The Paper Straw Reversal

Trump signed an executive order to end the use of paper straws in federal buildings and reinstate plastic straws. The President of the United States argues that paper straws “don’t work” because they can break easily and, in hot drinks, will sometimes “explode.” His administration says?paper versions are not just less effective but also could expose users to unwanted chemicals. The order essentially reverses a?Biden-era initiative to eliminate the use of single-use plastics in the federal government.

On its face,?a switch from paper to plastic may seem trivial. But this change is?not just about economics but a broader debate between cost and functionality and environmental sustainability. But plastic straws, for example, are less expensive and more reliable but have?been implicated in clogging up the world’s oceans. It’s widely reported that more than 390 million plastic straws are used each day in the U.S. and that worldwide plastic?production has rocketed in the last three decades. Plastic takes centuries to decompose, leading to lasting problems for our oceans and the?animals who call them home.

I think?this reversal in policy illustrates an important tension in public policy today. On one hand, it is important to see that?government operations run efficiently, especially at a time when reliability and cost are at stake. On one side,?the plastic has a devastating environmental impact. Although straws constitute?a minuscule percentage of the overall tally of plastic, they are a powerful metaphor for our bigger problem of secondary plastics and what to do about them.

There are plastic straw bans, and we?can do without them. It begs the interesting question: Are there alternatives that fit both our practical needs and environmental targets? As advances in biodegradable materials and?recycling technologies continue, we must keep that hope alive that one day, we will be able to close this gap.

This executive order is less about a straw’s?material properties than it is a new act in an ongoing conversation about how to best debate the balance between immediate convenience and long-term sustainability. As professionals and citizens, it’s worth contemplating how these decisions at the federal level affect local efforts?and, in the end, our common environment.