Consume Greenly

I am a long time environmentalist. I have always been fascinated with the complexity of nature and the complexity of life. My scientific lifestyle started early and I have been exposed to some pretty amazing science. I have been an advocate for change for quite a while now and it is refreshing to see my concerns about the environment being a conscious revolution in human culture. Awareness is great, but only action results in our future. As such, I migrated my lifestyle to match my convictions in both my personal and professional career. I have been doing this for 5 years now and it has its ups and downs. Being passionate about the future of our planet and being involved in the day to day business of green is a challenge. I approached companies years ago to propose green portfolios and was turned down. Many of these companies, since, have changed and gone “green”. Well, It is a start and I am glad that market pressure is now behind the green message and challenge. This is a big positive for our environment.

What changes have I made to increase my “greenness”? I have been working in a home office for 5 years ( paperless ). I do not use a cellphone for business ( as they represent e-waste and planned obsolescence, in my business philosophy). I do not own a car: I ride my bike, use the INTERNET for business communications and “rent” transportation as required ( trains, carpool for trips to the cottage ). I do not purchase highly-processed foods. I do not have any gas-hobbies ( motorbiking, helicopters, racing cars ). I do not travel by plane. I repair items and buy things I need, not want. I have simplified my wardrobe to natural materials and some fleece ( leather, cotton etc. ). I have looked at each of my “processes” and tried to make the best "green" choice, a choice that makes a positive impact on our environment. Making these changes gives me a pretty good perspective on going green. It is a balance of consumption and existence. I can improve and get green still. We all can.

Of course the new market is filled with "snake oil". The same marketing companies that sold its market the "lifestyle of consumption" and greed is now switching gears to promote a “green” twist, at any cost ( Rolls Royce builds its cars in a green sustainable factory - but is buying a Roll Royce a benifit to our planet? ). I look at a lot of “Top 100 Green Company Lists” and see the same companies that brought us to this level of consumption, waste and pollution to being with. Banks, Car Companies, Chemical Companies, Computer Companies, Consumer Product Companies. Banks that fund damaging companies. Car companies that thought bigger was better and branded luxury as social status. Electronics/Computer companies that sell products that are obsoleted quicker resulting in e-waste. Consumer Products that claim to be "green". On these lists, on occasion, we actually see an innovative company making a difference. A technology company or alternative energy company. The sources of solutions, not the problems. Sometimes these companies that are making a difference are bought by bigger competing companies and do not use the technology.

Some feel that being "green" means doing things greener. I do not. It would be refreshing to see the “green” label used for things that are green, not greener. Running a company that destroys our environment in a more sustainable manner should not be considered, but, when companies can charge money for a "rubber green" stamp of approval, "green" is lost in consumerism.

People hold the power of choice. The buying decisions of the public and consumption habits of each of us have the largest impact on our environment. What we buy, what we do not. So, when you are making a purchase, think of all the factors behind what you are buying and what the product is. It is our future, so, make some changes in your life and get activated on improving our environment. I have made my choices and I feel comfortable in my science behind my decisions.

I think that this is important for my business as it gives me tools to understand any company and show them how to be green. I have turned down “green” jobs: greener cellphones and a myriad of useless “landfill” plastic products that will not last. Items that hurt our environment. I think it is responsible and I like to lead by example. I feel it is the only credible way and honest approach to what I believe in.

Enjoy!



All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ http://deepgreendesign.blogspot.com/. My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!

Green Military?

"A kinder softer, greener military?"

Stopping all wars is the greenest way! And I can prove it, using science!

Why are the governments forcing the consumer to "go green" when they are to blame?

I have seen that the US military has been looking into equipment that uses less energy. Of course, "greening" military equipment makes sense, less resources to transport, less logistics, less cost. Spare me! The US military is the largest energy consumer aka polluter.

Being a career designer, I know that the basic “traditional” design philosophy is “cheaper”. Use less materials, remove cost and reduce operational costs. Same old.

I am sure most know that the US military is the most energy consumptive entity on earth. With those B-52 bombers flying with nukes 24/7 with a zero shot record, the return on environment (ROE) is terrible. I am not suggesting that each B-52 pop a nuke to make each mission worthwhile. No.

Greening war machines under the guise of “helping the environment” makes me sick. The nerve to slap a green message to killing machines takes the cake for my greenwashing list so far.

The US military is sending me the “lemming feed” for this one and I am not going to take that bite, thanks. On one hand, they want to sell this notion of saving a little gas is somehow going to improve my planet? Improving how?

The US military still uses depleted uranium rounds in many of its ordinance. Lets talk turkey (not the country).

Depleted uranium (DU) has been an issue for a while. Most say that DU is not “that” radioactive. Well, this is true, it is mildly radioactive, but, this is a talking point constructed to divert attention to the fact that DU is a toxic metal. Much like lead and other heavy metals, DU is classified as a toxic metal.

It is hard to find definitive studies showing that DU is outright nasty stuff. Most information leads to the typical “not 100% sure” scientific argument, or as I call it “the lawyers stamp of approval” to argue for its use in times of war.

The United Nations has a few studies and they do not endorse the use of DU.

DU is amazing, from the war profiteer perspective! DU is made from spent nuclear materials processing. Wow, talk about recycling! Instead of dealing with storage, the USA has learned that they can shoot it at their enemies. Lets face it, it is a war profiteers dream product: improved killing efficiency and nobody wants to store radioactive-toxic metal and the taxpayer flips the bills! The war profiteers clink the glasses over a juicey bonus for the quarter.

DU will eventually enter the water sources of all the places it has been used: Kosovo, Iraq, Afghanistan and the places that don't appear on the news. Iraq has already experienced DU's effects, but the US truthiness machine can quickly discredit any observations. I hesitate to post any findings, since most are not “scientific” according the GOP law experts that protect America.

What science does show us is that all life seems to be impacted by toxic metals. I have always held that toxic pollution is far more of an issue than climate change. Sure climate change is important and can devastate the human population, but, what else are we expecting to happen? Toxic pollution impacts all lifecycles on this planet. I am sure that chemical companies are happy that everyone is concerned about carbon emissions and not the poisons they are producing in the environment we all share.

I started this blog with the military trying to save a few percentage points of fuel in an effort to help this planet ( http://tinyurl.com/ydjj4hb ). This is such a complete joke. The audacity of the military to slap a green message on its products is outrageous!

Makes me angry that these suppliers are probably getting “Green Tax Dollars” to do this stuff. Makes me angry that the US voted to continue using DU. The UN vote was 122 to ban DU and 6 against (US, UK, France, Netherlands, Czech Republic, Israel).

Looking at the list of countries, I can understand why they want to use DU: they are countries, whose citizens are burdened with government military control by war profiteers.

Hybrid tanks, fuel cell powered UAV's, maybe even solar powered nuclear weapons sites? They are on the drawing boards, trust me. It is the natural process of “innovation”. Good technology exploited for war... expect to see more of this greenwashing... just look at nanotechnology.

Here are some links:

“Green” army vehicles :

UN report on DU:

Wikipedia Ad-Free

2001 report on DU ( thanks lawyers! )

Report on disposing of DU in USA ( why not dump it on Iraq! )

Enjoy!



All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ http://deepgreendesign.blogspot.com/. My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!

Green Risk = Greener Rewards

Resetting the priorities of the “old” economy and the business of “not-that-much-eco-value” industry is a must.

As "research" and "innovation" matures, it culminates into a stuffy business model that includes private companies and academia feeding on government funds ( military research and military innovation, that is). It evolves into its own self-sustaining entity. Spending on antiquated programs seems only to support the tired old industry which, in this case, focuses on a small, highly specialized and technology expensive industry, that could not catch Bin Laden. The investments made in the Canadian Space Program reflects, in some part, this idea versus taking on the environmental challenges Canada has. Challenges I think Canada would succeed in.

Canada is involved in space and the spending is about $300 million a year. This excludes the staffing costs and pensions we pay for the government overhead to keep Canadas “toe in the pool” for expensive small splash projects in zero-gravity. The technology is interesting but services a small niche market. Now, a lot of pride is included in this field of experts and we are looking at some of the brightest minds in the industry. Being involved in space is important, but, how Canada is involved is the important key to understanding my point.

MDA is a satellite company in Canada. They are indeed one of the leaders in image technology and if we compare the potential of MDA to the Canadian Space Programs ( Moon visits, checking out Mars and space arms ) we see that MDA has technology that is applicable to the environmental issues we all face now. That being said, Canada was willing to sell MDA, a few years ago, to the “Bushy Empire” for a song, to be used for military applications. Not sure if Stephen Harpers lusty privateers were involved to look away, but, Peggy Nash, currently the President of the NDP, blocked the sale. She saw the value. She saw the value in the jobs and the technology. Thanks Peggy.

I think that a mission to Mars and the funds invested to say “we did it” is careless when the potential to advance and expand MDA beyond commercial satellite communications to environmental mapping for scientists, farmers, researchers, etc. has a huge potential in todays market for “Earth Info”. Imagine if an 12 year old wanted to see progress of rainforest depletion in Canada? ( I hope that made you think )

I see the adventure in exploration, but, I think we have bigger "fish to fry" here on Earth, first. I would like to see many government programs die and those funds used to focus on the future markets that are large and profitable for Canada. Of course we lack bold leadership in Canada. I don't see any potential candidates willing to risk their smug necks on bold innovation.

Canada has already slept through the start of the new green economy and I feel that the current system is far too entrenched in “old model economics” and restrained by the red tape of private interests for this new industry to innovate and prosper. Now they are playing catch up by dumping cash on “greenwashing”-type efforts with majority of the cash being used to reinvent the green wheel and churn up some “needed” public education spending.

Canada needs action and direct investment without the same old expensive and administration-heavy government process. Most of the technology is available now and new technology needs to be at the top of the priority list. Time to cut the deadwood and start nurturing the growing green markets with a process that maximizes the investment into tangible green assets and large market innovations, not trivial green awareness and poorly planned “low-return on environment” cash give-aways.

Enjoy!




All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ http://deepgreendesign.blogspot.com/. My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!

Green Luxury Products?

BMW announces a CO2 reduction on its M series?

Pirelli announces a greener high performance tire?

Luxury SUV's that are hybrid?

Giant mansions with solar panels?

Perhaps luxury brands should be taxed just a little extra. If people are keen on feeding their egos, let them share in the over consumption that harms our planet.

All of these products are Ego-Green: the labelling of a wasteful ego-brands as green aka - Greenwash.

Please, give me a break. Luxury is so far from green, the two can rarely be combined, well except with "bold, smart" marketing ( the same folks that made over consumption beautiful ).

Enjoy!



All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ http://deepgreendesign.blogspot.com/. My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!

Green Lifecycle

Product Lifecycle: Add it up.

I like to write about products that are examples of great design. A great design should accomplish many things: 1) Do its job well 2) Last a long time 3) Can be repaired 4) Can be recycled 5.) Did I mention last a long time?

My experience as a tool designer and manufacturing specialist has given me special insight into products. I have designed products from scratch, evolved products, retrofitted products, conceptualized and simulated digital products. I look at a product and I think of the factory that makes them. I think of the materials they use. I look at their quality. I look at what is environmentally “expensive” to make. I look at simplicity and complexity. I am highly critical of designs and it plagues my mind looking at the products that are available today and that break so easily.

Make it cheaper has always been a driving force in design and it has evolved into the practise of planned obsolescence or product failure. This is sad for the consumer since most of these products are unrepairable and are “landfill”. Of course we can recycle them, but, nonetheless they failed their purpose.

Reminds me one day when I broke the microwave door handle and the coffee grinder. Makes for an awkward breakfast I suppose. The microwave broke because a plastic part from the door handle “drive train” snapped a tiny little tidbit of plastic ( for those less knowledgeable about Failure Analysis ). So, this tiny little chunk can be fixed, but, labour makes it more expensive than a cheap new microwave. Argh. The coffee grinder too snapped off a tiny little chunk of plastic and was rendered useless to most. Of course I rigged it so I could get my coffee and used my stove. Mission accomplished. So, when you look at the waste of good components ( motors, lights, computer pad thing, tiny blender ) because of these two little chunks of plastic ( most plastic parts are less than 5 cents make ) it makes this product a high environmental risk.

Products that are high environmental risk seem to be around a lot these days. A laptop that kisses the concrete goodbye, the cellphone in the toilet, that coffee grinder. This e-waste is sad, but, the prices we pay for these breakable gadgets now cannot compare to the long term environmental impacts and unsustainable processes to make them .

This past weekend, I needed to do some work fixing foundations on a cottage. Being a tool collector, I have an old old cast iron jack. It is about 100 years old and is operated by hand. It has a big handle for gripping, but, you can also insert a pole, inside the handle cavity, for extra torque. Smart. So, it uses an ACME thread on a 1 1/4” shaft with a big cast iron square end. The casting is quite “over designed” to current design standards. The jack screw is very efficient, using the wedge principle of the ACME thread. The handle had a ratchet, over-designed, connected to a 3” bevel gear which in turn drove the mating gear on the shaft. After 100 years, I lubed it up and it worked great. I could jack the cottage 1/32” per click and I did it with my hand ( 7” long handle ). That is quite the mechanical advantage! I could go on about the design features it has, but, to put it simply, it is build strong and to last. Not only this, all its parts are recyclable ( steels )! It has no rubber parts, no plastic. It is over-designed and over-built to last. Comparing this simple tool to systems today reveals two things. People want easy to use products for the best cost. This will change to what I propose: People will want products that last and are good for the environment.

So, what a Lifecycle for this jack. It has no hydraulics, no hydraulic oil, no rubber seals, no electronics, no motors, no plastic, no batteries, no auxiliary power. It runs on human power, but, human power that should know what they are doing ( most of the time ) with this tool. Thank you.

When we compare this tool to others I see its value on the environment. This jack could serve its purpose for another 100 years, easy. If we look at the energy to make this tool, it is high. When we look at the cost of the materials, it is higher than its competitors. When we look at its weight, it is heavy, it is about 35 pounds. But when you take into consideration these factors over the life of the product, these factors become negligible.

The real impact of the lifecycle analysis is demonstrated when the product with a very long lifecycle is compared to a series of products that all have a lower lifecycle. For our purposes, I will use my all mechanical jack ( 100 year lifecycle ) versus 5 products that needed to be replaced in that 100 year duration ( 5 products with an average lifecycle of 20 years ) and used for the same purpose. Once we understand the summation of energies to produce, purchase and deliver all 5 of the shorter lifecycle products, we see that Long Lifecycle tools benefit our environment greatly.

Simplicity in design! Amazing performance! Recycleability! No electronics! No Power! No Kidding! My trusty jack is a great example of return on environment, return on investment and the knowledge of the deep green method.

Start looking at products, their lifecycles and start adding up the value to your environment!

Enjoy!



All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ http://deepgreendesign.blogspot.com/. My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!

No Clean Coal

Recently announced, a coal company has decided to install an underground carbon capture system. The premise of pumping CO2 underground is easy to understand, but, has some fundamental flaws. This technology, no matter how expertly installed, still pollutes by putting its waste underground. What is the longevity of these systems and how ethically will they be operated? Will underground pressures be knowingly assessed? Or will the companies pump CO2 underground ( and other contaminants? ) until something bad happens, then let the lawyers profit on the mess?

Well, looking closer at this technology, you will find that the resultant capture of CO2 is only %1.5 of the emissions. Yes it is an improvement, but, is it the best solution to reduce emissions? Well, we have to determine the price of this system and compare. The cost of the benefit must be assessed.

Now, these companies are getting "Green"-Aid dollars for this work. But, at what benefit to the investment of Green Tax Dollars (GTD)? Looking at the Return on Environment (ROE), coal generation should be excluded. The entire process is a mess and other technologies provide a larger ROE. One of them is Geothermal Energy. These plants can hit ROI in less than 10 years ( very conservatively ) and provide clean energy that meets the baseload requirements to replace a coal station.

Once you crunch the numbers and look at the superior ROE of geothermal and its realistic ROI and its equivalent quality of power, coal should not be invested in with GTD.

The only way any government should give money to a coal plant, is to give it on the condition they use the money to build geothermal resources. They have the steam turbines and equipment already installed. A planned shift of the facilities can be started. If the coal companies would shift from coal to geothermal, by growing its geothermal content with hard % goals, I would start to give them money.

Oh, here is the article. Read it and take a look:

French firm pushes carbon capture solution at US coal plant

Enjoy!



All information and concepts on my blog is property of me, Graham Chivers.

Retweeting is highly recommended!

This information may not be used, in any publications, without direct prior consent from Graham Chivers @ http://deepgreendesign.blogspot.com/. My Blog is not to be within or, on any entities that have advertising. Sounds weird? Well, that is my choice. Freedom of speech and freedom of access, without any capitalism, by companies, that I do not find green enough. I assert that my Blogs will deliver my blog with NO ADVERTISING! As such, If you wish to rebroadcast my content, ask for permission. If your publication has absolutely no advertising, anywhere, I will be happy let you use my content, on the condition that I verify the publication for content, first. I dreaded the day that my blog would be beside advertising for laptops or other non-green thingies, but, it did. Support Ad-Free knowledge! If you see this blog beside advertising, please, let them know to respect my authority as a citizen. Thank you! I assert the right to assert my opinion on each blog, I blog. I assert that I am not a “domestic terrorist”. I assert that I am an individual, not a marketing scam. I collect no data from my Blog. All the products use to manufacture this product are “free” on the Internet. I use no marketing software for data collection. I feel that anyone should be able to read my blog with only knowledge being the product for free.

If you do not agree with any above content, prove it first. If you can teach me something, I will thank you in a manner warranted. If you are intending to “limit my internet access” or Freedom of Speech or my Human Rights: please go away!