The "planned obsolescence" thing from the Story of Stuff film really stuck in my mind, especially since I can really relate with it. Actually, perceived obsolescence was actually a part of my experience too. I was pretty late getting in on the iPod crazem and I only got one in 2005. I got the latest model out at the time, the Photo model. Then, a month or so later, Apple released their Video model and didn't announce it in advance and I was so annoyed that I just dropped 300 dollars on an already outmoded gadget. Apple did that on purpose I bet, and just like they planned, I got upset that my crappy old iPod wasn't as good as the shiny new one. I hate Apple.
part 2 later
Sunday, April 27, 2008
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Final blog topic
My two favorite readings this semester were the "Cradle to Cradle" book and the "lifeboat ethics" reading.
Cradle to Cradle brought up many interesting ways that we can redesign our world in order to live with nature. The most important concept from this reading was the idea of not being "less bad." Their ideas promoted technologies that are sustainable and work with the environment as opposed to technologies that are just better for the environment. It is important that we look to develop new products that can be recycled not just downcycled.
The lifeboat ethics article was much different than the cradle to cradle book. This article was very pragmatic. The idea that they propagated is that earth should not be viewed as a "spaceship" but rather a "lifeboat". Because of this, if we help others we are only reducing our standard of living. Giving food to the poor for example will only propagate further overpopulation. Famine should actually be viewed as a population check. While this view is not very humanitarian, it makes sense especially in the context of I=PAT.
Cradle to Cradle brought up many interesting ways that we can redesign our world in order to live with nature. The most important concept from this reading was the idea of not being "less bad." Their ideas promoted technologies that are sustainable and work with the environment as opposed to technologies that are just better for the environment. It is important that we look to develop new products that can be recycled not just downcycled.
The lifeboat ethics article was much different than the cradle to cradle book. This article was very pragmatic. The idea that they propagated is that earth should not be viewed as a "spaceship" but rather a "lifeboat". Because of this, if we help others we are only reducing our standard of living. Giving food to the poor for example will only propagate further overpopulation. Famine should actually be viewed as a population check. While this view is not very humanitarian, it makes sense especially in the context of I=PAT.
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Cradle to Cradle
I like the optimism that William McDonough and Michael Braungart have in Cradle to Cradle. With all the negative research and publishings we see today about the impact that we are having on the environment, it is refreshing to see a positive outlook. It was interesting to see how they both interpreted the relationship between the environment and industry. Personally, i think that the industrial revolution has had a negative impact on the environment, no matter what sort of angle one attempts to take. Technology is great, and i am thankful for it-i dont know how my grandmother grew up without running water-but i think that it has undoubtedly had an immense negative impact on the environment. Unfortunately, as much as i love McDonough and Braungart's ideas of innovative architecture and commodities, i dont know if they alone can save the planet, especially given the way our current society is structured. I think that using completely recyclable or completely biodegradable products is a wonderful step for consumption in the future, but it needs to in addition to practical disposal of old waste and most importantly, adjusted levels of consumption. i think that an issue that is just as important, and that should be raised simultaneously with what we consume, is how much we consume. solving the environmental concerns of one alone will not save the planet.
cradle to cradle
I thought that what the authors of the book brought up were awesome ideas. It's really a good idea to make stuff that goes back to nature or make garden cities or whatever else they were saying. Be one with nature: work with it as opposed to working against it. However, they might be a bit optimistic about this. Can the technology we have actually do all of this? Wouldn't this be really expensive since they'll have to change everything? Can the developing world afford to do all this? I want this movement to succeed though, so hopefully technology is actually affordable enough for everyone to implement.
Also, I thought this book was definitely cool (albeit a bit heavy and expensive and weird-smelling), imagine if all books were like this. You could read them on the beach without worrying about them getting wet or while lounging in a pool. Plus they'd be immune to water damage. Once, I had a textbook that got wet in the rain, and when I tried selling it back, they wouldn't take it because of water damage. That was 120 dollars down the drain, which would have been
Also, I thought this book was definitely cool (albeit a bit heavy and expensive and weird-smelling), imagine if all books were like this. You could read them on the beach without worrying about them getting wet or while lounging in a pool. Plus they'd be immune to water damage. Once, I had a textbook that got wet in the rain, and when I tried selling it back, they wouldn't take it because of water damage. That was 120 dollars down the drain, which would have been
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)