The unloved plastic bag - although they have their defenders - is unarguably an eyesore, particularly when them flapping like "witches' knickers" in tree branches on gusty days. But are they that bad environmentally? One of the government's own advisers, Professor Chris Coggins, who is a waste and recycling expert, has dared to stand in front of the anti-plastic bandwagon to argue that they are a diversion from the real environmental issues.
In a BBC interview, Coggins, who also works on the sustainable urban environment (waste) programme, said: "Plastic bags are a very visible form of litter but in reality they are a very small proportion of waste and oil use. So in overall resource terms, it's a visual rather than mainstream issue."
Coggins did not say this, but it seems that banning plastic bags has become a classic feel-good issue for the likes of the Daily Mail and towns such as Modbury, which has banned plastic bags altogether.
British retailers hand out an estimated 13 billion free plastic bags every year, which take about 1,000 years to decay, but if Britain wants to get serious about UK carbon emissions, the public and the government have to tackle the areas that really matter.
The energy sector alone accounts for 85% of all carbon emissions, followed by agriculture, industrial processes and land use.
On a recent trip to Kenya, I visited Lamu town, described by Unesco as the oldest and best-preserved Swahili settlement in east Africa. But despite its charms one of my abiding memories of Lamu was the profusion of discarded black plastic bags, disfiguring the town's narrow passageways - big enough for donkeys but not cars.
Coggins has provided a useful service in reminding people that plastic bags matter little in the wider scheme of things, although they can be aesthetic abomination when strewn along the lanes of Lamu or the streets of London.
