themselves as being sustainable if they are doing things that are having a negative impact on the environment? Simple: to make their businesses more appealing. I asked Cade Haase, sophomore here at BGHS, if he would be more likely to support a business if that business is environmentally friendly. He responded with “Yes. I think it’s important for companies to be environmentally safe to try to keep the Earth clean.” Out of a poll of 75 students asking them the same question, 63% said yes.
It is evident that people care about how businesses interact with the environment. By presenting itself as being environmentally friendly, a company can reasonably assume that it would see at least a small increase in sales on that basis, and that is why, for the most part, corporate environmentalism exists.
By Clay Wallace