this post was submitted on 25 Sep 2023
164 points (96.6% liked)

News

23014 readers
4 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Copenhagen, Denmark — Denmark's Lego said on Monday that it remains committed to its quest to find sustainable materials to reduce carbon emissions, even after an experiment by the world's largest toymaker to use recycled bottles did not work. Lego said it has "decided not to progress" with making its trademark colorful bricks from recycled plastic bottles made of polyethylene terephthalate, known as PET, and after more than two years of testing "found the material didn't reduce carbon emissions."

Lego enthusiastically announced in 2021 that the prototype PET blocks had become the first recycled alternative to pass its "strict" quality, safety and play requirements, following experimentation with several other iterations that proved not durable enough.

The company said scientists and engineers tested more than 250 variations of PET materials, as well as hundreds of other plastic formulations, before nailing down the prototype, which was made with plastic sourced from suppliers in the U.S. that were approved by the Food and Drug Administration and European Food Safety Authority. On average, a one-liter plastic PET bottle made enough raw material for ten 2 x 4 Lego bricks.

Despite the determination that the PET prototype failed to save on carbon emissions, Lego said it remained "fully committed to making Lego bricks from sustainable materials by 2032."

The privately-held Lego Group, which makes its bricks out of oil-based plastic said it had invested "more than $1.2 billion in sustainability initiatives" as part of efforts to transition to more sustainable materials and reduce its carbon emissions by 37% by 2032, Lego said.

The company said it was "currently testing and developing Lego bricks made from a range of alternative sustainable materials, including other recycled plastics and plastics made from alternative sources such as e-methanol."

Also known as green methanol, e-methanol is composed of waste carbon dioxide and hydrogen, created by using renewable energy to split water molecules.

Lego said it will continue to use bio-polypropylene, the sustainable and biological variant of polyethylene — a plastic used in everything from consumer and food packaging to tires — for parts in Lego sets such as leaves, trees and other accessories.

"We believe that in the long-term this will encourage increased production of more sustainable raw materials, such as recycled oils, and help support our transition to sustainable materials," it said.

Lego was founded in 1932 by Ole Kirk Kristiansen. The name derived from the two Danish words, leg and godt, which together mean "play well." The brand name was created unaware that lego in Latin means "I assemble."­­

all 36 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 63 points 1 year ago (2 children)

So they aren't giving up on trying to find an eco-friendly production method, they just found one way that doesn't work out. It is nice to hear that they're trying though.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 year ago

Lego have already been carbon neutral for years, but that they haven’t rested on that laurel speaks volumes

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Exactly. It's a shame this didn't work out but they're committed to developing and testing new materials.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago

It’s actually better than resealing this with the eco-friendly label and a potential markup with no actual benefit for the environment.

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Even if using recycled PET doesn't reduce carbon emissions, it's still reusing material which would otherwise be discarded - material which would otherwise end up in landfills or possibly waterways.

Reusing still seems better than not.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not reusing it for a purpose that doesn't make sense doesn't mean the material won't be reused ever either ofcourse.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago

We're not going to be able to reuse/recycle all discarded PET plastic, no matter what. It's not like if LEGO were to go forward with this program, they'd be taking discarded PET from some other reuse project.

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I wish it was more specific. Was it about the same or was it significantly more? If it was about the same then it would seem better to use it for now just to remove plastic from the waste stream. I mean environmentalism goes beyond simple global warming.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

That’s exactly what I was thinking. It’s a win if it reduces plastic waste while keeping production emissions the same.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

The material properties of PET are not the best for this application. It isn't as rigid or as durable as ABS, for example. And when it isn't virgin material, those properties degrade even further. LEGO has a very high quality standard (their dimensional tolerances on their parts are ridiculously tight for plastic parts) it would require any material it uses meet, so I'm not shocked that PET-based blocks didn't pass. That satisfying feeling you get when you snap 2 bricks together was probably very high on their list and compared to other materials, recycled PET would feel "smooshier".

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

The recycled PET did pass their quality standards.

Lego enthusiastically announced in 2021 that the prototype PET blocks had become the first recycled alternative to pass its “strict” quality, safety and play requirements, following experimentation with several other iterations that proved not durable enough.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

I worked at a research lab and legos were so precise they were used in prototypes. They would get glued to locations so the parts could be attached and taken back off easily while always being in the exact same place relative to its attachment point with the other piece.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

One can buy a new LEGO block today and it will fit onto an original LEGO. That's not ridiculous, that's magical.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Seems like the bare-minimum requirement for a product like that.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago

Try LEGO imitators to see the actual minimums.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Wish there were more details. All CO2 emissions are not created equal. We need to end our fossil fuel CO2 emissions. If this is not adding fossil fuel CO2 emissions (for instance if no oil based plastics are added in and it is created using renewable energy), it is not really that bad since it is simply repurposing carbon that is already in the system. While that might not be ideal, it would still be much better than creating the whole piece from oil based plastics.

But it could very well be that they don't have renewable energy in use at the plant and/or the recycling process has to use lots of fossil fuel oils.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

That and they can't just use whatever plastic, they wanted a specific kind to meet quality standards, which means pulling from a much larger pool of recycling, and then all those different recycling centers get to get shipped to a plant.

If your travel path from raw material to finished product looks like a river basin map, you're spending a lot on fossil fuels.

That and they might be refining the plastic further, potentially creating actual waste products that need secure disposal.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

LEGO is doing research in so many areas for that plan. Some succeed (Like "Plants made from plants"), and some (Like the PET blocks) do not.

I have participated in a trial some years ago where I got a set that was obviously hand-packed, but looked like a normal set. I believe it was chosen because it contained a selection of bricks in rather large quantities, i.e. it contained a lot of 1x2 bricks in one color and some others like that. Participants were asked to build the model, answer a questionnaire - including entering a code that came with the package, probably to identify the batch or whether it was a placebo set - and send the set back. In hindsight it was bad that I answered the questionnaire immediately after the build, because I noticed an interesting affect of the model on the next day when I tore it down for return. The model had collected dust overnight. I mean, any LEGO model collects dust, but this collected more in 24 hours than others did in weeks or months. And there was no way to add this information.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I always thought bionicles were cooler than legos.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)