Educational toy?

I published the text below with the YouTube version of this clip.

"My daughter bought this interesting toy for my eldest grandson. He is eight years old. The toy is called a 'Solar Satellite' (Kit) by its makers: a German company called Sol-Expert group.
The box says it is intended for children over 10. I was a teacher at a secondary school. So I can tell: yes, good advice.
My grandson is a clever boy, but he also likes playing football and climbing trees. Some parts of the kit turned out to be quite fragile. After he broke one and I used glue that took some time to dry, he lost his patience. I put most of it together myself.
The next day, the object worked its magic: the satellites were indeed circling the 'globe'.
For about 2 hours that day it was really sunny: instead of 10 revolutions per minute, as it said on the box, it made about 30 revolutions per minute. Wow."

I admit: I was trying to come up with a text to be fully approved by YouTube!!
Here I add more text.
The tiny solar panel provided enough power to make that impressive number of revolutions, provided the device was carefully aimed at the sun. And on the other hand: during the other 22 hours of the day, there was not enough light: it was night or there were too many clouds. The tiny satellites did not move at all.
Instructive indeed!
After my first look, before reading the text on the box, I expected the 'globe' to rotate. However, only the satellites moved. Clever choice: what was rotated by the solar panel weighed less than 5 grams!
The box says that the kit is produced in China. That raises questions about CO2 emissions. After all:
The great efforts directed at furthering the ‘chances’ of those profiting from solar-panel productions are aimed at encouraging that hysteria
That same hysteria about greenhouse effects in European political contexts encourages moving production from the EU (and the USA) to China.

Googling on 'CO2 produced by the transport of a sea container from China to Europe' gives this article as the very first search result: https://trimis.ec.europa.eu/sites/default/files/project/documents/JEPO-4283_Rev_OAN.pdf

The article is from 2010 and is not entirely to the point. The authors try to estimate the total effect of the relocation of production from Europe to China.
The article can be found on a EU-related websites, so it is rather lame, but the abstract does state:
“ … a number of recent publications indicate that emission reductions may also have been achieved because production has been shifted to other countries, and in particular China. (...) emissions in industrialized countries are substantially higher, and may not have declined at all. Significantly, emissions from transports are omitted in consumption-based calculations.”

I have not made any further study of it, but I have no doubt whatsoever that producing those toys, meant to influence schoolchildren, would not be viable economically if there were no vast amounts of public money involved.