Comments

  1. says

    This is intuitively appealing, but it’s not immediately clear that it makes sense.

    Straight-off, the value of resources used in making this package may exceed the combined value of those used in the manufacture and disposal of standard packages, even if there is a full and proper accounting for the latter.

    And some additional resources will go into protecting the packaging from water before it is time to remove the brush. This will be true not only up to the time that the product reaches the consumer, but may be true for a significant time thereafter, if the consumer buys more brushes than are immediately needed.

    That certainly doesn’t mean that such ideas shouldn’t be explored, but it does mean that we shouldn’t grab at them without more thought.

    • says

      Daniel, You make a very good point. Packaging needs to stand up to normal wear and tear which might include moisture. Would have to be a water-resistant, water soluble material

  2. says

    Very engaging design and exciting to see folks experimenting with packaging paradigms! However, I’ll second the concern that dissolving doesn’t necessarily mean better. As noted in a comment on UQAM (thank you, google translate), just because we can’t see it doesn’t mean it’s not still there. I’d be interested to know what this package is made of and how it could be beneficial once it’s in that water. It’d be neat if it made a nutritious treat for a houseplant!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>