As a consumer, however, I can't say either way without a price. I know you said that the company was willing to lose money over this, but is the consumer going to pay the same price, or more?
That's a good point. At least here in Norway, Lego is crazy expensive, and I bet only a few dollars of the $150 sets are even used to buy the plastic materials. The process of molding and packing them will be the same, so I'm not sure if it will affect the price a lot. But it's an interesting point, and I hope they cover the loss from their income instead of raising the price.
I love doing what I can to reduce my own footprint by doing simple things like using re-usable container, not eating at fast food restaurants, and keeping my thermostat lower in the winter, but these things cost nothing, or are actually saving me money. I don't have a problem choosing between two things where one is eco-friendly and the other isn't if they have a comparable price, but how much do you feel people will pay in addition to lower their footprint if it makes it harder on them?
Yeah, we all want to be more carbon friendly, but very few of us wants to pay more money for it. And I can't blame anyone for this, and I very rarely pay premium for environmentally friendly products myself. I think it's really important to find cheaper or equally cheap options if we want more people to choose renewable/"green" products.
Finally, I don't think they have said anything about how it affects the price, so either they are waiting with announcing this, or they plan to keep it the same. Guess we need to wait and see.
Thanks for a great comment, @thegreatlife!