There are a lot less Eureka breakthrough moments than there are small continuous improvements. Both are needed to get to fully sustainable products. By focusing on improvements of any magnitude, we force ourselves to start to think about the issue and it is only then that brilliant minds might have the chance to arrive at Eureka breakthroughs in the area of sustainability. Ray Anderson of Interface is already a long way down this road.
Nature provides us with a classic and iconic example of a sustainable product - a tree. The tree takes in light from the sun and carbon dioxide from the air which it uses to convert nutrients it gets from the earth through its roots into food to produce new leaves and growth. In winter it discards its leaves by dropping them onto the ground around it. The tree drops more than it needs for food, thus enriching the earth for other varieties of plants to grow. When it dies it decays and becomes rich food for new trees and plants. The cycle of growth and enrichment of the natural environment continues.
How are we to think of manmade products as elements in a growth rather than a reduction cycle?
Unfortunately man made products are designed as only one part of a system. I.e. they are designed to be made from materials we extract from the earth (wood, metals, oil – converted into plastics), to be used and when no longer needed, they are thrown away where they become useless, dangerous landfill. There is no return path of manmade products to raw materials that can be reused or recycled.
This is not the only problem with manmade products and certainly not the only ill effect that they have on the natural environment. However it is the most important problem to address to stem the continuous waste.
We need to focus on asking and forcing better answers to the question, what will happen at the end of this products useful life?
How are we going to enable this product to be more easily recycled or reused?
Comments