3 ms·
This is one of those cases where I feel recyclability shouldn't be a huge concern: LEGO bricks are viable for several decades (so far) and they should generally
by ocdtrekkie 3y ago
This is one of those cases where I feel recyclability shouldn't be a huge concern: LEGO bricks are viable for several decades (so far) and they should generally not ever need to go to a landfill.
This is a case where reusing is a far better premise: LEGO could invest in initatives to return LEGOs for redistribution to younger generations at a discount or credit.
EDIT: Heh, another commenter shared a link, LEGO does indeed have such a program, called Replay.
- Cthulhu_ 3y agoCounterpoint: They make a lot of new plastic, which ends up in the cycle one way or another. If they can make some of that out of existing plastic, in theory less new plastic needs to be made (in practice it won't stop), and plastic stays out of landfills and incinerators for a bit longer.
- ocdtrekkie 3y agoI think an important question is if the durability suffers. Reuse is better than recyclability. If they had bricks made of recyclable plastic but they only lasted ten years, I would argue that was worse. We should push as much as possible for durable, repairable products, and then focus on getting those products removed from the waste stream. Imagine if LEGO was able to incorporate bricks returned to them from Replay like programs into brand new sets. A lot of new sets have unique pieces but they still use a lot of traditional parts, not to mention basic sets like LEGO Creator.