worcester
western mass
vermont
urbana-champaign
tennessee
tampa bay
seattle
sarasota
santa cruz, ca
santa barbara
san francisco bay area
san francisco
san diego
saint louis
rogue valley
rochester
richmond
portland
pittsburgh
philadelphia
oklahoma
nyc
north texas
north carolina
new orleans
new mexico
new jersey
new hampshire
minneapolis/st. paul
milwaukee
michigan
miami
maine
madison
la
kansas city
hudson mohawk
houston
hawaii
dc
columbus
colorado
cleveland
chicago
charlottesville
buffalo
boston
binghamton
big muddy
baltimore
austin
atlanta
asheville
arkansas
arizona
valencia
united kingdom
ukraine
toulouse
toscana
torun
thessaloniki
switzerland
sverige
scotland
sardegna
russia
romania
roma
portugal
poland
piemonte
patras
paris/Île-de-france
oost-vlaanderen
nottingham imc
norway
northern england
nice
netherlands
napoli
nantes
marseille
malta
madrid
london
lombardia
linksunten
lille
liguria
liege
la plana
italy
istanbul
ireland
hungary
grenoble
germany
galiza
euskal herria
estrecho / madiaq
emilia-romagna
cyprus
croatia
calabria
bulgaria
brussels
bristol
belgrade
belgium
belarus
barcelona
austria
athens
armenia
antwerpen
andorra
alacant
abruzzoThis site made manifest by dadaIMC software
Design for Disassembly
Date Edited: 22 Oct 2004 12:38:17 PM
In the First Industrial Revolution businesspeople and engineers designed products to be cheap and look nice so that the masses could have access to them. However, what happens to these products (cars, computers, toys, clothes, etc) after we are finished with them? Well, they are sent to the landfills or incinerated. Then industry goes out to look for new resources to make more cheap and pretty products.
We all know that waste is strangling our system; just look at Toronto’s situation. Whether we are talking about solid waste, pollution, water or soil contamination or highly toxic nuclear waste; waste is strangling our system.
The official proposals for the waste management are reduce the waste, reuse the materials, recycle the products, refuse to buy them and regulate the toxins. However good-willed this strategy is, it does not address the inherent problem of our system: our system creates waste.
The Next Industrial Revolution is geared to eliminating the concept of waste. Yes, eliminate the very concept of waste by design. Where in nature do we find waste? Nature has no concept of waste; in nature waste equals food for another organism. Why not design our system do the same and cycle nutrients either for the natural world (biological nutrients) or for the world of human industry (technical nutrients)?
Imagine this: Factories in Thunder Bay manufacture wind turbines and ship them everywhere for deployment as clean energy producers. Then the molecules of these wind turbines come back to the factories after their 20 – 30 year lifespan. Yes, I mean design these wind turbines for disassembly so they constantly come back to the city.
What are the advantages? Well, firstly, if these machines were designed to come apart then industry would get new high quality resources for new wind turbines. Therefore we could stop the mining of the Earth for new material. Secondly, all the materials would be totally safe for children of all species because why would we want to circulate materials that were toxic? Thirdly, the workers in these Thunder Bay factories would have endless work because every time these turbines come back to the city their molecules need to be taken apart intelligently and effectively and then rebuilt into new technical nutrient wind turbines.
To date, industry has created technical nutrient carpets (Shaw, Honeywell, BASF), polyester (Victor Innovatex), window shades (MechoShade), and the 2002 treeless book Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things is itself the first technical nutrient designed for disassembly and infinite up-cycling.
Sustaining Development Community Centre
This content is now locked, and no comments may be added.