From Japan

The Designer's Virus

Are you one of those agents of neutrality or aesthetes of style ?

Find out

Eat Less Meat

It's not that eating meat is bad. It's that eating the meat made by the industrial economy in the US is bad. Here's a NYT article worth checking out. I like to think about reducing meat consumption as a design project - take a wasteful harmful system and change it so that it more effectively uses limited resources.

Beautiful 360 Panaramas

Link>>

Here's an article about a wood cooking stove for the developing world designed to be healthier than an open fire. Healthier is good. I've sat in a hut filled with smoke watching women boil water for dinner many times. The smoke can be oppressive. Often I've wondered if there is a better way. But something about this doesn't sit right with me. Shell is paying for its development. So there must be a lot of money in it. It's expensive for the target market. And it seems like it's just a fancy version of the Maputo Ceramic Stove" which can be made locally by locals. The difference between developing a product and developing a solution may be slight, but it is naive to think there is no difference. The industrial economy wants people to be consumers. It says, "If something is wrong in your life, you can buy a fix." If Shell wants to do good it should teach people how to make these stoves using local materials. This reminds me of a Chinese Proverb I once heard. Something about teaching a man to fish and he'll eat for a lifetime versus selling a man a fish and you've got his money in your pocket.

Solar Engine Turns heat into Power

Solar Engine Whips Waste Heat Into Power
Tracy Staedter, Discovery News

Every Photon Matters

Jan. 25, 2008 -- A new engine with no moving parts has been shown to convert waste heat and concentrated solar energy into electricity better than conventional solar panels.
The invention could lead to electricity generators ranging in size from the very large, such as those used by utility companies, to the very small -- such as those that tap body heat to generate power for personal electronics.
Because the conversion rate is so high, the technology could make solar energy cheap enough to compete with fossil fuels.
"It's not just the dependence on oil, it's the whole challenge of providing energy that is sustainable without destroying the environment," said nuclear engineer Lonnie Johnson, founder of Johnson Research and Development and Johnson Electro-mechanical Systems, both in Atlanta.
Johnson is funding his research with money he made by inventing the super soaker squirt gun. His new, somewhat less cavalier, invention is called the Johnson Thermo-Electrochemical Conversion System.
The original goal, in part, was to address a common problem with energy: When it's generated -- by gas, coal, battery, or other means -- much is wasted into thin air. In fact, in the United States alone, the amount of energy lost is more than the energy consumed by the entire country of Japan.
Johnson's engine captures that heat and turns it into useful power.
It's called an engine because it's based on thermodynamic principals that exist in mechanical engines, such as those that power automobiles. In a car engine, moving pistons and rods compress gas at low temperatures and expand it at high temperatures to convert heat energy to mechanical energy to drive the vehicle.

In Johnson's energy-converting system, electrodes on a thin membrane compress hydrogen gas at low temperatures and expand it at high temperatures. The pressure forces hydrogen ions through the membrane, stripping off electrons to generate power.
And although the system uses hydrogen, it does not burn it the way a hydrogen fuel cell would. It simply re-circulates the same quantity over and over.
"This is a whole new way of converting temperature differences to electricity that has never existed before," said Paul Werbos, program director for power, control and adaptive networks at the National Science Foundation in Arlington, VA..
If it works, it could be far more efficient than the best solar cells, which convert about 30 percent of sunlight into energy.
Johnson's system could reach 60 percent. But for that to happen, it needs to operate with very high temperatures, upwards of 1,400 degrees Fahrenheit (800 C).
Achieving that temperature will be a challenge, said Werbos.
"They will need new membranes and electrodes, and they will have to prove that they are handling the hydrogen correctly," said Werbos.
So far, the researchers have built a device that works at 392 degrees F. Johnson hopes to have demonstration model working at 1,400 degrees in a year to 18 months.

Solar Power Via the Super Soaker

A thank you to Jeff for sending out an email about a company in Atlanta that has created "A new engine with no moving parts has been shown to convert waste heat and concentrated solar energy into electricity better than conventional solar panels." The irony resides in the fact that the money the company uses to do all their research comes from Lonnie Johnson's (owner) profit from his invention the Super Soaker which is sold at WalMart...so thank you WalMart for contributing to green research.

Solar Energy

Apples and Orange Legos

Here is an intriguing article about designing for user experience. More specifically, the author talks about the difference between an experience designed FOR the user, versus an experience invoked BY the user.

Think of it this way: We spend weeks, even months trying to figure out user needs and develop features to meet those needs. We often have to shoot for the middle or aim for the lowest common denominator to meet a widely varying set of needs for a given audience. What if instead, the individual user, who presumably knows his/her needs best, could create his/her own experience within a framework we provide?

http://cameronmoll.com/archives/2007/12/challenging_apple/

Keep Driving

How much growth is too much? In our search to define sustainable I think it is important to point out that which we believe to be unsustainable. This is Dubai. They don't have a lot of water there. The top image is from 1991. The bottom one is from 2005.

Fool's Gold

The medicalization of life continues apace. Click here. This is the kind of design I hate. Take a minor concern that can be addressed with a shower, develop a new formula for an old fungicide, get a patent, tell men to be self-conscious, have them rub chemicals on their junk, and make money. Did you notice that this stuff may damage latex condoms and diaphragms? You should not be allowed to simultaneously prey on people’s ignorance to induce purchasing and assume they will be wise and responsible product users. Society played this game already. Women started douching in the 1600s. We now know it to be dangerous, resulting in irritation, inflammation, and infection. How long before we realize this is a bad idea? What percent of design does more harm than good?

How cool is my green ?

heres an interesting point of view that i stumbled upon , yesterday
it belongs to one dawn maxey
She is a "spoken word artist" (and a teacher) from stanford who recently talked at Compostmordern, an "interdisciplinary design conference dedicated to promoting sustainable solutions within the design community at large"

this is what she had to say about all the "pseudo green-ness" that surrounds us

Snobs and Queen Bees. I thought these junior high icons had faded like the Tamagatchi.

But then
I began to notice people at Whole Foods with entire shopping carts full of 'organic' and 'go green' items. These people are the same ones that say "did I bump into you? I'm sorry. I just didn't expect this ENVIRONMENTALLY SAFE dishwashing soap to be so heavy."
I want to pour environmentally safe salt in their eyes.

I don't know who these people are
but they're growing out of control.
pressuring well meaning citizens into buying
more, more, more,
all to pollute less, less, .. less?

being green is the new cool
and even Kermit can't keep up
suddenly I feel pressured to buy solar powered nose hair trimmers and
I don't even have that problem.

In fact, I imagine a day when things get so bad you'll live in a glass house so that everyone can see you wake up in the morning, get out of your organic soy bean bed and pull on a pair of diesel's global warming ready jeans. You'll open a box of tony the tiger's non hydrogenated hypoallergenic free trade grain flakes, and drive your not-tested-on-animals bicycle to work. then you'll help Nike 'save' the rainforest by branding large red swooshes on all the lemurs or maybe organize a photo shoot for Abercrombie's new cotton free cotton underwear.

Hipsters have taken this way. too. far.

Especially with the Prius.
See, it's gone from a Pri-us to a Pri-ME.
because
it's all about how cool I can be
In fact, I'll buy seven
so I can drive a different one each day
it's all about ME
pri-us to a
pre-me to a
pre-me-um.
a premium.
another excess "thing" in our lives that piles up and nobody ever looks at again.

Green is chic now, but when the stock market of trends crashes
no one will want to be caught dead with biodegradable polos, environmentally safe dirt, or origami made from corn husks.

the earth will be just as trashed as Lindsay Lohan in a Bacardi factory
and people will care
even less

So how do you fix the problem?
Make being green
sustainable
show people that it's not hip or trendy or fun to be green
it's an obligation

turn ME into SENSIBILITY

it's logic we should have learned by the fourth grade

having three hybrids does not equal less pollution
George Clooney is not the world's expert on recycling
buying organic blueberries from Chile uses up a lot of frickin gas

there is no such thing as free range carrot sticks
don't give in to the power of trends.

but hey, hip is neat too
live earth was amazing
the truth was inconvenient
and by all means,
captain planet was a really cool guy

but when you combine campaigns and corporations
with a heavy dose of
good brains and obligations
the change will last so long
the energizer bunny will cry himself to sleep

Green is not hip, or trendy, or fun.
It's an obligation.

P.S: If you wanna read some more stuff like this, about sustainability or design in general, head over to Unbeige

keep reading..

Copenhagen Institute of Interaction Design

having conversations with travis and michael gluzman, we're trying to resolve the issue of where creative people go who want to do it all; basically as a creative consultancy that deals with all problems. imagine incorporating all this with technology.

on a tangent relating to the readings in MOD, I ran across an interesting school/research center/design community that i'm fascinated with, and they're located in an amazing country. by the way, bill moggridge is on the board of directors. CIID

One Laptop Per Child Loses a LARGE Backer

Despite my opposition to the One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) program, I hate to see a third world education relief program take another ding. Rather than repeating what the BBC article recently published about the OLPC loss of Intel as a big money partner I want to pose three questions (possibly rhetorical).

1. Does cut throat capitalism have a place in world aid if it only prolongs the relief? (Intel is producing an inexpensive laptop called Classmate to undermine the OLPC's project.)
2. Do third world countries really need laptops? If so, what research uncovered this fact?
3. Organizations such as Unitus provide micro loans to help struggling societies get a leg up. For example, an Indian mother takes out a loan for $50 and is able to open a small business that not only provides money to pay back the loan, but enables her to send her child to a decent school. This in turn gives the child a fighting chance to expand their opportunity, thus improving their immediate environment. Additionally, payback for these loans is very high since they still respect money. Should we (western crazies) concentrate more on teaching people to fish rather than just giving them a fish?

OKAY SOMETHING THAT REALLY PISSED ME OFF...I checked ebay for this OLPC laptop. $300 for the laptop? This definitely sounds counter productive to their effort if we make this laptop the new iPOD (buying frenzy that jacks up the price amongst other things....).

I'll admit it, I want one and would pay $300 dollars for it. I just wish the extra $200 would go to back to OLPC.

DONE...stepping off my soap box.