Research everywhere like air pollution @airpo - Tumblr Blog

Volatile Organic Compounds by Sally Deneen

An article that explains VOCs very clearly : it's now more and more obvious that the health risks are definitely there but that everyone is having a hard time to prove them.

Hard to believe, but there are literally thousands of substances in everyday use in our society that give off volatile organic compounds, or VOCs, that can be harmful to our health.

The "volatile" part of the name doesn't have anything to do with stock prices, but it's sort of the same idea: just as stock prices can shoot up, gasses take off from their liquid or solid source, evaporating into the air. Think of gasoline or paint thinner. You know how you can smell them when your nose is a foot away or more? You're smelling VOCs. This is also known as "off-gassing." Often you smell the chemical, though sometimes there's no odor.

The "organic" part of the name simply refers to the fact that a substance contains carbon. (There are some big exceptions to this rule about organic stuff having carbon, with carbon dioxide and baking soda – bicarbonate of soda – rising quickly to the top of the pile, since both contain carbon but are considered "inorganic." This categorization traces to early scientists who figured everything was either from a biological source – "organic"– or from a metallic or rock source – "inorganic." But this is a definition of VOCs, so we're going back to that.)

VOCs are used widely in degreasers, disinfectants, fuels, pesticides, glues, cosmetics, air fresheners, photocopying, pressed-wood furniture, vinyl floors and a seemingly endless array of consumer products. In a typical home you could find all the way from the carpet up to the acoustic acoustic ceiling tiles – and in between, in everything from furniture to bathtub caulk. New and remodeled buildings tend to have the highest readings, so authorities recommend you keep such a building particularly well-ventilated for at least the first three months.

Because products containing these chemicals tend to be used indoors, they're a significant contributor to indoor air pollution. They're found indoors at concentrations many times higher than you would find outdoors.

VOCs have famously escaped the confines of the indoors, though, at Superfund sites like New York's Love Canal and Kentucky's Valley Of the Drums. But they also got loose in practically every community in the country, often at dry-cleaning shops and industries using degreasers, before their disposal was strictly regulated.

Even at low levels, these chemicals can cause a number of symptoms. But they sound like symptoms of lots of things, so it can be hard for a doctor to narrow it down to VOCs. Common symptoms include fatigue, headaches, skin and eye irritation, tingling or numbness in the extremities, drowsiness and dizziness.

(via thedailygreen.com)

#VOCs #volatile organic compounds #air pollution

Wikipedia and air pollution : Volatile organic compounds

Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are organic chemicals [ie. "any member of a large class of gaseous, liquid, or solid chemical compounds whose molecules contain carbon"] that have a high vapor pressure at ordinary, room-temperature conditions. Their high vapor pressure results from a low boiling point, which causes large numbers of molecules to evaporate or sublimate from the liquid or solid form of the compound and enter the surrounding air.

So it's chemicals that evaporate into the air at normal temperatures so that it happens fairly routinely?

Apparently there's loads (most odours are VOCs apparently) and also they're a huge part of how plants communicate (ohh plant language though, pretty neat!). So most of them are alright but some are harmful to humans and the environment.

Also, pro note : Anthropogenic means "from humans".

But which ones are harmful?

Seems like the ones that are biologically produced are okay since most stuff produces them (insect animals fungi etc.) and that plants are the main source and produce a shit ton.

biological sources emit an estimated 1150 teragrams of carbon per year in the form of VOCs.

Yeah that number is pretty impressive.

Anthropogenic sources emit about 142 teragrams of carbon per year in the form of VOCs.

We on the other hand produce much less but i'm willing to bet that it's the harmful kind.

But how?

[Firstly] a major source of man-made VOCs are coatings, especially paints and protective coatings. [...] Approximately 12 billion litres of paints are produced annually. [...] Motivated by cost, environmental concerns, and regulation, the paint and coating industries are increasingly shifting toward aqueous solvents.

Very interesting mention of aqueous solvents, something I assume is a solution to this problem, that I have to investigate later on.

Secondly we find some old friends, CFCs the old rascals but also :

[the] industrial use of fossil fuels [which] produces VOCs either directly as products (e.g., gasoline) or indirectly as byproducts (e.g., automobile exhaust)

Also a newcomer, Tetrachloroethene, "widely in dry cleaning and by industry".

But that seems pretty benign next to another new face :

One VOC that is a known human carcinogen is benzene, which is a chemical found in environmental tobacco smoke, stored fuels, and exhaust from cars in an attached garage. Benzene also has natural sources such as volcanoes and forest fires. It is frequently used to make other chemicals in the production of plastics, resins, and synthetic fibers. Benzene evaporates into the air quickly and the vapor of benzene is heavier than air allowing the compound to sink into low-lying areas. Benzene has also been known to contaminate food and water and if digested can lead to vomiting, dizziness, sleepiness, rapid heartbeat, and at high levels, even death may occur.

There's also Methylene chloride that seems pretty bad but it doesn't seem to be related to air pollution so i'll leave it aside, I have to focus to chemicals that are relevant to the problem at hand.

The dry cleaning industry seems to be misbehaving again :

Perchloroethylene

Perchloroethylene is a volatile organic compound that has been linked to causing cancer in animals. It is also suspected to cause many of the breathing related symptoms of exposure to VOC’s. Perchloroethylene is used mostly in dry cleaning. Studies show that people breathe in low levels of this VOC in homes where dry-cleaned clothes are stored and while wearing dry-cleaned clothing. While dry cleaners attempt to recapture perchloroethylene in the dry cleaning process to reuse it in an effort to save money, they can’t recapture it all. To avoid exposure to perchloroethylene, if a strong chemical odor is coming from clothing when picked up from the dry cleaner, do not accept them and request that less of the chemical be used as well as a complete drying of the garments.

But this paragraph sounds weirdly sketchy to me so I would have to investigate further to use it.

So apparently VOCs go really into action indoors?

At first I instinctively thought that was irrelevant but people use CatClo indoors as well, this could be an area where the results are more immediately discernable.

In offices, VOC results from new furnishings, wall coverings, and office equipment such as photocopy machines, which can off-gas VOCs into the air. [...] Studies also show that relative leukemia and lymphoma can increase through prolonged exposure of VOCs in the indoor environment.

the indoor total VOC (TVOC) concentrations can be up to five times higher than the VOC outdoor levels.[22] New buildings especially, contribute to the highest level of VOC off-gassing in an indoor environment because of the abundant new materials generating VOC particles at the same time in such a short time period.[23] In addition to new buildings, we also use many consumer products that emit VOC compounds, therefore the total concentration of VOC levels is much greater within the indoor environment.

VOC concentration in an indoor environment during winter is three to four times higher than the VOC concentrations during the summer.[24] High indoor VOC levels are attributed to the low rates of air exchange between the indoor and outdoor environment as a result of tight-shut windows and the increasing use of humidifiers.

Okay so the VOCs that were cited earlier are indeed harmful to humans. Just in this part, they've mentioned leukemia, lymphoma and breathing related symptoms.

further research is needed into : the claim by the air pollution page that some VOCs"are also significant greenhouse gases via their role in creating ozone and in prolonging the life of methane in the atmosphere" whereas the VOCs page doesn't mention it at all ; the incredibly unclear health effects part of the article and what the flip has methane to do with all of this?

Okay so I looked more into it; from toxtown.gov (a part of the US Library of Medicine) more info about the health problems:

How can volatile organic compounds affect my health?

The health effects of volatile organic compounds can vary greatly according to the compound, which can range from being highly toxic to having no known health effects. The health effects of volatile organic compounds will depend on nature of the volatile organic compound, the level of exposure, and length of exposure.

According to the Twelfth Report on Carcinogens published by the National Toxicology Program, benzene is a human carcinogen; formaldehyde, perchloroethylene, and styrene are "reasonably anticipated to be human carcinogens." People at the highest risk of long-term exposure to these three volatile organic compounds are industrial workers who have prolonged exposure to the compounds in the workplace; cigarette smokers; and people who have prolonged exposure to emissions from heavy motor vehicle traffic.

Long-term exposure to volatile organic compounds can cause damage to the liver, kidneys and central nervous system. Short-term exposure to volatile organic compounds can cause eye and respiratory tract irritation, headaches, dizziness, visual disorders, fatigue, loss of coordination, allergic skin reactions, nausea, and memory impairment.

additional helpful article at epa.gov that basically repeats the same thing but in clearer terms than my rambles.

#wikipedia mon amour #air pollution #volatile organic compounds #VOCs #benzene

Packaging of the World : Morrisons Laundry Care

Brief: laundry care is a complex segment. With a huge array of product types and product formats, the key to solving the brief was to clarify and simplify on pack messaging and create shelf standout for consumers. The various product types (e.g. Bio, Non Bio, 2 in 1s and Colours) and their benefits are the key messages. Then within each type a variety of different formats are available (tablets, capsules, powders, liquids and gels and super concentrates). Creative Solution: steering away from the rather dated category norm imagery of flowers, butterflies, mothers hugging children and scientific whooshes, the revamped range focuses on a simple, strong design concept that mimics fabric care labels found on clothing. This ties the complete range together and still allows for the important differences between product type and format to be clearly identified. This ‘label’ design concept cleverly allows further key messages to be conveyed. The background fabric changes for product type. For example, a soft fleece fabric is used for Non Bio. Secondary messages, such as number of washes and washing temperatures, are displayed as icons done in the style of washing instructions found on clothing labels. In a world populated all too often with copycat design when it comes to own label packaging, the goal was to break convention and create category busting designs that will clean up against the competition.

(via packagingoftheworld.com)

#value #laundry

Carbon emissions per person, by country

Looking at a country's total carbon emissions alone doesn't tell the full story of the country's contribution to global warming

(via theguardian.com/september 2009)

#carbon dioxide #CO2 #air pollution

Where's the worst air pollution in Europe and how much does it cost us?

Today the European Energy Agency(EEA) revealed its costing of airpollutionin Europe. These are the costs of illness and environmental damage caused by pollutants from industrial facilities.

Thereport'skey finding is that a tiny number of industrial sites are causing a large proportion of the damage. In fact just 6% of the total number of industrial sites in Europe are responsible for three quarters of the total damage costs.

As such the data from the report describes the 622 facilities that cause three quarters of the total damage costs.

Very interesting numbers but really bad representation. Still, it's fascinating to be able to see exactly where the problem is. The article is from 2011 but I wonder if much has changed ever since.

(via theguardian.com)

#air pollution #europe

How bad is London's air quality? Find out using this interactive tool

London Air, an air-quality monitoring project led by researchers at King's College London (KCL), maps pollution levels across the capital on an hourly basis. One map shows the latest local figures from the London Air Quality Network (click the "Bulletins" tab), while another highlights areas where air-quality does not meet its targets, as set out in the Air Quality Strategy (click the "Statistics" tab). You can explore overall pollution or a specific pollutant for any period over which data has been recorded. You can also browse a full-screen mapof nitrogen dioxide levels at street-by-street detail, or a visually impressive 3D map of different pollutants across the city.

#air pollution #london

The different "value" ranges.

#value #laundry

weirder/rarer laundry stuff. Congrats filetti in being sold only in Waitrose, what's so special about it?

#laundry

An overview of the washing powder logotypes sold in tesco.

The colours in this are irrelevant as I left out the billions of brand variations (all the "colours"/"bio"/"non-bio"/etc versions).

#common uk washing powders #laundry

target audience - unemployed women : Hannah Dalston

She is 26 year old and works a hospital porter.

She has been unemployed for four months and is surviving on the JSA and housing benefits, that make her lead a very humble life.

Jobseekers Allowance is available in either contribution-based or income-based form. Contribution-based JSA depends on the National Insurance payments that you have made over the course of the previous two years. If you have worked full-time and made your full NI contributions for the previous two years, you will receive contribution-based JSA for the full period - currently set at 182 days. Contribution-based JSA is paid at a rate of £51.85 per week for those aged 16-24, and £65.45 for those aged over 25.

She is single.

She had a basic education but no university degree.

She lives in East London, next to the tube station Bow Road.

For entertainment, she watches the x-factor and nevermind the buzzcocks.

She thinks of herself as a good person but is focused on improving her own life first and foremost.

She shops at Tesco and Morrisons, depending which one is more convenient at the time. She regularly buys their own brand value ranges and owns a tesco clubclard.

When she feels like she wants to eat something good she either buys biscuits/cake from Tesco or the occasional McDonalds.

She has a pay-as-you go oyster card and that often disuades her from getting away from her neighbourhood if she doesn't really need to.

She wants a better standing but is not seeking to be "wealthy" at all, she aspires to middle class at most.

She applies to jobs every day and gets some interviews but her resume is bland and she is an undiagnosed dyslexic.

She gets teary eyed during adverts about starvation.

She loves romcoms and wants to have children some day.

#persona #strugglers

'Up to 9% of deaths in London caused by air pollution'

Up to 9% of deaths in the capital's most polluted areas are down to air pollution, a new London Assembly paper has reported.

The paper, Air Pollution in London, produced by the Assembly's Health and Environment Committee, reports 8.3% of deaths in Westminster are attributable to man-made airborne particles.

In Kensington and Chelsea it is 8.3% and in Tower Hamlets 8.1%.

Bromley and Havering have the lowest proportion of pollution-related deaths in London, both 6.3%, but are still above the England average of 5.6%.

The Department of Health figures relate to research in 2010 and are based on estimates.

A 2008 study estimated there are over 4,267 extra deaths each year in London from particulates in the air.

Breast cancer and diabetes have been attributed to air pollution as well as respiratory problems.

#air pollution #london

four hundred hours later I finally settled on a shade of blue : tentative palette for my research pdf. Greyish tones because of pollution, blue+green because grey is boring and green is good for the environment.

#research pdf #colour combination

Tutorial with Chris

So some really good thing came out of my tutorial with Chris.

My research is not too broad or too narrow and i’m apparently on the right route, I just have to express it in a more visual way, to be honest it IS a lot of text for a field dominated by visual communication. But that’s another challenge, how am i supposed to translate all this chemistry into (interesting!) visuals?

On my pdf, I’ll get more direct advice on next tuesday when i bring in my old one for review but I already know that I should divide my present pdf into categories, for examples theme then client and market then persona, etc. I also still have to devour my type and grids books because I’m way behind.

We also had a workshop on pdf design with a close up look at pdf examples from previous years and it really motivated me to step up my game. Some of the previous examples look really slick and well designed whereas my last attempt was a blue monstrosity. I’ll start mine as soon as possible (i.e. now) and hopefully I’ll have more time to perfect my pdf this project. i think the key to perfection is to browse the previous examples for good ideas and inspiration but also to just do and redo yours until it really looks nice instead of just giving up because the deadline is in two minutes.

I’ve also been told it’s alright to go with the branding angle instead of the advertising one so I’m really happy about this, even though I already read this ancient book on advertising… It was necessary to read into advertising to know that I didn’t want to do it. So yaaay branding and new stuff and shiny packaging I’m getting excited already!

I have to do intense practice reviews now, one on washing powder and laundry products and one on products targeted to strugglers. Obviously, if we were seeing this project in a realistic point of view, the product would completely crash without a good advertising campaign at its launch but you can’t advertise a product that doesn’t have a brand really so it makes sense that I concentrate on the branding first. If it was a real brief I would then go on to do the advertising or the client would hire a different person but it would get done still.

So the challenge with this branding endeavour is to produce an acceptable form of packaging and brand identity. The end game would be to create brand values : that the branding would be specifically directed to the demographics’ values and lifestyle. For this to work I have to develop my persona a lot more than her current state. I also realised just now that I haven’t made a blog entry about her so that will be the occasion to flesh her out to the max, as well as, maybe, the extreme version but let’s do one thing at a time and not get ahead of ourselves.

#tutorial #research pdf

Wikipedia and air pollution : carbon monoxide

It's only the third bloody pollutant and I already can't stand this wikipedia page... but i will vanquish and conquer!

Onto the next pollutant!

Carbon monoxide (CO)- is a colourless, odorless, non-irritating but very poisonous gas. It is a product by incomplete combustion of fuel such as natural gas, coal or wood. Vehicular exhaust is a major source of carbon monoxide.

The first thing that came to mind when reading the article was this :

carbon monoxide often alternates between upset and surprised

Worldwide, the largest source of carbon monoxide is natural in origin, due to photochemical reactions in the troposphere that generate about 5 x 1012 kilograms per year.[3] Other natural sources of CO include volcanoes, forest fires, and other forms of combustion.

If i understand well, carbon monoxide is only half evil. Light sometimes reacts with air and it's created. It can be produced naturally and is supposed to have some natural functions that don't cause the choking of all living creatures, so that's good. Human production of CO is where the problem is, bringing this toxic gas into our homes and cities.

Carbon monoxide is produced from the partial oxidation of carbon-containing compounds; it forms when there is not enough oxygen to produce carbon dioxide (CO2), such as when operating a stove or an internal combustion engine in an enclosed space. In the presence of oxygen, carbon monoxide burns with a blue flame, producing carbon dioxide. Some processes in modern technology, such as iron smelting, still produce carbon monoxide as a byproduct.

Without enough oxygen, when you half burn carbon-based stuff like wood/coal for example it produces CO instead of CO2. Used to happen a lot in the past everywhere, and now mostly in iron smelting.

Sources of carbon monoxide include cigarette smoke, house fires, faulty furnaces, heaters, wood-burning stoves, internal combustion vehicle exhaust, electrical generators. [...] Exposure typically occurs when equipment is used in buildings or semi-enclosed spaces.

Modern automobiles, even with electronically-controlled combustion and catalytic converters, can still produce levels of carbon monoxide which will kill if enclosed within a garage or if the tailpipe is obstructed (for example, by snow) and exhaust gas cannot escape normally.

It combines with hemoglobin to produce carboxyhemoglobin, which is ineffective for delivering oxygen to bodily tissues.

Concentrations as low as 667 ppm may cause up to 50% of the body's hemoglobin to convert to carboxyhemoglobin.[21] A level of 50% carboxyhemoglobin may result in seizure, coma, and fatality. [...] Within short time scales, carbon monoxide absorption is cumulative, since the half-life is about 5 h in fresh air.

It associates with your blood to make you body unable to process oxigen, which is why you die. This only occurs when exposed to the gas at the moment of its creation as it survives only 5h. By the way that 667ppm number is the limit of when you just start dying on the spot, but lower exposures (100ppm for example) cause all kind of bad symptoms : prolonged exposure or increasing amount of gas will eventually lead to death.

symptoms such as headache, nausea, vomiting, dizziness, fatigue, and a feeling of weakness. [...] Neurological signs include confusion, disorientation, visual disturbance, syncope and seizures.[23]

That's all alarming enough (especially learning about all the way this gas has been used to murder people and other sordid affairs...) but it isn't that relevant to pollution, isn't it? What about carbon monoxide in the atmosphere?

Carbon monoxide is present in small amounts in the atmosphere, chiefly as a product of volcanic activity but also from natural and man-made fires (such as forest and bushfires, burning of crop residues, and sugarcane fire-cleaning). The burning of fossil fuels also contributes to carbon monoxide production. [...] Because natural sources of carbon monoxide are so variable from year to year, it is extremely difficult to accurately measure natural emissions of the gas.

Okay so CO is indeed up there and the effect seems to be that by destroying other atmospheric elements CO raises the levels of other harmful stuff such as methane (a greenhouse gas) and tropospheric ozone (it creates smog and kills crops).

To top the whole thing, I was happy to read that it didn't last long in the atmosphere but nooo it becomes CO2 afterwards. You just can't win with these pollutants.

Okay so appart from all the murdering, from a pollution point of view CO isn't that bad in itself, but is rather an aid to other pollutants : it helps progation of methane and the creation of ground-level ozone before eventually turning into CO2. So it's not harmful directly to our urban environments, but contributes to other harmful pollutants.

here more in depth research is needed into : how much exactly do cigarettes emit? if you smoke too much in a small room you get CO poisoning? if i was a super serious researcher i would look into this CO in the atmosphere deal and understand exactly how much is made naturally by photochemical reactions and how much is CO coming from human sources. Also, how big is the CO's impact in the atmosphere : is there a tiny bit more methane and tropospheric ozone or like, loads more?

#air pollution #carbon monoxide #poisonning #wikipedia mon amour

Ogilvy on advertising

Okay so I've doomed myself in the LCC library by taking out a mountain of advertising, branding and packaging books. But they all seem so relevant/interesting!

Anyway here's what I retained from my first read "Ogilvy on Advertising", because Chris told me that I should focus on the advertising side of things rather than the branding one (which I'm kinda bummed about, I got excited about this branding stuff!).

Also keep in mind I had no idea who that Ogilvy guy was and from when he was from so as the book went on I became more and more aware of how ANCIENT this advice is. Like on the first page I was like... well this ad looks peculiar... and then what do you mean logos are bollocks... maybe women shouldn't rise in advertising cause it makes men uncomfortable to work under them??... OK I now get it this writer is from the distant past.

(ps: he then went on to say that it's okay for women to become ad magnates... only because apparently it doesn't bother the guys working under them anymore, so it's okay. I'm glad a woman's career is based on a man's comfort, but whatever he's being progressive... in his own backwards way.)

But no matter how old this advice may be, thus rendering some of it (really) outdated, I do believe that some of what he is saying is timeless since a lot of it is how to ease reading ; indeed white on black will always be difficult.

Do your homework : research the product, research similar ads and their success rates, research consumers and their interaction with you product.

Have a solid positioning : what the product does and who is it for?

Keep the brand image consistant across time and different media

"Positively good" : don't try to sell "the best", sell something that is honestly good

News in the headlines attract the eye : traditional words are "amazing" "introducing" "now" "suddenly" ; always include the name in the headline

Ads with useful information ex. "how to take out stains with [your product]"

no crowd scenes in the illustration

the order of the eye : 1) illustration 2) headline 3) copy

apparently drop initials increase readership

the copy should be set in serif

3 columns of text in the copy ; 35 to 45 words wide

only use spreads if your product is long and you need to show it horizontally

no full stops at the end of headline

typefaces that the public finds easy to read : century, caslon, baskerville, jenson

11pt size, use line spacing between paragraph

do not use all caps

Special advice on posters :

your poster should deliver your selling promise : in words and pictorially

large type

strong, "pure" colours

no more than 3 elements

Kinds of adverts which are "above average" :

funny adverts do sell, but few can pull them off correctly

use memorable characters (physically memorable counts)

demonstrate how well your product works in an immaginative way

problem solution : show a problem that the user is familiar with and then show how your product can solve it (obvs in a non-cheesy way, ex: the knorr gravy pot advert)

give a clear and direct reason why your product should be bought (ie. blabla is good BECAUSE THIS)

emotional adverts are strong, specially if your product doesn't have much of a rational appeal (like candy bars etc.) but "don't attempt emotion unless you can deliver it"

(below average is celebrity endorsement which apparently doesn't work at all... but what about Nespresso?)

here are some of his tv advertising "tips":

don't mention your competitors by name as this distracts the audience's attention from your brand

use your brand name in the first 10 seconds

play games with the name of the brand so that people remember it

show the package (at the end for example)

close ups on your product

visual surprise in the first frame

sound effects (ie sausages sizzling) are effective

actors talking on camera is more effective than voice-over

write your promise in type on camera as the soundtrack speaks the word

"avoid visual banality" show the viewer something that they've never seen before

Obviously all his advice is to take with a grain of salt, depending on situations and I'm also super aware that trying to respect all this advice in one ad would create Frankstein's monster.

You have to value simplicity above all else.

#advertising #ogilvy #creative advice

Catalytic clothing : potential selling information

Half-way through reading Ogilvy's book on advertising, I'm thinking that I want my advert to go back to the basics as to appeal correctly to the strugglers VALs type.

With a illustration + headline + body composition, I can have a first piece for my advertising campaign in a practical way, probably as an advertisement in a free newspaper.

here i have to : collect free newspaper, read and scan several of their adverts for comparison

here is some brainstorming about what selling points I can use for catalytic clothing, maybe find some catchy sentences for the body.

interesting facts about CatClo and how I could sell them :

Catalytic Clothing harnesses the power of a photocatalyst to break down air borne pollutants. A catalyst is a term used to describe something that makes a reaction proceed at a greater rate but isn’t actually consumed during that reaction. A photocatalyst gains the energy it needs to be active from light.

CatClo uses light to activate its nanotechnology and break down the pollutants in the air around it.

5. How are the pollutants broken down? When the light shines on the photocatalyst, the electrons in the material are rearranged and they become more reactive. These electrons are then able to react with the water in the air and break it apart into 2 radicals. A radical is an extremely reactive molecule. These radicals then react with the pollutants and cause them to break down into non-harmful chemicals.

Light activates CatClo's electrons and they attack the pollutants in the air around you.

6. What happens to the pollutants after they’ve been broken down? The Catalytic Clothing technology is designed to breakdown the pollutants straight away. However, some pollutants may become attached without being broken down. In this case, the pollutants will be washed off during subsequent laundering. This actually already happens with normal clothing.

CatClo breaks down the pollutants straight away : turned inoffensive, they'll be washed off in your next laundering! This actually already happens with normal clothing, except the pollutants are still active.

8. How is the technology delivered to the surface of the clothing? The photocatalyst is delivered to the surface of the clothing during the traditional laundry procedure as an additive within a standard product such as a fabric conditioner. The active agent is packaged within a shell that is attracted towards, and subsequently binds to, the surface of the clothing during the washing cycle.

You add CatClo technology to your clothing by adding it to your normal laundry routine! No different than any washing powder... but it adds months in your life... and your family's life too! Do your bit by choosing CatClo fabric sweetener!

9. Why do we need mass participation to produce a noticeable reduction in the level of pollution?

Although any garment that is treated with the product becomes active, a single garment is only able to remove a small proportion of the air borne pollutants. Therefore, a large number of individuals, all acting together, is required to produce a noticeable reduction in the level of pollution.

One piece of Catalytic Clothing removes a small amount of air pollution, but if a large number of people use it, it makes a noticeable difference in such a key issue : change your world for the better.

12. How would society benefit if Catalytic Clothing was widely introduced? Exposure to air borne pollutants presents a risk to human health and also has a detrimental effect on ecosystems and vegetation. Air pollution is currently estimated to reduce the life expectancy of every person in the UK by an average of 7-8 months. The widespread introduction of Catalytic Clothing would dramatically reduce the level of air borne pollutants, thereby improving the quality of life for all members of society.

Air pollution destroys essential animal and plant life ; thanks to acid rain, say good bye to any sea food and hello to your new frog based diet! But pollutant also reduces the life expectancy of every person in the UK by an average of 7-8 months : even if you love the taste of frogs, CatClo is still the best option!

14. What will be the cost of using this domestically? It is hard to say at this stage and will depend on whether it ends up as an additive, or a product in its own right. As mass use will have the most impact on air quality, clearly the cost has to be as competitive as possible.

CatClo's ultimate goal is to reduce harmful air pollution from our homes, our cities and the lungs of our loved ones. Making money, when facing such a crucial issue, is not what matters! Buy CatClo at the competitive price of ////!

22. What pollutants can the chemical absorb? Nothing is absorbed but the photocatalyst causes oxidation of substances adsorbed on the surface. Nitrous oxide is converted to soluble nitrate and volatile organics are converted into fatty acids and soaps.

CatClo cracks down on notorious bad guy Nitrous Oxide, responsible for acid rain, asthma, lung cancer and greenhouse gases! You can't save the world in a fortnight, but make a difference every day with Cataclytic Clothing!

AND t's nanotechnology, which is cool as hell! We live the future maaaan!

So, organising all these points in a semblance of rational explanation, I end up with the following :

Air pollution destroys essential animal and plant life ; thanks to acid rain, say good bye to any sea food and hello to your new frog based diet! But pollutants also reduces the life expectancy of every person in the UK by an average of 7-8 months : save yourself, your neighbour and the fish industry : get CatClo!

CatClo cleans up your air by cracking down on notorious bad guy Nitrous Oxide, responsible for acid rain, asthma, lung cancer and greenhouse gases!

You add CatClo technology to your clothing by including it in your normal laundry routine! No different than any washing powder... but it adds months in your life... and your family's life too!

Light activates CatClo's electrons and they attack the pollutants in the air around you. CatClo breaks down the pollutants straight away : turned inoffensive, they'll be washed off in your next laundering! This actually already happens with normal clothing, but the pollutants are still active. Do your bit by choosing CatClo fabric sweetener!

You can't save the world in a fortnight, but make a difference every day with Cataclytic Clothing!

Okay so I have a paragraph of selling arguments to tweak and structure until perfection, now I have to select the headline and which "news" is going to be in the spotlight, maybe try to find "useful information" to include in it as well.

I decided to drop the nanotech route, because even if I find it super cool people might be technophobic and also have seen the four hundred sic-fi films where nanotechnology murders everyone like an agressive virus.

After figuring out the headline and the body of text, I have to find THE photo (or at least what I want the photo to look like). That photo should visually communicate the benefits of CatClo and illustrate the article+play off the headline.

Oh man these ads look ridiculously simple but are actually extremely difficult to pull off. It's the brevity that makes it so difficult :(

Maybe I should do a series of three? Like one about acid rain, one about catclo and another one about the malignant effects of air pollution on human health?

Also I should get some more exact facts and satistics in there? the 7-8 month life reduction thing is pretty strong, i'm definitely including it so maybe something else in the same style?

I find it very delicate to not fall into doom and gloom end-of-the-world tone. I doubt that an advert that's basically "you're all gonna die! :D soon!" would be effective : it's depressing (and that doesn't make you want to spend money, you sell hope not despair even in cause campaigns : "ok our issue is bad, but here's what you can do about it!") and also I think today public would just be like "yeah right" and skip it.

Every second thursday is the apocalypse nowadays, no one is alarmed anymore.

#catalytic clothing #body of text

Examples of advertising against air pollution

More Camden residents are inquiring about air quality following the installation of London’s first real time air pollution sign, according to Camden council. This works on the constant reminder of the danger and risks to the public.

These are images of a guerilla marketing component from a campaign designed to gain public support in an effort to reduce the pollution released by particular powerplants in Chicago. The shape and text was created by power-washing filthy sidewalks using a large stencil form.This works by providing the proof that the problem is real (by showing a clean/dirty comparison) but also by calling the audience out on their inactivity.

The print ad titled CHOKE was done by BBDO Guerrero Ortega advertising agency for the Air Pollution Watch (brand: Abs Cbn Bantay Usok Foundation) in the Philippines. Second link.This works by... i don't know i think it's pretty bad to go after the poor buses that reduce air pollution (lost of people in one vehicle instead of lots of different vehicles each polluting as much as the other). But the thing where they show an instantly recognisable part of the object they want to talk about is a good idea?

Recycled Paper Ad Again this might be dumb but it's a good idea to present it like that, it's really relatable, specially to strugglers who can't donate to causes. "oh you can't do this for the environment? well you can do at least that!" and then present your product as an easy way of helping.

Renault Venezuela is promoting the Renault GNV (natural gas for vehicles) systemthe appeal is : do it for the kiiiids. pretty universal.

Anti-Coal Plant Ads Take Over D.C. Metro StationAgain with the kids, this seems to be an easy/popular way of trying to get audiences to react.

Atmospheric Pollution Ads from Singapore Make people laugh to capture their attention?

Jeseok Yi a.k.a. Jeski does clever ad campaigns, here's the one about air pollution : This works because it's a sensational VISUAL reminder that it's a real danger, people will remember it as just more than a number because of the visual trick.

A BILLBOARD THAT ABSORBS AIR POLLUTION by Coca-Cola and WWFThat's kinda genius, I have to research into this to see if it actually work but still! Of course only Coca-Cola is such a huge brand that they can do that kind of stunt but maybe other big brands could be convinced into similar gimmicks? after all they're only good rep.

"TAXI" Print Ad for Air Pollution Awareness by Saatchi & SaatchiHere the message is 100% visual, it's so literal that no audience could ignore it. Also it's in an unusual place so people are like "wait what's that on the exhaust pipe?" and look.

#air pollution #awereness #advertising

Trending Blogs

Recently Viewed Blogs

Research everywhere like air pollution