A Question of Design by William McDonough and Michael Braungart
This article outlines the Industrial Revolution and its impact on the way we produce and consume products. Typically people praise the Industrial Revolution for the technological and living advances its given us but I thought it was really interesting that the authors listed all the negative consequences that the Industrial Revolution has also given us. The designs and techniques for design in that time period were so primitive, and that hasn't changed much for today's industries. Given how we're so much more advanced now and we know the effects this has on the environment and overall product life, why are Industries still working that way? I think the intention of Henry Ford and many industry leaders of time were good, wanting to create products for everyone. However, the cheap way they did so and are still doing so is a really negative effect. It's funny to correlate that with the recent decline for American car companies and the government bailout. The authors say that today's infrastructure is,"designed to chase economic growth..it does so at the expense of other vital concerns, particularly human and ecological health, cultural and natural richness and even the enjoyment and delight" (McDonough & Braungart 468). In terms of sustainability the products produced then and now are not for long term use. They are intended to be replaced by better/newer versions. This means that immense products occupy landfills, the ocean etc., polluting the Earth day by day. The authors suggest that designers make products that are intended to work for as long as possible to better the environment, not to be replaced by a new design and further damage the Earth.
- Industrial Revolution : creation of factories, cities, mass production. etc.
- The standard for living was raised.
- With the new jobs and the raising population the economy grew and industries wanted to efficiently mass produce products to get them to the consumer as soon as possible. Example in article: Henry Ford's mass production of the Model T. Before 1910 when Ford moved into an electric powered factory to mass produce the cars, car parts were individually made by craftspeople and no two parts were alike, they were edited to fit with the product.
- DESIGN GOALS of the industrialists was to make a product that was desirable, affordable, and operable for all people that could be cheaply mass produced.
- The way industries produced products at the time of the Industrial Revolution is for the most part still very similar to the way they mass produce products today, and it's taking it's tole on the Earth.
- "cradle-to-grave" designs: only last for a certain period of time, to be thrown away and replaced with a newer/better version. "Cradle-to-grave" designs occupy landfills, oceans, cause for pollution.
- The International Style- began in the early twentieth century. This style produced building that were universal, the goal was to create a social and aesthetic environment for working that was clean, minimalist, affordable. The materials for these projects were large sheets of glass, stell, concrete.
- Poor design = intergenerational remote tyranny (poor designs today hurt the environment and people or future generations)
- Designers should work to leave behind POSITIVE DESIGNS to start a "strategy of change" for the future.
The Sincerest Form of Flattery: Janine Benyus On The Virtues of Imitating Nature by David Kupfer
I found this article to be really informative. Prior to the reading I never heard of Biomimicry. The idea of Biomimcry seems too good to be true and I didn't think it would actually be applied so often. Several companies have contacted Janine Benyus and her team to make a project "greener" by using Biomimicry. I don't understand why the use of Biomimicry isn't publicized more, or why more companies don't take advantage of her service. Maybe it's just easier to keep with the way of the Industrial Revolution-simple and cheap; not caring about the earth. Biomimicry is the epitome of sustainability in design.
- Janine Benyus is the author of Biomimicry: Innovation Inspired by Nature, a book that describes Biomimicry as the practice of observing the way organisms in nature solve problems, and applying those solutions to our everyday urban world. It's finding a natural way so produce.
- Biomimicry is being used to create sustainable products and processes for designers, engineers, architects, chemists, city planners, etc. (Kupfer 5).
- "Biomimicry is not about harvesting nature's resources but sitting at her feet as students" (Kupfer 6) this means that all types of design professionals can take from the natural world to build and create sustainable, safe products.
- We don't need to find a new source for energy, we need to change our practices and how we consume.
- "Coevolutionary loops"- when two species/organisms keep evolving to work together. According to Beynus this needs to be applied to humans and the Earth to increase a species rate of adaptation.
- Corporations should form t"coevolutionary loops" with their customers, to maintain sustainability and meet the clients requests for green products.
- The website Beynus has made, AskNature.org, allows visitors to ask a question about nature and get an easy answer to help solve a problem. This allows not just corporations, but designers and non-designers to contact biologists and use Biomimicry.
- Biomimicry has been applied to several projects: borrowing the lotus leaf's use of "nanobumps", which loosely collect dirt that lands on the leaf, and is easily washed away with rain. This has been simulated for self-cleaning products for outdoor roofing, paint, wood, tiles, fabric etc.
- Main goal for Beynus's work is to boost the respect for the natural world and she says that creating more sustainable products is an expansion of that.
-----------------
Speculative Prehistory of Humanity by Buckminster Fuller
I think there are some ideas brought up in Fuller's article that really resonate with David Kupfer,William McDonough and Michael Braungart's articles. This article references time's in history where design of machines. automobiles and aircrafts have been or not been sustainable. The article is from 1981 and I think the idea he presents on page 75 stating that,
"humanity does not understand the language of science...Ninety-nine percent of humanity thinks technology is a "new" phenomenon. The World population identifies technology with (1) weapons and (2) machines that compete with them for their jobs."
I don't think that people today think that they have to compete with machines for their jobs as much as they did in 1981. I think today machines make people's jobs easier and more likely advance their job performance. Also, I don't think people today associate technology with weapons. I think they associate technology with computers, social networking sites, mobile phones, GPS devices, etc. Technology will always be considered "new" because technological advances are always being made-there's always something new.
Also on page 75 in the article, Fuller discusses the idea that nature does not have to stop and think or revise it's process for creating something, it just does it in a "elegantly simple" way. This is in line with Kupfer's article on Janine Benyus and her Biomimicing process. Fuller says, "synergetics will make it possible for all humanity to comprehend that physical Universe is technology and that the technology does make possible all humanity's option to endure successfully." That statement is basically Biomimicry, working with with the universe to create sustainable products.
- The author states that humanity's technologies waste ninety-five out of every 100 units of enegry it consumes. Based on transportation vehicles.
- There is "design-avoidable energy wastage" because of the inefficiency of automobiles.
No comments:
Post a Comment