Once at a supermarket, I read a thought-provoking sign posted at the check-out counter. In essence, it said the store was using only plastic bags.
有一次在一家超市的收银处，我看到一则发人深思的告示,上面写着:本店只用塑料袋。
On the surface, that seemed to be very environmentally unfriendly. But the sign went on to explain a rationale that hadn’t occurred to me until then, asserting that the energy and exhaust fumes expelled to transport the same number of paper bags outweighed the fact that plastic wasn’t biodegradable. Paper bags take up more space and require more trucks for transport, so the store believed it was lessening its carbon footprint by using plastic.
表面上，这对环境非常不利。可是告示接下来所做的解释更是我从未想到的。超市声称:生产 和运输同量纸袋所消耗的能源和所排放的废气对环境的影响大大超过塑料袋不能进行生物降解的危害。而且，纸袋占用的空间更大，需要运送的卡车更多。因此，超 市认为使用塑料袋是在减少碳足迹(碳足迹指个人能源消耗量和污染排放量)。
It got me thinking, so I looked into it a bit further. According to the Society of Plastics Industry, it requires 400 percent more energy to manufacture a paper bag than a plastic one. And while paper bags are compostable and biodegradable, they also cost the world trees, potentially increasing greenhouse gases. (I say “potentially” because if the trees used are from paper farms and were planted only for the purpose of being cut down, then those wouldn’t factor in here.)
告示让我对塑料袋问题作了进一步思考。根据塑料行业协会的说 法，加工制成一个纸袋需要的能源比一个塑料袋多400%。尽管纸袋可 以进行生物降解用做肥料,但是纸袋也要消耗世界各地的木材，有可 能还会增加温室气体。(我说“有可能”是因为如果所用木材取自于专 为制纸袋而采伐的农场，那么上述情况在这里就不是考虑因素。)
I suppose we could end the discussion by simply purchasing those canvas grocery bags that are showing up in supermarkets everywhere. But what sort of impact does their production have on the environment?
我本以为只要大家购买使用商场里随处可见的帆布购物袋，问 题就可以解决了。但是，生产帆布购物袋又会对环境造成什么不良 后果呢？
I’m just saying there are no easy answers. And you know what they say about the road to hell and good intentions. I was talking about this recently with my husband, John, who had probably the best suggestion of all.
我只想说这是个仁者见仁，智者见智的问题。还记得人们常说 的善意会把人引入地狱的事吧。近来,就此事我同丈夫约翰进行了 讨论,他的建议或许是最佳的。
Why not ask for plastic and bring your used plastic bags each time you visit the grocery store? If you use them five or six times, or until they start to fall apart, you’ve really done a good thing, haven’t you? You can also use them to line your small wastebaskets, instead of purchasing plastic trash bags.
为什么不可以要了塑料袋之后，每次再去副食店带上重复使用 呢？如果能用上五六次，或者更多次直到破了，岂不是做了一件大 好事？也可以把旧塑料袋铺在小垃圾筐里盛垃圾，而不用再买垃圾 专用塑料袋。
There’s another environmental dilemma I've been struggling with, too. We use many paper plates in my house. I’m not going to defend it, because I know all about landfills and deforestation and any other argument you could throw my way. But I also know a thing or two about the need for convenience and necessary evils. But are paper plates really evil? I don，t know.
还有一个一直以来令我困惑的环境难题，那就是我们家大量使 用一次性纸盘。对此我不想辩解什么，因为我知道会有诸如垃圾填 埋，森林砍伐以及任何其他的争论向我抛来。然而，关于便利的需求 及其造成的不良后果，我也略知一二。一次性纸盘真的不好吗？我 不知道。
Doesn’t the energy used to run the dishwasher and the chemicals from the dishwashing detergent that eventually enter the water table count for anything? That might be even worse.
洗碗机工作需要电能,洗涤剂里的一些化学成分最终流人水槽。难道它们对环境的危害就无 足轻重吗？也许更糟糕。
As to this, Seattle voters have turned down Referendum 1 on August 20，2009, which aimed to reduce throwaway bag use in Seattle by charging shoppers 20 cents for each disposable plastic or paper shopping bag provided by stores.
对此，2009年8月20日，西雅图的选民们否决了一号全民投票，其目的是通过收取顾客每个纸 袋20美分来减少西雅图一次性袋子的使用。
Had referendum I passed last year, grocers, convenience marts and drugstores would have charged shoppers 20 cents for each bag they were provided at checkout counters.
如果此投票去年得到通过,杂货店、便利超市及药店在柜台将向要袋子的顾客按每个20美分收费。
Supporters of the charge pinned the loss on a heavily funded opponent that outspent them 15-to-1，but they said the campaign had laid the grass-roots foundation for future efforts.
支持收费的民众把他们支持率只是对手的1/15的原因归为对手有大量资金支持,但他们说， 这样的投票为今后的基层工作奠定了基础。
“Big money can come in and run deceptive scare campaigns, but in the end, people who care will defeat the people who scare，” said Green Bag Campaign spokesman Brady Montz.
袋子收费运动的发言人布雷迪?蒙尔茨说大量的经费足以通过欺骗制造恐慌来控制这样 的投票活动,但最终，真正在乎的人会打败制造恐慌的人”。
The city hoped the 20-cent charge would encourage Seattle consumers to stop using throwaway shopping bags and instead take their purchases home in recycled bags or reusable totes, reducing waste.
人们希望20美分的开支能鼓励西雅图的消费者停止使用一次性购物袋,重复使用环保袋，以 减少垃圾。
Stores with annual revenues of less than $ 1 million would have kept the 20 cents to cover their costs, while those grossing more would have kept 25 percent and passed the rest on to the city for recycling, environmental education and reusable bags for low-income consumers.
年营业额少于100万美元的商店愿意保留20美分一个购物袋的收费来支付其他费用，但是那 些毛利收人更多的就只保留25%的袋子收费，其他部分的回收问题就留给了这个城市,或者通过环 境教育和让低收人消费者来重复使用环保袋。