I was having a good chuckle with another radical freak parent recently over a claim by the manufacture of a disposable product (in this case it’s diapers) that using their product was cheaper than using the equivalent reusable product. I won’t bore you with the details, but poking holes in their argument was a bit like shooting fish in a barrel. You’d think they could have checked the true retail price of their own product, for one thing :rolleyes:
It got me to wondering, though. I can distinctly remember a quote from a consumer magazine’s report on rechargeable batteries from about a year ago: “For once, the more ecologically responsible choice is also cheaper.” I know what the writer was thinking about; environmentally friendly substitutes are often more expensive than the product they’re meant to replace. But in the case of disposable versus reusable products, is the disposable version ever cheaper in the long run? Let me specify that I’m curious about realistic usage; the guy who buys a camera and only ever shoots one roll of film with it would obviously have been better off buying a disposable camera, but most people use a camera for years. I also don’t want to get in to the environmental arguments in this thread, just the economic side.