I see that a large, well known and highly profitable supermarket in Cardington Road is about to stop supplying its customers with plastic carrier bags at no charge. I welcome the move, of course. Why wouldn't I?

Well, let me see …

Their in-store announcement claims that it's being done "as part of our commitment to the environment". However, this change is being imposed, unilaterally, on all their Bedford customers. It is the customers that will be bearing the consequences of this change. So how is that part of their commitment rather than the people of Bedford? And as this change will clearly result in lower costs and thereby boost their already considerable profits (£2.124bn in 2007/08) I have to wonder about the level of the store's commitment.

The profit motive is reinforced as the announcement goes on to say "to help you we have placed re-useable bags at the checkouts". However, as those re-useable bags will be sold to us, yet again one wonders just who is being "helped"?

For years US stores have provided, not plastic bags, but large brown paper bags at their checkouts. For some reason this has never caught on in Britain. However, it is an obvious, readily available, sustainable and recyclable alternative to the ubiquitous plastic model. No sign of it being adopted here in Bedford by this retail giant in its unselfish and unstinting devotion to our planet.

Any seeds of doubt are further watered by the huge amount of unnecessary packaging still to be seen in this Bedford store. This includes fruit in plastic punnets, fruit in plastic bags, vegetables wrapped in cling-film and meat on plastic trays. Packaging makes up nearly a quarter of household waste and 70 per cent of that is food related. Not much commitment there.

Equally there is no serious commitment to source more food locally, instead of flying it in from around the world and trucking it unnecessarily up and down the country. The centralised distribution systems used by supermarkets means food travels around the country unnecessarily before ending up on the store shelves. This store could cut down on energy use by giving more space to home-grown fruit. Tropical fruits imported by plane use over thirty times more energy per kilo than home-grown apples. I am sure Bedford growers would welcome the opportunity to supply direct at reasonable prices.

Friends of the Earth say continuing to build huge new stores, geared up to people shopping by car, is more mental than environmental. Work for DEFRA suggests that car use for food shopping results in costs to society of more than £3.5bn per year - before recent fuel price rises - from traffic emissions, noise, accidents and congestion. Bedford is as subject to this burden as the rest of the country.

These large stores are extremely inefficient in terms of energy use. A survey by Sheffield Hallam University found that large superstores are the most energy inefficient buildings in the retail/light industrial sector, despite the relatively new building stock. Taking into account the average size of buildings, the amount of climate changing emissions from superstores compares very badly to those of other food businesses, emitting three times more carbon dioxide per square foot than a greengrocers. The fact that the Cardington Road store was recently extended merely adds to the problem locally.

Yes, every little helps. But when it's this small it's liable to give us all eye-strain, isn't it?