Pirate's Cove

The shameful thing here is that Lego only seems to care about their “carbon footprint”, not whether recycling plastics makes sense for real environmentalism

Green Fail: Lego Abandons Bricks Made of Recycled Plastic Bottles for Failure to Reduce Carbon Emissions

Danish toymaker Lego has halted its initiative to create its iconic bricks from recycled plastic bottles, citing the failure of the prototype to reduce carbon emissions.

CBS News reports that Lego recently admitted that its ambitious project to manufacture Lego bricks from recycled plastic bottles, specifically polyethylene terephthalate (PET), will not progress further. This decision comes after more than two years of meticulous testing and experimentation, which concluded that the material did not meet the company’s sustainability goals, particularly in reducing carbon emissions.

Despite the setback with the PET prototype, Lego remains unwavering in its commitment to sustainability. The company claims it has invested more than $1.2 billion in various sustainability initiatives, aiming to transition to more sustainable materials and achieve a 37 percent reduction in its carbon emissions by 2032.

Lego is currently exploring a range of alternative sustainable materials, including green methanol and bio-polypropylene, for developing Lego bricks. Green methanol, also known as e-methanol, is a sustainable compound composed of waste carbon dioxide and hydrogen, created using renewable energy to split water molecules. Bio-polypropylene is a sustainable and biological variant of polyethylene, a plastic used in various applications, including consumer and food packaging.

It’s all a scam. Recycling is a good thing, but, they’re doing it for the wrong reasons, and I suspect the price to do this is pretty high. Of course, did they really try, or was this all “greenwashing”, putting out statements and press releases, promising to be more sustainable, doing the minimal, all in an attempt to placate the climate cult?

Oh, and then there’s this

(Watts Up With That?) Ford said dropping the [British] 2030 deadline would be a mistake, and hinted it could put further investments at risk.

“The UK 2030 target is a vital catalyst to accelerate Ford into a cleaner future,” Ford UK chair Lisa Brankin said in a statement on Wednesday.

“Our business needs three things from the UK government: ambition, commitment and consistency. A relaxation of 2030 would undermine all three.”

That’s an excerpt from a Reuters piece, leading Eric Worrall, who wrote in his headline that Ford is relying on government coercion, to opine

Is anyone awake in shareholder land? Who put the fools who bet the futures of their businesses on the trustworthiness of politicians in charge of major automobile companies?

Without government mandates, which they do not want to call mandates, so, let’s call them decrees or orders, EVs will be nothing more than niche vehicles for the foreseeable future. Few are clamoring for them. The majority who buy them make between $150k and $300K. The rich folks mostly buy super luxury cars. The working and middle class cannot afford them.