Paper or Plastic?

According to the article "The Nickel-Bag Offense," by Brian Braiker of Newsweek, when asked the question, "Paper or plastic?" some consumers in the United States might have a second thought about which they choose. IKEA, a Swedish assemble-it-yourself furniture chain, is launching a new idea, Beginning March 15th, all of its U.S. stores will begin to charge five cents for the once free plastic bag. The aspiration is to decrease litter in the United States. Braiker continues in his article to make the comment that "what was once free to the customer did not necessarily come without a greater cost." This comment is a strong example of TANSTAAFL, "There ain't no such thing as a free lunch." Braiker is stating that even though the bags appeared free to the consumers, there was still a cost - the littering from the bags that were thrown out and the pollution from producing the plastic bags. America, according the article, throws away nearly one billion plastic bags a year with less that one percent being recycled. On the other end, these bags are made from either petroleum, coal or natural gas. Braiker strongly points out that it is a waste of "valuable raw material," especially since so many are thrown out. The production also causes lethal gases to be distributed into our atmosphere. So IKEA's plan is to charge consumers for choosing plastic in hope that they will start and trend. A trend that will spread all over the nation and decrease the plastic bag usage by nearly half. But I wonder if this is really wise. Sure, it will help reduce some pollution and littering, but there will still be other markets that produce prodcuts that cause both of those things. How much will getting rid of plastic bags actually help? Is the opportunity cost of losing a market, where people are employed and consumers are served, less than the opportunity cost of pollution and littering?