We Must Design the Whole Experience
Here’s a serious question to inventors, government policy makers and anyone else who cares to listen above the bedlam of global environmental nonsense. Listen closely - we’ve got to design whole solutions to our crises not just best-next-steps and setting 20 - 50 year global warming targets.
Here is one example. Motor vehicles and the oil crisis, global warming and depleting resources.
Why the flying farouli are we trying t make cars run on air, water or other essential life ingredients? Isn’t there a water crisis - anyone looked over at the Aral Sea or the Yellow River in China or Australia’s 10+ year drought? Where is this water coming from? I saw a program on the television recently where for only 2 litres of fresh tap water a certain experimental hybridised car can reduce fuel by as much as three quarters on a 100 km journey. OK I get that, great. But when 100 million (times 2 litres) cars ran that product we are absolutely, excuse my french, fucked. Doesn’t anyone get it?
Similarly, how much air is on the planet? Have a look at the photos - we exist in a fragile environment with a thin layer of oxygen that every one of us needs. Why are we considering something we need to survive as fuel for a car? What’s wrong with the concept of localisation? Why is globalisation so fantastic - tomato grown in China gets shipped to Italy then canned and shipped to Australia and sold by the can at 69 cents, way below the market value of local produce. I’m sorry but globalisation sucks, as does mass production.
We have to accept that we’ve been the most priveliged and pampered first world society in the history of the planet - probably for the rest of history, too. In the last 200 years we’ve looted the planet to get a dollar at every turn. That’s led to a design issue - we’re not designing to the whole problem and just sticking to the easy part of making product X for under price Y. Awesome short sightedness. Cars running on water? On air? On food? I mean we’ve got limited area to grow food and we have a massive soil depletion globally, growing world populations and depleting water supplies. So how is food for cars sustainable?
And putting in plans to reduce global emissions by 2050 is a sham. What a waste of paper. In 2050 all the edible fish species in the ocean will be gone, for example. 2050 is the beaurocratic term for “we won’t deal with it - pass it on” syndrome.
But what do I know? I belong to the smartest animal species on the planet on an individual basis. I belong to the dumbest parasitic species on the planet in any great number.
And what’s really fucked about all that is the osterich attitude that its all about international economy. Really? Should we redefine a crime against humanity?
Designers make the world and should be taking some responsibility for its direction. Its not just about money. [end of early morning rant]
June 11th, 2008 at 10:20 am
I will second that, there needs to be a radical re-think to A LOT of things (and then that needs to be actioned at once…not debated about pathetically in verbal red-tape bullsh*t for the next 10-20 years!)
*Head nod from over here mate*
June 11th, 2008 at 12:26 pm
Hey Matt, how have you been? Yeh its a bit of a cop-out ay.
I’m told the tides coming in even faster than they originally thought, too. I might live on beach realestate by the time I get old enough to pull retirement. There’s an up side. Living at the beach in a localised economy, no car to worry about, slower lifestyle… no air, no food and no water though. Ah well… I can dream.