One of the feeds that I read is Treehugger. It covers environmentally senstive products. The problem is that the word sustainable seems to automatically multiply the cost that item by a factor of seven. For example:
This cute little knitted toy is "handmade by artisans in rural Kenya. The octopus is created with natural wool yarn treated with natural vegetable-based dyes. It's filled with acrylic (ah well, natural stuffing would have been better). The price is $92" Go ahead and wipe the coffee/tea/whiskey off of your monitors. I can appreciate that it is not mass produced and the people that manufacture it need to eat too, but $92 for a stuffed toy! I would love nothing more than to feel good that this was not made in a sweatshop, but as a consumer I'm a bit underwhelmed.
While posting this message I find that I am not the only one who noticed this too. Tim Haab posted the following to the
Environment Economics blog:
I was browsing around over at
treehugger.com and here are some of the gifts you can get for under $100.
- A sustainably harvested maple animal puzzle: $98
- A natural wool yarn knot octopus--with vegetable based dyes: $92
- A birch rocking horse with hand-painted face: $52
- Bauhaus building blocks: $150
Now here's what I can get at Toys'R'Us:
- 16-piece solid wood farm cube puzzle: $7.99
- 18-inch hot purple bean bag octopus: $14.49
- Clippety Clop 'classic wooden' Rocking Horse: $39.99
- Brio wooden colored building blocks: $19.99
Who says markets can't put a price on the environment?
I think that Treehugger will be going into my
on notice file. And don't get me started on the
$225 scarf made out of upholstery scraps.