Here is an interesting article about a family who decided to get as close to 0 waste as possible. Also, check out their website, myzerowaste.com, for great ways to reuse materials and household items.
Post your weekly statement below in response to lecture material from 9/15 or 9/20.
Elaine Czech
ReplyDelete21 September 2010
ARTDES 250: SEC 4
Creeping normalcy occurs when a major change happens slowly or in increments thus being accepted as normal. By the time the change has happened, the way things were before is already forgotten.
It is easy to forget that where a strip mall stands there was once a forest, especially if you have lived your whole life only ever seeing a strip mall in that location. The idea that clear-cut forests are all around us is baffling. Equating the local Target to a mountainside of only stumps is a rather impossible task to visualize but sadly they are in fact the same thing. Although we cannot bring back the abundant forestry, our awareness allows us to move forward in ways that prevent/reduce the amount of environment destroyed by human development.
Instead of cutting down more trees and destroying more habitats developers can replace or reuse abandoned lots. There are tons of abandoned malls in suburbia that can be easily developed into thriving centers. According to World Changing, the changing of dead-malls into living spaces is called Greyfield redevelopment. For example, the charter academy that took its new home in a renovated Wal-Mart is one of the interesting redevelopment stories in World Changing. Stapleton, in Denver is home to the largest urban redevelopment sites. Formerly the location of the Denver airport, developers are reusing the land to create homes, and businesses, along with parks and a community farm. The work of this redevelopment received an award from the United Nations for its sustainable approach (Steffan 242).
Besides rebuilding preexisting structures, simply reworking them helps improve upon the space we have already in use. For example, reworking the sprawling suburbia so that there is more central planning. With central planning shops and business are able to be closer by which promotes walking and using public transportation (Steffan 240). By increasing proximity of houses to businesses helps increase usage of public transit, which in turn decreases automobile usage. Also by adding bike paths and decent sidewalks cities further support green transportation.
The normal idea of the “white picket fence” in a nice suburb no longer fits into our world. Our idea of normalcy needs to changes so that it supports eco-friendly homes and cities. Even by just starting off with small improvements, such as adding sidewalks, can help to change the normalcy in an area.
Bibliography
Steffan, Alex. World Changing: User’s Guide for the 21st Century. New York: Abrams, 2006.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMelis Agabigum
ReplyDeleteADP III
Section 4
09.18.10
During today’s lecture, I discovered how many unnecessary materialistic objects I have. When Joe introduced the “my space” project, I began thinking about all the possessions that I have and how useless some of them are. At the sight of the requirements outlined in the assignment, I began to panic, wondering if I would have enough time to catalogue everything that I own. The amount of unnecessary possessions in my house is ridiculous. Questions began looming over my head: “How much jewelry is too much?” and “Have I ever used the blender in my kitchen on more than three occasions?” All these questions sent me immediately into self-reflection mode, where my entire collection of junk flashed before my eyes. I began wondering how often I use some of the tools I have in my kitchen, my bathroom, my room, even my garage. In many countries, people have maybe a quarter as many objects as I do in their homes. I came to a realization that I have too much stuff.
The notion of creeping normalcy is frightening. We perceive the world the way we want to see it: we subconsciously accept what is happening in the world. For example, I knew there was an existing problem of Americans over consuming meat, but it did not seem like that big of a deal. I have chicken at least twice a week. In contrast, those who are in other countries consume more than half as much meat as I do in a year. I thought my consumption of meat was acceptable because I do not consume nearly as much meat as other Americans. Still, the consumption of meat per year, compared to those in other countries is too high. I was subconsciously telling myself that everything was normal.
The excuses that we make are causing the world to rapidly lose its resources. Though it seems all natural for us in America, we must remember that this over consumption of electricity, food and material goods is not natural and drastically higher than that of places in other parts of the world. We need to become conscious and aware of what we are consuming and how much we are using or throwing away.
Brooke Adams
ReplyDeleteADP III section 4
9.21.2010
The lectures this past week were very relevant to me because of my recent epiphany towards how much I waste and use. The garbage project is a great idea. Unfortunately, my garbage paper will not be as accurate now that I’m living in Ann Arbor. I have realized that I live a drastically different lifestyle between my two homes. I am much less wasteful and much more conscientious of my electricity usage, my water usage, and what I throw away or buy here in Ann Arbor than I am when living at home. I never realized how much I wasted until I moved into my own apartment. I had been starting to realize, even before the lecture, how ignorant I’ve been. After the lecture, I began reflecting on how many bags of garbage my family seems to throw out per week, how often I leave lights on when I leave a room, how much packaging the materials I buy are cased in. I even began reflecting on how often I run the dishwasher, something I’d do all the time at home. I always knew that the dishwasher used both electricity and water, but I never really stopped to think about it. I never thought, “do I need to run the dishwasher right now? Can I fill it up some more? Could I wash some things by hand?” There are so many little things I have been taking for granted and wasting, I am astounded. I am guilty.
I am nervous to do the inventory of all my possessions paper. Once that paper was brought up during lecture, I started to think of how many needless things I own. It made me think of an article I read recently on Yahoo!, of a husband and wife who decided to each get rid of everything they own, save for 100 items total. That’s it. They managed to minimize the amount of clutter in their lives- clothing, pots and pans, accessories, possessions in general- everything they owned was downsized dramatically. And the end result? The couple was happier than they had ever been. Their debt was gone. Their money was no longer being wasted on needless things. The materials paper is going to be eye opening, I can just tell. Eye opening and a bit depressing.
The paper I mentioned: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/08/business/08consume.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1
Allie Seiler
ReplyDelete9/21/10
ADPIII: Sec 4
This class thus far has forced me to assess a lot about my life and the way I live it. I’ve always been aware that as someone who likes material goods, drives an SUV, and flies frequently across the country, I’m quite the consumer. I wouldn’t consider my lifestyle to be recklessly wasteful – I am from the West coast after all where conservation and recycling are quite trendy, but there are certainly things I could be doing better. But that’s always been true and I’ve always known that. After all, I pay attention to current events and the world around me. I know about global warming and problems we have with landfill that will continue to be worsen. I’m aware that the world’s resources aren’t go to replenish them as we rapidly run through them. But still, for the most part, things continue on as they always have been.
I find it confusing that we know so much yet we do so little to reverse the damage. Now I am in no way exempt from this wrongdoing. I could drive are smaller car and drive less, I could use less energy and heating, I could stop using paper and plastic products all together – the options are endless. But those are conveniences in my life that I have become accustomed to and as selfish as it is, I’m willing to admit that they’re not so easy to give up. It’s not easy to adjust our lifestyles; even little habits.
However, after seeing the photographs during lecture of the families with their belongings, I cannot stop thinking about them. How some people had so few things and some had so many. I started to think about what it would look like to empty my own home – all our furniture, clothing, and plain old stuff. What do we need it all for when families in other parts of the world survive just fine without it? This is about the time when I always start to think about our society and question why it is the way it is. Now I realize that this is not true for all people, but take clothes for example: I love clothes and I love to shop. But the truth is, shouldn’t I only need the basic amount that will keep me warm and clothed? Then why do I love fashion so much and getting new clothes? Why must I want a new skirt when I have plenty of perfectly good ones already hanging in my closet? I honestly don’t understand yet I have become so accustomed to wanting new clothes that I don’t think I could suddenly stop desire.
Clothes are just a shallow example of all the ways we could alternate our lives to conserve more. I know what I should be doing for our planet Earth, but I need to take some initiative and turn my knowledge into action.
This week I felt a little overwhelmed by graphs, the population graph, the co2 graph, the cell phone use graph, all of them growing expanentionally. A lot of what the graphs covered I knew about, at least had heard about before, but there is something startling to see it and not just think in abstracts. Living in America it’s hard to see how our choices are affecting other people all over the world. We don’t often get the opportunity to sit down and really look. Also, we hear about mostly numbers, fifty million, 200 billion and the numbers don’t make it real, so I found the illustrations, and example Trumpey gave very helpful.
ReplyDeleteHonestly, it was a lot of information to take in. I had not realized how interconnected everything is. The cell phones and gorillas for example. That domino effect makes me wonder what other things I use on a daily basis are responsible for serious problems in places on the opposite side of the earth. Its one of those things that until they are brought to your attention it doesn’t even occur to you. I get just as excited as the next person about buying a new phone, or trading up from an older version to the brand new, faster, better, shinier model.
The pictures of families with all of their belongings laid out was interesting, and it made me think of how much stuff I have. Objects have this way of collecting and piling up until you’re not really sure where it all came from. That is a problem I certainly have. I think the stuff paper will be an excellent opportunity to take in how much stuff I have. When I’m done I think I’m going to find that I have way more things stashed away in closets and under beds then I first thought. It will also be a great time to think about what sort of stuff I actually need, and why I purchased any of it to begin with.
Overall the lectures were both scary and fascinating, they gave me a lot to think about, and I look forward to learning more.
Hannah Dow
ReplyDeleteThe projects we have received have got me constantly thinking something that I had never thought about so much before. How much am I wasting and how can I stop it? How is it that the way I live causes me to waste and make such a larger footprint on the Earth than people in other places and yet we are idolized with stigmas like the “American Dream?” The pictures that we viewed in lecture showed - in my opinion, in the best way possible – why the differences between American and other remote parts of the world are so vastly different. Americans like “things” and the more we have, the better off we believe we are. The comparison between the American family standing with all of their belongings outside their home was so different. The American house looked cluttered with countless different technologies and “unnecessary” items whereas many of the other families had the most basic and obligatory items along with very personal family mementos.
Although it is common to learn of America, as a country of “bigger is better,” to see the difference right in front of you in a somewhat tangible fashion is very hard-hitting and demands an emotional, personal response. It is ridiculous how much people can stuff into their homes, and I am not saying that I am not guilty of buying things I don’t need, but everyone should have to see the photos that we looked at in class to really be able to grasp how we live and how we can change. Although some families had half of the material items we had they commonly looked happier in their pictures and most likely had healthier eating habits than we do. The bottom line is that awareness about these kinds of things is key for change and yet much of America has yet to change their ways.
James Reich
ReplyDeleteThe topic covered in the last few lectures that sticks out the most in my head is global population. I feel that the Professor put so much stress on it because it seems that the overpopulation of the planet has been the cause of many of the environmental and social issues that we face today. The solution to this problem seems non-existent or impossible to achieve. It is unlikely that a significant number of people in the world will recognize that we have simply too many human beings on the planet and do something about it. The simplest way to cut down on people that I can think of would be to stop having children. Not altogether, but cut back. A birth rate diet if you will. However if the population continues to grow, so will the problems that it creates. The family planning policy that was introduced to China is good example of how birth rates have become enough of a problem that preventative measures need to be taken.
The photographer who captured images of different families with all of their stuff outside the house, and the family with a weeks worth of food out in their kitchen made me think of how my family compares. Although I know it’s not a competition and more is not necessarily worse I think that my family is definitely on the more abundant side of the spectrum. I think that most of the things families have in their possession that go unused are not harming the environment, they are just sitting in the house. I know that in my how there is a great deal of stuff that goes unused in my house that isn’t being thrown out and wasted to go to a landfill. Some might say that it is still a waste if the objects are not going to use but is it better to throw them out or keep them inside the house away from the environment?
The abundance of corn was discussed in lecture as if it were causing a problem. It never occurred to me that an abundance of food could cause problems for a society. I’m not saying that I don’t believe that the overproduction of corn can be an issue, but it is difficult to image when it is usually a lack of food that causes problems for a society. I was a little confused though when all of the options for distributing excess corn were addressed. While it sounded like mostly all of the excess corn products were reduced down into corn syrup, it also sounded like the management of extra corn was very inefficient and could be improved and put to better use.
Tiffany Hu
ReplyDeleteADP III - Section 4
I have never had a completely understanding of the environment and environmental issues, so I am glad for an opportunity to take this course and hopefully become more aware of what is going on in our world and what we can do to change.
In the article with the eco-friendly family who only throw away 100 grams of litter, I really appreciate what they're doing. I think it can be done by a lot of people if more people start doing it. I think the key to change it through incentives. If your neighbors are doing it, then you will too. If there are laws regarding being less wasteful, you won't want to break the law and pay the fines. There needs to be more incentive as to why people should change.
However, change should be gradual, and we should not expect any dramatic improvements. However, action we can take now are to improve our own ways, and then try to raise awareness. Like Professor Trumpey, we should utilize the "power of creativity" with our artistic and creative abilities.
I appreciate how we learn so much every lecture, about waste, co2, cell phone usage, corn and how we consume so much every day. I think with this knowledge, we will have incentive and motivation to change.
Liz Ritenour
ReplyDeleteADP III
Section 004
9.20.10
This week, we learned briefly about Fritz Haber, a German Jewish scientist famous for discovering a process for achieving artificial nitrogen fixation. I had never heard of Haber or of this process of nitrogen fixation before this. I found it particularly fascinating, not only because of the importance of this innovation, but because of the devastation it led to, as well.
During the post- World War I food shortage, Haber discovered a method of creating artificial nitrogen. Before this discovery, nitrogen was either mined in Chile, or found in manure. When scientists were able to use artificial nitrogen, modern fertilizer became possible, thus saving society from the devastation of food shortage. Professor Trumpey explained that this is one of the most important inventions of the 20th century for many reasons. Without this innovation, 2 out of 5 people would not exist today. Chile’s economy would be entirely different, considering that it was the main source of exported nitrogen. However, it was equally important in a very dangerous way, as well. With this new process, armies in World War II were able to use ammonia concentrates to build bombs. It also led to the use of chlorine gas and Zyklon B. In 1915, he witnessed the first gas attacks, and in 1920 he won the Nobel Prize for achievements in agriculture. He ultimately fled Germany in the 30’s and died in France in 1934.
It is an extraordinary example of how so many advancements in technology can be traced to both great results and terrible regression. It is also incredible that one man’s discovery could change the world in such staggering ways. He sent the nature of warfare on a more destructive path, while simultaneously reconstructing society. We still use the Haber-Bosch process today. It is still not perfected, considering that it is based on using fossil fuels and supporting lifestyles that perhaps are not meant to be possible. There is a great deal of irony in this piece of history, and it is very ambiguous as to whether or not it was a necessary technology. It has, however, created a new normalcy that we are now dependant on, when it is possible that there are only supposed to be 2 of every 5 people existing today.
Erica Neumann
ReplyDeleteSeptember 20, 2010
ADPIII section 40
Lecture response 1
Today, North America farms a surplus of corn: 13,300 calories per person, per day to be exact (according to Professor Trumpey’s lecture). This is an unbelievable amount of corn for a country that uses less than 2% of its land for farming. Why then, if so little land is dedicated to farming and such a surplus of corn is causing the vegetable to be used in the most unnatural and unhealthy ways, is the United States still allowing such a surplus of corn to be planted and harvested? Using corn as a substitute for flour and wheat in chips, cereal, and binding agents is a healthy, logical way to integrate the nation’s abundance of corn into the population’s daily diet. However, the statistic that over 25% of grocery items include corn seems unsettling. The increase of high fructose corn syrup in the average American diet seems to be directly correlating to the increasing obesity problem seen through out the United States. Americans are consuming 150 lbs. of artificial sweeteners, sugars, and corn syrup per person per year. This is partly due to the large businesses that market and sell foodstuff with ingredients that include corn. Because there is such a surplus of corn, it becomes an extremely cheap ingredient, and therefore turns in large profits for businesses. The businesses, being only interested in profits and expansion, don’t take into consideration what they are feeding the nation.
Not only is corn becoming an overwhelming aspect to the population’s diet, but the corn being grown and harvested is less and less natural. Farmers alter the seeds of plants to create hybrid, monster plants. Scientists genetically modify vegetables by combining the genes of other plants and animals to give the food unnatural qualities. The grocery store food is sprayed with so many pesticides that the people no longer know what they are eating. The world has survived for hundreds of years from of corn and agriculture before genetically modified food and artificial sweeteners. We need to step back and carefully consider how we are treating our Earth and bodies.
Marissa McClain
ReplyDeleteSeptember 20, 2010
ADPIII section 4
When it comes to the environment I am an information junkie. I have seen all of the documentaries, read the articles, and there was even a point in my life when I watched Planet Green, a television network devoted solely to environmental issues, exclusively. While I have had phases in my life when I have carried around a Nalgene water bottle and a canvas bag around with me, generally speaking my devotion to protecting the environment stops there. I know the issues and I know steps I can take to lessen my carbon footprint, I have just been too lazy to put my knowledge into action. I have become so used to my wasteful practices that the thought of even small changes in my lifestyle seem incredibly inconvenient. With that, the idea of creeping normalcy rang true to with me. I have become complacent with my lifestyle and have come to accept aspects of our society that are entirely irresponsible and inefficient. I drive my SUV and drink bottled water without giving it a second thought because even though I know what I am doing is unhealthy I choose convenience over responsibility time and time again.
Being forced to carry my garbage around with me has made me see the physical manifestation of my current habits and effectively changed my outlook on certain aspects of my lifestyle. By making it inconvenient to be wasteful I am now doing all I can to avoid waste. Little things have been affected. Instead of a to go cup at the coffee shop I will sit in and drink from a mug, instead of eating a prepackaged meal or takeout I will make myself something and use dishes. I now realize exactly how much superfluous waste I generate and hopefully in the future I will continue to view the environmentally friendly route as the path of least resistance.
section 4
ReplyDeleteworldchanging response:
I read, “Designing a Sustainable World.” I really enjoyed this chapter because it had t do with everything we are currently talking about. In addition to the learning that I gain from ADP I am also in the course Design for Change, which talks directly about the subject of this chapter, sustainable products and the practice of social engineering. A part of the article addresses a fact that in some ways is quite disappointing, something that we previously talked about in my discussion group. Designers are aiming to design things so beautiful and ergonomically sound that being eco-friendly is some what of a trend and yes this is good but it is still a trend nonetheless and trends never last forever which makes me worry for the future even more so than I do now. There were some uplifting points that the article made- we have come quite a long way. More designers and everyday people are beginning to think about a product’s life as a complete cycle, and by this I mean instead of just developing something that will be useful in the present and possibly harmful to the atmosphere in future, more and more people are considering how products will be disposed of and treated in their “afterlife” if you will. It is frustrating to read something you already knew but tried to ignore. It is nearly impossible to make a difference on your own when it comes to “going green.” The government makes regulations and businesses decide whether or not to manufacture new products that could possibly help out “situation.” So this gets me thinking, “well, what should I even be doing if I can’t really make an impact?” And just honestly thinking that is a tough thing to realize. What is it that I can do? As said in the article although it is painfully obvious that we have a long way to go, at least there are signs that hundreds of designers and engineers are doing their part in trying to redesign and redefine products that fulfill a whole new list of criteria.
Kaiti Marek
ReplyDelete20, September 2010
ARTDES 250: SEC4
After collecting my garbage for a week, I am surprised by how much I wasted, particularly at work. I found that a very significant cause of my waste was actually my job. I work in Bursley’s dining hall, and all employees are required to wear latex gloves during their shifts. This is a health code issue, and not something I can really cut down on if I want to keep my job.
My job has actually tied into many of the things we have read and learned about over the past week. For instance, I make hamburgers on some days. During these shifts, I have to change my gloves after putting burgers on the grill because I cannot touch food with bloody gloves. I have to make a new set of burgers every ten minutes or so. If I work a seven-hour shift; that means that I throw away about 84 gloves in a day. That is just my glove usage for one 7-hour shift. That number increases drastically when you consider how many people the dining hall employs. Another thing I have had to think about while making burgers is the article “This Steer’s Life.” There are so many things in that article that I never knew about the process of raising cattle for meat. It is fairly sickening to slap burger patties onto a grill all day now that I know where they came from and what is in them. Equally sickening is the amount of that meat that is wasted every day. Many burgers do not get eaten and have to be thrown away after a certain amount of time. It is a perfect example of why this industry is unlikely to change. Restaurants go through so many burger patties in a day that anything but factory meat would be unreasonable for them to buy. Maybe on a personal level, grass-fed meat could become practical, but a place that mass-produces meat will almost always choose to buy it a cheap as possible so that they can achieve the highest profit possible.
One thing that surprised me in the article was the mention of McDonald’s setting rigorous standards for how their meat is slaughtered. I found this interesting mainly because I view McDonald’s as a cooperate giant bent on making money whatever the cost. This is probably true. The reason for this test, no doubt, is to satisfy the consumer and alleviate guilt associated with purchasing their food, thus making more people eat there. I guess it is interesting to see rampant consumerism and a company’s strive to achieve profits work itself out for the good of the cattle we eat.
Paula Schubatis
ReplyDeleteSection 4
The chapter about “stuff” was very eye opening to me. Living in an industrialized country, I have never seriously thought about the life cycle of my stuff. Yes, I know it was made in China, and yes I know that it will decay in a dump for thousands of years, but those are rather abstract concepts to grasp for me; I have never traveled the distance most of my imported goods travel to get to me, nor have I ever been to a landfill. It is important to comprehend all that goes into the making of our stuff, and the potential repercussions of having stuff.
Although thinking about the life cycle of our stuff can be enlightening, it can hardly be world changing. The characteristic human need to create and collect stuff has been around since the birth of culture.
Another intriguing point which was brought up in the chapter was about the way American culture perceives money. We consider the more money we have, and the greater amount of nice stuff we have, to be conducive to status, and happiness. This notion is defiantly true of American culture, however is true of most societies, industrialized and non-industrialized. Even in the most simple of cultures, the more nice stuff you have represents wealth and status; a surplus of stuff ensures survival as well as displays status. It is a little ethnocentric of the author to attribute this trait to strictly Americans, although American culture and globalization has created an excess of consumption. The statistic which struck me the most was to see the average number of acres consumed per American as opposed to more developing countries. This startling statistic shows that although we may not have created the urge to collect stuff, we have augmented it greatly.
Eliana Gershon
ReplyDeleteSection 4
This entire class so far has come as a huge shock to me. I was not expecting it to shake my values or teach me things that could truly make a difference in the world. Our World's dependancy on corn for one is astonishing. Items such as ketchup or even toothpaste one might guess contain corn. But fiber glass? Linoleum? It seems almost absurd, and definitely a bit scary. Learning things like this, especially on the topic of food production and consumption have really taught me to consider the amount of things I buy and the types of things I am so quick to buy but maybe shouldn't be.
An American family on average can consume the same amount in one day as a family in Africa might consume in a week! For energy use, the ratio could be days compared to months! Why is it that we are leaving such a large footprint, and are there actually ways we can change?
The major thing lectures have taught me so far is how one person really can make an impact. One person can maybe spark the change that our country and our World needs. Since beginning the trash project, I have noticed that I use tons of disposable paper products and buy products that come with way too much packaging than is necessary. I do this simply out of convenience. I think if more people in America tried experimenting with something like the garbage project, the majority of people would realize the same thing. Convenience in the end could destroy our planet.