Shopping at LEGO or Amazon?
Please use our links: LEGO.comAmazon
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

It's time for LEGO to block Shell

135

Comments

  • oldtodd33oldtodd33 Denver 4800 miles to BillundMember Posts: 2,586
    edited July 2014
    ^ If you look at NY City that number falls to about 6500KWH which is the only U.S. city I consider most like major cities in the U.K.. I suspect part of the reason for electricity usage to be from the high number of detached single family homes in the U.S. compared to the U.K.. According to one website, most people in the U.K. don't even own a refrigerator and few people have air conditioning.
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 19,653
    When was that website written? 1950? Most people in the UK have a fridge. In some "classy" areas people even have one outside in their garden, along with an old sofa.

    Most (residential) places in the UK don't need Airton, it is simply not worth it for 1-2 weeks per year. Especially when it is normally cool enough to open a window.
    Redbullgivesuwind
  • oldtodd33oldtodd33 Denver 4800 miles to BillundMember Posts: 2,586
    edited July 2014
    Here is the one I found, correct me if it is wrong. http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc1/Housing.html

    I have never been to Europe so my first hand knowledge is lacking at bit, but most homes here have A/C especially in the Southwestern U.S. where summer temps hover around 100 degrees Fahrenheit, I was in Phoenix a couple of weeks ago and 115 was the norm.

    By the way, I have 3 fridges, 2 in my house and 1 for beer in the garage, not uncommon.
    bobabricks
  • ShibShib UKMember Posts: 5,421
    I can honestly say as a UK resident I don't know a single person who doesn't have at least one fridge, having an additional mini fridge for drinks in the summer is also quite common.
    I have some American friends and the one big difference in lifestyle I really notice is expectations on house size. They have a house that I would consider pretty big. Would be sold as 4 bed by UK standards (3 decent sized bedrooms and what we'd call a box room) but they describe it as three small bedrooms. It doesn't take much to then see extra electricity usage in heating/cooling/lighting etc. I noticed they have a tendency to use more electrical lighting as well - possibly a result of more space further away from windows as a result.
  • oldtodd33oldtodd33 Denver 4800 miles to BillundMember Posts: 2,586
    Then that would leave general house size as most of the reason for the extra electricity. Is it fairly common for people to own a flat or single family detached house? From what I know as I said above, I picture most people in the U.K. who live in major cities to live like people in NYC, large buildings with many what we would call apartments.
  • CrowkillersCrowkillers Member Posts: 757
    edited July 2014

    Surprisingly I wouldnt, I tried to state as clearly as possible that i wasnt comparing with slavery - that was just an example to point out an underlying flaw in crow's argument.

    Flaw...?

    I am talking about our current modern world that we actually live in right now and you interjected something from 100's of years ago that has nothing to do with anything related to this subject at hand...

    Anyone that complains about something that they depend on and use on a daily basis is just plain deranged...

    Slavery..? Do you know how many people in the U.S. actually owned or depended on slaves..?



  • MojoestMojoest UKMember Posts: 474
    Having read through this thread, (well my eye's glazed over part way through as talked turned away from Lego in terms of just the bricks and figures), various other articles online, comments to TLM and Lego groups on Facebook and I think I've really missed the point, (but at the same time kept focus on the real reason we're here). From all this info the one piece my brain focuses on was a line in this story:

    http://www.edie.net/news/5/Lego-urged-to--block-Shell--amidst-Arctic-drilling-concerns/?utm_source=weeklynewsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=news&utm_campaign=weeklynewsletter

    "But the toymaker has confirmed to Greenpeace that a further co-promotion between Shell and LEGO has already been agreed to start this year."

    Yay! more "free" Lego :-)
    Shibelectrobovine
  • XefanXefan Member Posts: 1,149

    Anyone that complains about something that they depend on and use on a daily basis is just plain deranged...

    Yeah, I mean it's so deranged to complain that it'd be nice to have cleaner air even though I depend on it to breathe. I shouldn't complain about how the trains are always late or the roads always potholed because I use them every day.

    Are you actually serious? You're such a drone to the powers that be that you genuinely believe no one should complain about anything they use ever? That you should always put up and shut up?

    Sounds like a fine way to make sure nothing improves ever, that humanity never advances.

    You should probably learn to think for yourself a bit more if you genuinely believe what you just said.
    cheshirecatRedbullgivesuwind
  • ShibShib UKMember Posts: 5,421
    Mojoest said:

    But the toymaker has confirmed to Greenpeace that a further co-promotion between Shell and LEGO has already been agreed to start this year."

    Yay! more "free" Lego :-)

    I love how you found the bright side! :-P
    bobabricks
  • cheshirecatcheshirecat Member Posts: 5,332
    edited July 2014


    Flaw...?

    Yes flawed - as @Xefan has eloquently described. I assumed it was fairly obvious.

    As for your other thing about LEGO being made from Oil. Looking at their 2013 CSR report they say themselves 'By 2030, our vision is to find and implement sustainable alternatives to our current raw materials.' which suggests they themselves see the problem with using oil based raw materials. Yet they come to a marketing/pr agreement with a big oil company. You can't see the weirdness of that?

    Would LEGO have entered a PR association with BP after the deepwater horizon oil spill? No. Should it be any different because that was near the US coast rather than Nigeria? 7000 spills over 30 years, probably millions of barrels of oil released. Should LEGO require a similar level of social responsibility from the companies they choose to forge PR links with as they do their suppliers? They don't seem to.

    Seriously after reading through LEGO's CSR report you do wonder why on earth they thought a marketing campaign with Shell was a good idea. LEGO aren't the target with this, Shell are, but through association LEGO get their name dragged through the mud. Unnecessarily.

    And yes, I drive a car, I buy petrol, I got the shell polybags, but I still think highlighting the bad stuff companies do is important and persuading good companies not to cross promote bad companies is entirely sensible.
    Redbullgivesuwind
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 19,653
    Didn't LEGO use to say that they were aiming for a more sustainable alternative to current (crude based) raw materials by 2020?

    That is also their target date to use only renewable energy (I assume for production, and not for transportation).
  • CrowkillersCrowkillers Member Posts: 757
    edited July 2014
    Xefan said:

    Anyone that complains about something that they depend on and use on a daily basis is just plain deranged...

    Yeah, I mean it's so deranged to complain that it'd be nice to have cleaner air even though I depend on it to breathe. I shouldn't complain about how the trains are always late or the roads always potholed because I use them every day.

    Are you actually serious? You're such a drone to the powers that be that you genuinely believe no one should complain about anything they use ever? That you should always put up and shut up?

    Sounds like a fine way to make sure nothing improves ever, that humanity never advances.

    You should probably learn to think for yourself a bit more if you genuinely believe what you just said.

    I am talking about people that complain about the use of something vital to their everyday needs but have no idea how far that something actually goes...

    The subject at hand is oil and you are attempting to spin my words into something else talking about potholes and trains...


  • CrowkillersCrowkillers Member Posts: 757
    edited July 2014


    Flaw...?

    Yes flawed - as @Xefan has eloquently described. I assumed it was fairly obvious.

    As for your other thing about LEGO being made from Oil. Looking at their 2013 CSR report they say themselves 'By 2030, our vision is to find and implement sustainable alternatives to our current raw materials.' which suggests they themselves see the problem with using oil based raw materials. Yet they come to a marketing/pr agreement with a big oil company. You can't see the weirdness of that?
    I never even mentioned anything in this thread about Lego being made from oil...

    My outlook on this world's oil needs go far beyond Lego bricks...

  • oldtodd33oldtodd33 Denver 4800 miles to BillundMember Posts: 2,586





    As for your other thing about LEGO being made from Oil. Looking at their 2013 CSR report they say themselves 'By 2030, our vision is to find and implement sustainable alternatives to our current raw materials.' which suggests they themselves see the problem with using oil based raw materials. Yet they come to a marketing/pr agreement with a big oil company. You can't see the weirdness of that?

    No, don't see any weirdness in that at all, they can't solve the problem now so they will continue on until they can.

    As far as Lego being made of a sustainable material, can you imagine paying $200 for a set that literally disintegrates in 20 years or whatever? I can't either, it's a win/win for Lego but I will stop buying it if or when they do try to change their materials just for safeties sake.
  • XefanXefan Member Posts: 1,149
    When people assume that changing raw materials to sustainability means an inferior product I'm amazed someone making such a claim is still alive and hasn't drowned on the amount of oil industry propaganda they must've swallowed.

    It's perfectly possible that moving to sustainable raw materials just means using renewable oil produced via a process such as this rather than oil harvested from the natural environment:

    http://www.wired.com/2008/05/making-renewabl/

    Besides, if we're using less oil for things we don't need to use oil for (i.e. power generation including powering vehicles) then there will be more of an abundance for the things we do need it for meaning the price of plastic production can actually go down and Lego could actually get cheaper (or Lego can make even more profit). Sustainability neither has to mean inferior quality or more expense, which is why many people, including me actually side with the renewable argument - not because we're flower loving hippies, but because there's literally no downsides to weening ourself off of the status quo (well, unless you're a big oil CEO) and in fact many upsides.

    Sustainable raw materials doesn't translate to making Lego out of paper or whatever you seem to think it means. It could just as well mean still making it out of ABS, but ABS where a key raw material - oil - is sustainably sourced.
    cheshirecatTheBigLegoski
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 19,653
    I doubt we will see cost effective renewably sourced ABS. Some of the raw materials (especially the butadiene) could come from renewable sources, but all of it is unlikely.

    Instead, if they can get the properties right, I imagine it will be something more like a blend of PHB and PPC (polyhydroxybutyrate and polypropylene carbonate), where they might be able to get higher percentages of renewable source materials.

    That said, there is still a lot of crude based oil used for transportation of the product. Getting that down will probably be easier than changing the chemistry of the bricks. There is the energy used to make the bricks too, but they reckon that will all be sustainable by 2020.

  • petitetoilonrougepetitetoilonrouge Ottawa, CanadaMember Posts: 21
    edited July 2014
    Maybe I'm misreading this, but weren't people incensed last year when there was the Lego Movie was being promoted at McDonald's and how it was giving the toy company a bad image etc.? Yet because of Greenpeace's ambivalent reputation, Shell gets a pass?

    I don't know, I'm of the opinion Lego is making more than enough money to choose its promotional partners more responsibly. As several people pointed out, we indeed can't live without oil (yet?), but to actively promote it is another matter altogether.
  • JumpinbeansJumpinbeans Member Posts: 70
    Typical Greenpeace playing the PR game...I would be much happier with my daughter playing with Lego (even with a shell logo splashed all over it) than other toys on the market.
  • iancam33iancam33 Member Posts: 407

    This planet can shake off the human race like a dog does with fleas...

    I've never come across a dog that can get rid of fleas on its own. Nearly all dogs will not take a bath on their own.

    Someone commented earlier that LEGO gets nothing from their affiliation from maersk. I think not. One, LEGO gets added sales of the Maersk labeled products and two, who do you think ships product for LEGO at, I am sure, a discounted rate.
  • iancam33iancam33 Member Posts: 407




    Slavery..? Do you know how many people in the U.S. actually owned or depended on slaves..?





    This statement I make is directed to everyone. This whole slavery aspect to the thread is pointless. At one point just about every culture was enslaved at some point in time and to some degree. I have Scottish heritage and we/they were slaves at one point so it's time to end the slavery bit.
  • madforLEGOmadforLEGO Chicagoland USMember Posts: 10,108
    edited July 2014
    iancam33 said:

    This planet can shake off the human race like a dog does with fleas...

    I've never come across a dog that can get rid of fleas on its own. Nearly all dogs will not take a bath on their own.

    Someone commented earlier that LEGO gets nothing from their affiliation from maersk. I think not. One, LEGO gets added sales of the Maersk labeled products and two, who do you think ships product for LEGO at, I am sure, a discounted rate.
    The dog with fleas remark is @crowkillers I think paraphrasing a comedian-George Carlin ( believe the line is 'the planet will shake us off like a bad case of fleas...", will need to watch Carlin this weekend and see if I got that right). Which is funny until someone tries to kill it with logic.
    Pitfall69
  • GoldJonoGoldJono Aberdeen, UKMember Posts: 217
    edited July 2014
    I for one would be really sad if TLG ended it's association with Shell, as some of my favourite sets when growing up were the shell petrol stations and tankers as it was easy to relate them to things you saw in the real world.

    As far as Greenpeace is concerned I think their tactics are often pretty dubious and that they think the ends always justifies the means. I a lot of ways they're as bad as the organisations that they pick fights with.

    As far as Shell et al are concerned they are striving to improve their safety and environmental performance, don't get me wrong they still have long way to go. It's bad business for them to spill or flare hydrocarbons as it's product they can't sell. The only exception to this where immediate safety takes precedence over long term environmental damage.

    Shell wouldn't be in the Arctic if there wasn't the demand for the the oil and gas. As consumers we have an obligation to future generations, to think twice about whether we need to travel and if we do, select the option with the least impact. The same consideration should be given when selecting new cars and household appliances. We should also think twice before we replacing perfectly serviceable consumer electronics with the latest shiny new ones. Do you really need an iPhone 5S when you already have and iPhone 5? We should take every opportunity to reuse, repurpose or recycle waste. That's the great thing about lego, old lego is almost completely compatible with new Lego sets.

    We are decades from a hydrocarbon free society, there are lots of social, economic, technological and political barriers to this, but we can all make a difference, all be it a very small one.

    Rant over!
    ShibmressinRedbullgivesuwind
  • cheshirecatcheshirecat Member Posts: 5,332
    I have to say it's not that simple, oil extraction has a lot of leaks, see Nigeria, and I suspect they could stop them but it would cost too much. More importantly they don't clean them up if they think they can get away with it. High profile stuff like the gulf they pour money into whilst other sites sit polluted for decades.

    For me it's simply this. A company who tries to promote itself as good with a strong sustainability, and in the Shell case specifically environmental consideration, particularly one targeting kids, shouldn't be cross promoting with big oil. I would say the same for tobacco, fast food, defence contractors etc.

    And as for missing the old shell sets (to which the recent polys didn't compare imo), think what they could do instead if not with shell. Of course finding a company everyone could agree on might be hard!
    RedbullgivesuwindLegoKip
  • XefanXefan Member Posts: 1,149
    Yes, the discussion has turned full circle and we're back to the same incorrect argument that we use oil because we have to use oil.

    It's still incorrect, we use oil because big oil has made sure we have to use oil, not because we actually have to use oil.

    As cheshirecat alluded to, the cost of cleanups, and of health problems from mass burning of fossil fuels, oil spills etc. aren't covered by these companies. They're covered by you and I, which makes oil look cheap to the consumer, but the actual cost is higher. Compare this to nuclear, and some renewables that look expensive, but they're actually cheaper because they don't require that hidden oil subsidy.

    It requires governments to start holding the fossil fuel industries to the same level of accountability they hold the nuclear industry and until that happens there's little you and I can do. There has been some progress towards this (although Australia has recently decided to regress and put the burden back on the citizens of the country), this is what carbon tax is largely for - placing the burden of cost of releasing CO2 back on the industries that profit off the processes that result in these emissions rather than that cost being born by you and I, as tax payers, but it still doesn't come close to bringing fossil fuels to their actual upfront cost so they can properly be compared against alternatives.

    Long story short, if you knew how much of your taxes were going on dealing with the problems of fossil fuels (such as a large part of the cost of asthma treatment for example) and could lump that on top of how much you already pay for fossil fuels you'd all be out there listening to Greenpeace and buying electrics cars or hybrids and demanding the grid be switched to renewables (or ignoring Greenpeace and demanding nuclear), because it would be so much cheaper. It's only because it's hidden in your taxes and you don't realise how much you're actually paying for fossil fuels in practice that you all think it's okay.
  • cheshirecatcheshirecat Member Posts: 5,332
    ^ Indeed, and the same is true of all that cheap processed and fast-food, well if you live somewhere with extensive tax based health care. Even if you don't then its still costs the economy in terms of productivity etc.

    The figures for 2007 in the UK showed that obesity cost the UK economy almost £16 billion including £5 billion in direct NHS costs. There are currently about 18 million families in the UK (married, non married with or without kids) so its near enough £1000 per year per family.

    6 years later the NHS costs are now over £6 billion per year and the government/NHS predict that by 2050 the total cost to the economy will be over £50 billion per year.

    That cheap food isn't really that cheap at all.
  • texaspetetexaspete U.K.Member Posts: 56
    Xefan said:

    if you knew how much of your taxes were going on dealing with the problems of fossil fuels

    Can you tell us, and then we'll know?
    Aleydita
  • XefanXefan Member Posts: 1,149
    It really depends on how many problems you want to believe are attributed to fossil fuels, but even if you're a climate skeptic and don't believe they have any climate impact then the health implications alone are massive. This Forbes article gives US health cost figures attributed to fossil fuels as $886.5 billion annually for the US.

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/justingerdes/2013/04/08/how-much-do-health-impacts-from-fossil-fuel-electricity-cost-the-u-s-economy/

    Obviously the numbers increase even more if you factor in climate and environmental impact.

    There is much written on the subject, and much research done on the subject, a simple Google search on fossil fuel externalities will bring you plenty more to read ranging from personal opinion on blogs to cold hard scientific and statistical research. Though careful about reading this if you're in Texas, you might get shot or something.
  • iancam33iancam33 Member Posts: 407

    iancam33 said:

    This planet can shake off the human race like a dog does with fleas...

    I've never come across a dog that can get rid of fleas on its own. Nearly all dogs will not take a bath on their own.

    Someone commented earlier that LEGO gets nothing from their affiliation from maersk. I think not. One, LEGO gets added sales of the Maersk labeled products and two, who do you think ships product for LEGO at, I am sure, a discounted rate.
    The dog with fleas remark is @crowkillers I think paraphrasing a comedian-George Carlin ( believe the line is 'the planet will shake us off like a bad case of fleas...", will need to watch Carlin this weekend and see if I got that right). Which is funny until someone tries to kill it with logic.
    I was taking it as a personal quote. Did not know it was carlin.
  • iancam33iancam33 Member Posts: 407
    @Achesirecat: It's the same here in the USA. This country is ungodly obese(it's quite disgusting). If only they'd start charging more to these people for health costs so those of us who actually exercise and eat better foods wouldn't have to foot the bill. Everywhere I turn these days I see fat people and it's disturbing because they can barely move and even scarier that they drive cars.

    @Xefan: We are and will be dependent on big oil because they hold the patents to numerous alternative sources of energy. They won't use/release them until they have exhausted their current source of income.
  • IstokgIstokg MichiganMember Posts: 2,270
    edited August 2014
    LEGO's relationship with Shell goes back to the early 1950s, with gas pumps, tanker trucks and LEGO sets. A French journalist interviewed me for a story on this, and I sent her many images about that collaboration...

    http://www.terraeco.net/Lego-Shell-une-histoire-d-amour,55921.html

    Granted OCTAN has been the service station of choice (a fictitious one at that) since 1992, but Shell has always hat a foothold with either Shell LEGO sets, or promotional sets.

    One of my favorites is the 373 Shell Oil Rig! ;-)

    bobabricks
  • bobabricksbobabricks Vancouver, BC, CanadaMember Posts: 1,842
    So is that oil rig in the video going to be the next promo set? If so, I can't wait! I hope the CEO comes with A couple of LOTR rings, you gotta bling those guys up. :P
  • LegobrandonCPLegobrandonCP CanadaMember Posts: 1,917
    edited August 2014
    Not sure if this has been posted yet, but GP has been putting stickers on actual LEGO products. I think that is a bit overboard.

    http://imgur.com/b6ErApo
    From WetWired on Reddit
  • Farmer_JohnFarmer_John USA - 4,035 Miles from 62 West Wallaby St., Wigan, Lancashire, UKMember Posts: 2,404
    Let's see...Lego uses oil to produce oil-based products and also supports an oil company. Anyone who has a problem with oil shouldn't be purchasing Lego products. In fact, the vast majority of everything we use today is an oil byproduct (energy, cosmetics, insulation for household appliances, most of the non-metal components in your car, polyester in your clothes, etc., etc., etc.). I would love to meet someone who doesn't use oil products...except they would probably be naked and smell terrible as everything is manufactured (including solar panels) using oil products. Shell wouldn't be in business if there wasn't a customer to buy their product. What most hate to admit is that THEY are the customer. It all sounds a bit hypocritical to me...

    If TLG was to cave to those complaining about Shell, the same complainers would next be demanding that Lego quit using oil in their products altogether. Fortunately, TLG is in the position to tell the complainers to go pound sand (as they should).

    My suggestion is for those who can't sleep at night over this issue to go back to college and get a degree in chemical engineering and solve the problem instead of just demanding that other capitulate to their unrealistic and uneducated whims.
    dougtsmonkeyhangerbobabricksmadforLEGOoldtodd33Pitfall69
  • fenderbender336fenderbender336 Member Posts: 88

    Not sure if this has been posted yet, but GP has been putting stickers on actual LEGO products. I think that is a bit overboard.

    http://imgur.com/b6ErApo
    From WetWired on Reddit

    I'm pretty sure that's vandalism. Ugh when is this going to end?...
    bobabricksmadforLEGO
  • cheshirecatcheshirecat Member Posts: 5,332

    My suggestion is for those who can't sleep at night over this issue to go back to college and get a degree in chemical engineering and solve the problem.

    Good plan ;-) If only I knew someone that worked in a top checmical engineering department of a university...

    As for the rest of your spiel at least no one here is suggesting we shouldn't use oil or that we dont use oil. But that doesn't mean we should let oil companies do what ever the hell they like. Shell made £3billion profit in the last three months. They can afford to clean up their mess, no they should be forced to clean up their mess.

    LegoKipjadeirene
  • cheshirecatcheshirecat Member Posts: 5,332
    Obviously there is no excuse for sticking stickers on product. For those in the UK I guess if we label GP as Eco-terrorists then Argos are Retail-Terrorists, i bet these stickers are easier to remove than those damn Hero ones!
    Matthewfenderbender336bobabricks
  • Farmer_JohnFarmer_John USA - 4,035 Miles from 62 West Wallaby St., Wigan, Lancashire, UKMember Posts: 2,404
    ^I agree that they are responsible for their messes...but I will also let them have their profits along with that responsibility.

    Actually my daughter is a second-year Chem Engr major and is REALLY looking forward to her polymer class (to each their own, I guess). Maybe I can influence her to go work for TLG and get us lowly Bricksetters personal tours. ;-)
  • icey117icey117 DenmarkMember Posts: 509

    icey117 said:


    That said I've more or less concluded that if anyone are serious about saving our planet it does mean turning our society back in time to when there was no electicity or industry or cars... or plastic- LEGO.

    It's a myth that some love to propagate. The relationship with impact is almost certainly non linear I.e. a halfing in activity more than halving impact. We don't have to become completely sustainable overnight, any improvement will help.
    Sorry for the late reply (due to vacation)... But dont get me wrong; I'm not environentally ignorant. I'm from Denmark... A nation that is quite up front with changes. And every step does make a change... My point is that if we as humanity is not willing to sacrifice our "civilization comfort" we'll properly never turn sustainable. We are as civilization like an massively overweight person sitting on McDonald discussing if changing our Mayo with Keychup will make us slimmer. It will - but it's details. The hard calls we shun! I find that ignorant!
    GoldJono
  • monkeyhangermonkeyhanger Member Posts: 3,011
    We talk about dirty oil and obscene profits, but every single thing that comes up from a well is made into something, nothing is wasted. As long as they clean their mess up (why do we allow them to not do so?) i've no beef with oil companies, they work hard for their profit when you think about money earnt vs volume of product. We have the saviour of the planet in electric cars, using batteries made via some of the most environmentally unfriendly processes in any industry.

    The US could learn a thing or 2 from Europe when it comes to vehicles. If Audi can get 400ps from a 2.0 Turbo petrol that can do 40mpg on a motorway journey, there's no need for a chuggy 5 litre V8 that'll do 20mpg tops. They are getting the message and switching, slowly, but more due to the $ cost of fuel going up than environmental conscience.
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 19,653
    Someone posted this on Eurobricks.

    Looks like they are now going round stores and damaging stock they don't own to get their message across.

    image
  • CCCCCC UKMember Posts: 19,653
    edited August 2014
    And their latest video suggests that they would like to increase tourism to the arctic, and that polar bears don't maul kids to death if you cuddle them. Or did I just misunderstand the point of it?



    And they also think Lego should introduce articulated short legs, like some of the customs.
    bobabricks
  • madforLEGOmadforLEGO Chicagoland USMember Posts: 10,108
    Just makes me want to buy more; does that vandalism count toward a 'damaged box'?
    I guess it is easier to stick a sticker to a box and vandalize stuff that is not yours/ merchandise then to talk to govt representatives and try to get legislation passed forbidding toy companies advertise oil companies and institute penalties to oil companies that equal their profits for the day, per day for the spill until it is cleaned up.
    But LEGO does not control this, governments do.
    I have to ask though where were these moral crusaders 20-30 years ago when LEGO was building actual service station sets?
  • SchwallexSchwallex Member Posts: 121
    Whoa, it was only last week that I commented about my poor walrus elsewhere in the forum, and it was a different Greenpeace post.

    I am beginning to wonder just how many places they are going to use it in without attribution or a link back to the source. Or how many of the other animals they are using elsewhere, or plan on using.

    Bets are being accepted.
  • fenderbender336fenderbender336 Member Posts: 88

    We talk about dirty oil and obscene profits, but every single thing that comes up from a well is made into something, nothing is wasted. As long as they clean their mess up (why do we allow them to not do so?) i've no beef with oil companies, they work hard for their profit when you think about money earnt vs volume of product. We have the saviour of the planet in electric cars, using batteries made via some of the most environmentally unfriendly processes in any industry.

    The US could learn a thing or 2 from Europe when it comes to vehicles. If Audi can get 400ps from a 2.0 Turbo petrol that can do 40mpg on a motorway journey, there's no need for a chuggy 5 litre V8 that'll do 20mpg tops. They are getting the message and switching, slowly, but more due to the $ cost of fuel going up than environmental conscience.

    I have an Audi with the 2.0T and it does achieve 40 mpg on the highway. What isn't true is the statement that the US doesn't have an environmental conscience. I've said this in a similar thread, Tesla Motors is an American car manufacturer that makes electric cars that I can confidently say are the most advanced on the market. They're sleek, powerful, and highly practical, achieving up to 300+ miles of driving range. Also Tesla is developing ways to recycle the batteries their EVs use, they have a new SUV coming out next year, and they're working on a sedan for the $30k price range. Currently they have the Model S sedan and the Roadster, but I can guarantee that the Model S is light-years ahead of the competition, no EV, or most petrol cars, come close. This is coming from a VW/ Audi fanatic.
  • madforLEGOmadforLEGO Chicagoland USMember Posts: 10,108

    We talk about dirty oil and obscene profits, but every single thing that comes up from a well is made into something, nothing is wasted. As long as they clean their mess up (why do we allow them to not do so?) i've no beef with oil companies, they work hard for their profit when you think about money earnt vs volume of product. We have the saviour of the planet in electric cars, using batteries made via some of the most environmentally unfriendly processes in any industry.

    The US could learn a thing or 2 from Europe when it comes to vehicles. If Audi can get 400ps from a 2.0 Turbo petrol that can do 40mpg on a motorway journey, there's no need for a chuggy 5 litre V8 that'll do 20mpg tops. They are getting the message and switching, slowly, but more due to the $ cost of fuel going up than environmental conscience.

    I have an Audi with the 2.0T and it does achieve 40 mpg on the highway. What isn't true is the statement that the US doesn't have an environmental conscience. I've said this in a similar thread, Tesla Motors is an American car manufacturer that makes electric cars that I can confidently say are the most advanced on the market. They're sleek, powerful, and highly practical, achieving up to 300+ miles of driving range. Also Tesla is developing ways to recycle the batteries their EVs use, they have a new SUV coming out next year, and they're working on a sedan for the $30k price range. Currently they have the Model S sedan and the Roadster, but I can guarantee that the Model S is light-years ahead of the competition, no EV, or most petrol cars, come close. This is coming from a VW/ Audi fanatic.
    They are also offering to share the technology they used for the Tesla as well I believe.
    Plus in the US I believe Oil Companies are subsidized to keep prices of gas per gallon to relatively low costs (vs most of the rest of the world)
  • TechnicNickTechnicNick Berkshire, UKMember Posts: 279
    edited August 2014
    ^ Yep, the Tesla is definitely making every other EV look pretty foolish.... Well done them.
    Back on topic, Lego should not allow themselves to be bullied out of a productive relationship, and Shell should clean up after themselves, as stated by others already.
  • fenderbender336fenderbender336 Member Posts: 88
    @madforLEGO‌
    You are correct, Tesla released their patents for anyone to use! That's a game changer in itself
  • timttimt Member Posts: 33
    Greenpeace Canada now impersonating Brick Specialists and showing off an Oil Spill set.
    greenpeace.org/canada/en/Blog/new-arctic-oil-spill-play-set-by-lego-shell/blog/50135/

    image

  • XefanXefan Member Posts: 1,149

    I have an Audi with the 2.0T and it does achieve 40 mpg on the highway. What isn't true is the statement that the US doesn't have an environmental conscience.

    The problem is that the US is such a large and varied nation, whilst you find a lot more support for green ideas and issues in places like Silicon Valley and the adjacent regions in California, a trip to some parts of Texas will find you surrounded by equal but opposite zealotry against green causes.

    America is a heavily polarised country, where on one hand you have some of the worst polluters in the world, and on the other you have the hardest working technologists moving towards green technologies. It's an enigma and always has been and this extends from environmental issues through to civil liberties.

    This is why it's hard to simply say the US does or doesn't have an environmental conscience, it's easy to say it doesn't because it's the worst polluter in the world after China (though China has 4 times the population, yet less than double the pollution and far more wealth so much less excuse than China) and I'm not convinced the smaller areas of America that are far more environmentally conscience are enough to un-tar that overriding reputation of being a massively irresponsible nation in terms of environmental policy. Even within California itself there are massive fossil fuel industries so it's hard to even say as a state that overall it's environmentally responsible.

    I agree it's great that companies like Tesla exist and that America can still give birth to such companies, but that doesn't excuse the rest of the country from being so utterly irresponsible through little more than laziness. There are many areas in which America could trivially increase efficiency to be closer to standards in other parts of the world but opts not too with little good reason and that's where that overriding reputation comes from in spite of great advances by companies like Tesla.
    fenderbender336
  • bobabricksbobabricks Vancouver, BC, CanadaMember Posts: 1,842
    edited August 2014
    This has gone to far in my perspective. They are impersonating Lego employees and there is most likely a law against that. Not only that but they are bringing down the company by persuading people that Lego would actually release such a horrible product. In the end I just say if you hate oil so much, I would like to see you live just 1-2 weeks without it.

    I am also unimpressed that the custom set they made does not include a CEO, shameful.
    fenderbender336madforLEGOAdeelZubair
Sign In or Register to comment.

Shopping at LEGO.com or Amazon?

Please use our links: LEGO.com Amazon

Recent discussions Categories Privacy Policy Brickset.com

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Brickset.com is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, the Amazon.com.ca, Inc. Associates Program and the Amazon EU Associates Programme, which are affiliate advertising programs designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.