Plastic Packaging

[smcginnis]

Also and more importantly Lego makes big money from the nostalgic value of it's product. Switching things around, even something minor like this , could undermind that source of profit. Definately something no one running a business would want to do.

Well, I don't know how the cost would be affected by this (probably, it'd be much more expensive), but there are things that look very much like plastic bags that are biodegradable (which wouldn't make it less nostalgic. Now there are of course cons to these as well (see this wikipedia article); but it's a start.

If everyone keeps saying that they aren't willing to make a few sacrifices (such as nostalgia, or a bit more money), then nothing will get done; except worsening of pollution and global warming. I realize that LEGO packaging isn't really a big issue compared to the whole, but it is a part.

Anyway, I'm done with this thread. I don't want to cause too much controversy. Please, if you have an issue with my post, PM me, unless it's very relevant to this topic.

~smcginnis

[MarioDAlessio]

I definitely agree and sign your petition to ask

LEGO to develop a greener method of packaging parts.

This could also be opportunity to move beyond fragile "MISB" while can't sets be designed to be easily opened to display separate well package contents and resealed and stored in original long lasting packaging.

We would all have to pay more and probably consume less.

The packaging should add to the display of the contents not be some cheap throwaway plastic bag. I would be happy to pay more for strong long-lasting resealable bags or plastic display cases for minifigs and recycled paper for lesser parts.

As it is all my opened castle sets are currently stored in resealable plastic bags not the original plastic bags.

King Leos castle had a plastic display of barding, figs and banners something like this that can be opened and closed to displays minifigs etc would be good.

Mario

[Count Blacktron]

I like all the plastic baggies separating every part step. I save all the baggies and use them for packing material for EVERYTHING I ship through the mail. The stuff is better than bubble wrap.

What would you suggest they pack the bricks in? Would you really pay more for more elaborate packaging? I'd rather see some real marketing suggestions for a total packaging change. So... unless a suitable alternative is available/suggested, I believe this petition is not useful.

I will not sign.

If you read my entire post, you would have seen that I have already proposed two different packaging techniques that are better for the environment: recyclable cardboard boxes, and resealable sandwich bags. Both are relatively cheap (not gold encrusted or anything,) and have a far smaller impact on the environment.

I did read your entire post, no need for you to be so haughty. Sheesh. I just am very pleased with the product as it is and I have a great secondary use for the baggies, which can be resealed and re-used. I feel that it is just not needed and I don't see the cost benefit. Wouldn't everybody just throw your alternative baggies and carboard away nullifying the desired effect? Most consumers do not use any toy packaging materials for any purpose, but the current LEGO packaging materials are very useful to me in packing postage as I stated. The cardboard used is already recycle friendly as well, what's to change?

I just don't see the need, no need for you to attempt to peer presure me into signing your petition. Still no sign-y for me.

[Damien]

The thing to remember is. . plastic can be recycled. It is recycled every day. The cheapest method of packaging is to use plastics. Environment-friendly things of all kinds, while nice in theory, are often ludicrously expensive by comparison.

Ever go into a health food store and notice that their bagels are five dollars compared to the grocery store's 2.40? Same principle.

So here's my proposition for how LEGO can be more environment-friendly and less wasteful:

1.) Larger bags. Many small bags actually requires more plastic than a few large bags. A few large bags for a big set is -perfectly- sufficient.

2.) Dump the cardboard holders. Look, LEGO cloaks are not THAT flimsy. They can survive being in a plastic bag with the smaller pieces. Sticking them in a heavy piece of cardboard loaded around with tape is wasteful and unnecessary.

3.) Different plastic. My (limited) understanding of the situation is that LEGO currently uses a fairly cheap kind of plastic that's more difficult to recycle. So, change to the ever-so-slightly more expensive kind that's easier to recycle. It may actually look cheaper, but it's better. Cheap plastic is fine so long as it's able to be recycled. It's not like LEGO pieces really had a tendency to burst out of the plastic. So stop the fancy stuff and just make the bags what they're supposed to be - containers to keep us from opening a mess of parts flying all over the floor.


Another interesting idea would be to institute a recycling program. If you return the box your LEGO set came in, along with the plastics, to the store you purchased from, the store gives you a credit on future LEGO purchases (paid for by TLG, of course - and only a small credit - maybe 50 cents per box, or a fixed amount dependant on the retail price of the set).


This can all lead to more environmentally aware LEGO customers, and can paint LEGO as a more environmentally aware company, without bankrupting them. They're going to use plastic bags. It's really as simple as that. It would be fiscally irresponsible of them to use anything else at this point in the world's manufacturing progress. So a more realistic project would be to explore HOW they use plastic, rather than if they can stop.


All in my opinion, of course. Good thread, by the way.

[Chrislad77]

1.) Larger bags. Many small bags actually requires more plastic than a few large bags. A few large bags for a big set is -perfectly- sufficient.

2.) Dump the cardboard holders.

Another interesting idea would be to institute a recycling program. If you return the box your LEGO set came in, along with the plastics, to the store you purchased from, the store gives you a credit on future LEGO purchases (paid for by TLG, of course - and only a small credit - maybe 50 cents per box, or a fixed amount dependant on the retail price of the set).

I can agree with alot this (the first 2 points of my quoted section). Anything Lego does must fit into capitalism and these do.


The trade in system seems unworkable to me though. I mean you'd have to set something up with almost every store that carried Lego. That is a massive program. Seems too expensive. Not a bad idea in theory though, it'd probably work better as not a green issue so much as a repeat buyer reward program when you'd send in proof of purchase.

Right now no matter what plastic you used it'd be cheaper just to throw it away and make new bags. Unless there is a ground swell of upset, Lego ,along with most companies, have no reason to do otherwise.

Another issue in the USA is that alot of states don't recycle at all, because of the economic drain, so a good number of consumers even if they were given "recycleable" material would not be able to do anything but throw it away.

[Lamanda2]

Damien's got some very good points/suggestions. (No surprise there, of course. )

"1.) Larger bags."
Yes. I'ts crazy the ammount of little bags they are using now, when all they really need are two or three bags, to seperate larger and smaller pieces.

"2.) Dump the cardboard holders. "
I've always seen those as a waste.. A really annoying waste at that, undoing that tape is a pain. (Yes, I can be that lazy. )

"What would you suggest they pack the bricks in?"
I would just suggest they choose a more recyclable type of plastic, if not that, I would just suggest a fewer ammount of bags, it's amazing how much a little change like that can help.

"Would you really pay more for more elaborate packaging?"
Well, I wouldn't think it would be more 'elaborate', but yes, I really wouldn't care if I had to pay a little extra.

"I also would like to add that they should stop shipping sets in boxes that they could fit a dang elephant inside!"
Good point, the boxes they use are alot bigger than they need to be, aren't they. For some reason I keep Lego boxes.. but I can't really do it any more, as there isn't room for the darn things!

Frankly, I could really care less wether my Legos were sold in nice boxes and all as they are today, or if it was in a paper bag, just as long as I get my bricks I'm cool.

Just my thoughts on the subject.
I'd gladly sign your petition, Spongey.

~Amanda

[Spongey]

I like all the plastic baggies separating every part step. I save all the baggies and use them for packing material for EVERYTHING I ship through the mail. The stuff is better than bubble wrap.

What would you suggest they pack the bricks in? Would you really pay more for more elaborate packaging? I'd rather see some real marketing suggestions for a total packaging change. So... unless a suitable alternative is available/suggested, I believe this petition is not useful.

I will not sign.

If you read my entire post, you would have seen that I have already proposed two different packaging techniques that are better for the environment: recyclable cardboard boxes, and resealable sandwich bags. Both are relatively cheap (not gold encrusted or anything,) and have a far smaller impact on the environment.

I did read your entire post, no need for you to be so haughty. Sheesh. I just am very pleased with the product as it is and I have a great secondary use for the baggies, which can be resealed and re-used. I feel that it is just not needed and I don't see the cost benefit. Wouldn't everybody just throw your alternative baggies and carboard away nullifying the desired effect? Most consumers do not use any toy packaging materials for any purpose, but the current LEGO packaging materials are very useful to me in packing postage as I stated. The cardboard used is already recycle friendly as well, what's to change?

I just don't see the need, no need for you to attempt to peer presure me into signing your petition. Still no sign-y for me.

I'm sorry if I've offended you. In no way am I attempting to pressure you into signing; a little bit of cross-debate is beneficial, in my opinion, to further understand the topic. I'm glad that you've found a way to use the current bags without throwing them out. Once again, I sincerely apologize if you feel that I have offended you, as this was not my intention.

[Sir Kohran]

If you read my entire post, you would have seen that I have already proposed two different packaging techniques that are better for the environment: recyclable cardboard boxes, and resealable sandwich bags. Both are relatively cheap (not gold encrusted or anything,) and have a far smaller impact on the environment.

I did read your entire post, no need for you to be so haughty. Sheesh. I just am very pleased with the product as it is and I have a great secondary use for the baggies, which can be resealed and re-used. I feel that it is just not needed and I don't see the cost benefit. Wouldn't everybody just throw your alternative baggies and carboard away nullifying the desired effect? Most consumers do not use any toy packaging materials for any purpose, but the current LEGO packaging materials are very useful to me in packing postage as I stated. The cardboard used is already recycle friendly as well, what's to change?

I just don't see the need, no need for you to attempt to peer presure me into signing your petition. Still no sign-y for me.

I'm sorry if I've offended you. In no way am I attempting to pressure you into signing; a little bit of cross-debate is beneficial, in my opinion, to further understand the topic. I'm glad that you've found a way to use the current bags without throwing them out. Once again, I sincerely apologize if you feel that I have offended you, as this was not my intention.

Thanks for being reasonable and avoiding an argument.

Anyway...I actually like the cardboard holders. The cloaks have always been a bit brittle and this is a good way to keep them safe. However, I don't think the tape is necessary.

- Matt

[Chrislad77]

hings!

Frankly, I could really care less wether my Legos were sold in nice boxes and all as they are today, or if it was in a paper bag, just as long as I get my bricks I'm cool.
~Amanda

Ah but see if you want the "green" packaging you'd have to be willing to accept fewer pieces per set

The cost will go somewhere.

[Patron of the lego]

Also lets not forget that plastic is petroleum, so that means that the prices have been rising of recent, especially in the summer. I'm guessing that it takes more money to manufacture the plastic your talking about, so lego switched to this bag. However biodgradeable plastics are coming, the weakness is that plastic is limited and costly.
300th post

[Jansen]

emperor james wrote:

The_Vanquished wrote:

Lets just put landfills on Mars!


why do that when we have the whole continent of australia?

Some of our Australlian members will probably be offended by that...

Chrislad77 wrote:

PostPosted: Sun Jul 08, 2007 7:15 pm Post subject:
Jansen wrote:


Chrislad77 wrote:
Quote:
The real question for someone who signs this is, would they be willing to pay more for the same Lego product so that it could have the "improved" packaging?

Personally I wouldn't.


It would actually cost less because they dont have to use as much plastic. Smile



Sorry but that's really not true.

The reason they use plastic is because it is so cheap. They use the cheapest bags available that meet there standards. Anything but the current bags would cost more, it's really not an argueable point.

Even if it is so cheap, they still have to produce less, so wouldn't it be cheaper? I don't get your point.

[Chrislad77]

Even if it is so cheap, they still have to produce less, so wouldn't it be cheaper? I don't get your point.

Well now your changing your point and not working within the context of your old post.

You signed this thread which states you support Lego using more "environmentally friendly" packaging material, aka more expensive plastics, cardboards, ect. Even using less of the more expensive stuff will still cost more.


The idea of using less overall packaging was suggested by discussion in this thread, and most strongly by members dissenting from the encouraged position of this thread.

A couple fewer bags has the best chance of actually getting accomplished and makes economic sense.

[Jansen]

Even if it is so cheap, they still have to produce less, so wouldn't it be cheaper? I don't get your point.

Well now your changing your point and not working within the context of your old post.

You signed this thread which states you support Lego using more "environmentally friendly" packaging material, aka more expensive plastics, cardboards, ect. Even using less of the more expensive stuff will still cost more.


The idea of using less overall packaging was suggested by discussion in this thread, and most strongly by members dissenting from the encouraged position of this thread.

A couple fewer bags has the best chance of actually getting accomplished and makes economic sense.

Ah, I see now!
In my old post I signed the petition in hopes that LEGO would use any type of a more "green" alternative packaging. I completely forgot that recyclable plastic costs more. I completely understand what your saying now! Now, what I want to know is if using one bag made out of recyclable plastic holding all the pieces of a set, would it balance out the price of the special plastic costing more, but using less of the nonrecyclable plastic :

[Spongey]

I think we have to realize that the sets will not be that much more expensive. Resealable plastic bags cost a few cents a piece, so even if you have twenty (which is unnecessary), a big set may only cost $1 more. When you're spending $120 on a set, I don't think you'll notice $121. With a small set, that may only have one bag (if any,) it will cost a few cents more. Instead of $4.99, it will be $5.09 (at the most.) This is not a big sacrifice to make.

[Patron of the lego]

Well multiply that amount by 1 million. I understand spongey were you are coming from, however plastics have to go through a manufacturing process, and that process also adds to the price combined with the rising oil prices. I'm guessing the plastic we are given are cheaper. However I also see your side of the story, and I understand that you want it to be recycled too.