Thanks, I appreciate that you didn't just flippantly post this. However, I would say that citing the most extreme figure there without context is a technique of persuasion that pollutes discussion with hyperbole. I saw that number and it seemed immediately fishy. I still think so, but I won't get into all the reasons here because I don't have time. I really hate plastic bags. I've picked up hundreds of them off beaches worldwide. So we need to ban them and find an alternative--hey, like paper. Your comment inadvertently raised my hackles because it sounds a lot like you'd rather have BAU and plastic everywhere. (I hope not).

I hate litter, but I don't see much difference between something biodegrading over tens of years or never. Given all of the advantages plastic has over everything else, I would much rather we used that. We could penalise people who improperly dispose of waste - this seems to work quite well in Singapore.

Paper is a particularly bad replacement as it falls apart when wet - a couple of days ago a paper bag did this to me as I walked back in light rain. Additionally, paper necessarily has a higher environmental cost due to the weight and packing fraction of the raw materials.

I shared that number because it shocked me and the report looked authoritative. Thanks for helping to add context to it :)