2013-02-27, Anonymous: Fair point about no proof of reduced loivgenty.Biodegradability in and of itself isn't a bad thing. I'd welcome it if this were a change Papermate (or Sanford more broadly) were making across all their pens and pencils. As it is, though, it seems just a gimmick. Why is this pencil biodegradable and not all their actual disposables? The only reason I can think of is that then those cheap disposables wouldn't be cheap anymore. So, the pencils that would certainly benefit from being biodegradable aren't, and the one that is biodegradable isn't one that should need to be (it's refillable, so you shouldn't need to throw it out).As an example of what I mean by cheap : Staples sells the Sharpwriter for 4 USD per dozen, while they sell this pencil for $5.49 per two-pack. Breaking that down, it's $2.75 per Papermate Biodegradable versus 33 per Sharpwriter.And that means that this pencil will actually have next to no effect on pencils' contributions to landfills: Those who throw away boxfuls of cheap regular-plastic disposables will continue to do so, because this biodegradable pencil doesn't compete with them (at least, not any more than any other refillable).Changing all their other pencils to this biodegradable plastic would be more helpful to the environment. It might also help lower the cost of Mirel through economies of scale (though it could also drive prices of source crops up ah, the complexities of modern economics). But introducing a single new model as the only one made from this material rings hollow to me it's a gimmick, nothing more.

2013-03-04, ykbfaV , [url=http://ogrcncepamcq.com/]ogrcncepamcq[/url], [link=http://ueduvinkanru.com/]ueduvinkanru[/link], http://abbytiyjrkxr.com/

Commenti :
Codice di sicurezza :

Only members can propose tags