#braungart

[hello-infoforall-me-blog]

Nie mehr Müll - Leben ohne Abfall

[futurphil]

Vom Müll-Schwindel und Glaubwürdigkeit

Wenn die Deutschen gefragt werden, was sie für den Umweltschutz machen, dann kommt meist zuerst Mülltrennen. Aber die Stimmen ebben nicht ab, die lauthals behaupten, dass der Abfall ja sowieso irgendwann zusammkommt und dann auch noch einfach verbrannt wird. Deswegen nehme ich gerne das Angebot an, wenn ein WDR-Beitrag etwas Licht ins Dunkle bringen will.

Ich schlucke diesen rechthaberisch-betroffenen Unterton herunter, welcher mir bei "Könnes kämpft - Der große Müll-Schwindel" entgegenschwallt. Da fehlt mir persönlich die Seriösität, aber vielleicht werden erst dadurch Zielgruppen erreicht, denen das andere zu langweilig und nüchtern wäre. So merke ich das Verlangen der Sendemacher, in die Stammtische der Republik einzudringen und mit ihrem Thema für Zündstoff zu sorgen. Ähnlich geht es mir da auch immer bei Christoph Lütgert und seinen Nachforschungen, aber das ist eine andere Baustelle. Tatsächlich erfährt man einige interessante Dinge, wo es hängt und was die Alternative wäre. Nur eine Szene macht mich stutzig: Im Beitrag interviewt Schwiegermutter-Held Könnes den Umweltforscher Michael Braungart, als "ausgewiesener Experte für wiederverwertete Kunststoffe".

[quartix]

We need a new industrial revolution. One that doesn't exploit our earth like the first.

http://www.mcdonough.com/cradle_to_cradle.htm

[witterungen-blog]

„Die Menschen fühlen sich einfach schuldig, auf der Erde zu sein. Das hat ziemliche Auswirkungen, weil wir dann versuchen, weniger zu schaden. In Deutschland versteht man unter Umweltschutz, weniger zu zerstören. Das ist aber kein Schutz. “, sagt der Hamburger Forscher Prof. Dr. Michael Braungart. „Nachhaltigkeit“, meint der Erfinder des Cradle to Cradle-Ansatzes, „ist das traurige Minimum.“

[futurphil]

Cradle-to-Cradle Verein

Heute habe ich an der Uni mitbekommen, dass sich ein Cradle-to-Cradle Verein gegründet hat. Ziel ist es, die Idee weiter zu verbreiten und "zum Mitmachen anzustiften". Dabei wird auf (Weiter-) Bildung gesetzt, auch Fördermitglieder und Spenden werden über den Verein gesucht. Es soll wohl auch ein bundesweites Netzwerk entstehen. Vielleicht hat der mir am Infostand geschenkte zu 98% nach C2C-Kriterien produzierte Stabilostift einen wesentlichen Anteil an der nun folgenden Weitergabe zum Link der Homepage c2c-verein.de . Aber als Leser des Buches "Einfach intelligent produzieren" muss ich zugeben, dass auch ich die Idee spannend finde, nicht zuletzt wegen der spannenden Gründungsgeschichte des Miterfinders Michael Braungart (ehemaliger Greenpeacer). Interessante Randnotiz: Als vertretungsberechtigter Vorstand wird Monika Griefahn genannt, niemand geringeres als dessen Frau!

[nrcars]

What is 'Cradle to Cradle' Design?

Adapted from a research paper I wrote in 2010... You may have heard of Cradle to Cradle design, but what is it? I'm going to break it down for you... What's all this talk of Materials, Systems and Metabolism? The Intelligent Product System (IPS) was initially developed by William McDonough and partner Michael Braungart and the EPEA. It places materials used in human industrial and commercial processes in two distinct “cycles” and one category of unusable materials: Biological Metabolism Materials in this cycle are referred to as ‘biological nutrients’ and must be biodegradable and pose no long or short term hazards or impacts on any species of life. These materials can be used for industrial manufacturing and commercial processes and then be returned to the natural ecological processes to become nutrients for other species of life. Biological nutrients are used in “products of consumption”, disposables, consumables, etc. Some of these materials could also be input back into manufacturing and industrial processes. Technical Metabolism Materials in this cycle are referred to as ‘technical nutrients’ and consist of synthetic materials. These materials are used in products of service, durable goods, etc. They must remain in a closed loop where they are used in manufacture, are recovered at the end of the product’s life and reused input back into the manufacturing cycle. As presented in IPS, materials/products in the technical nutrient cycle are intended to be owned by the manufacturer so they can be recovered at the end of it’s use. Materials in both the technical and biological cycles are included on a P-List (Preferred list). Unmarketables These materials or products consist of hazardous waste, carcinogens, heavy metals, etc, that are harmful to humans or other species of life or ecological processes. These materials are included on an X-list, ideally being phased out, banned, etc. Existing materials in this list/category are intended to be stored. The question of what to do with them is an interesting one which we will have to face and deal with, especially future generations. What about the terms downcycle, recycle and upcycle? As referred to in Cradle to Cradle principals, “downcycling” (also known conventionally as recycling) is where materials are reused in lesser manufacturing for example: plastic computer housing is melted down to become a plastic cup which then becomes a plastic bag which then becomes a plastic park bench until ultimately the synthetic material can’t be used anymore, hence “downcycling”. “Recycling” is seen as strict reuse of materials, inputting materials (technical nutrients) back into manufacturing cycles to be reused, not downgraded to lesser materials/forms. “Upcycling” was a term first coined prior to Cradle to Cradle in 1994. It is a response to materials losing value as they are reused and seeks to increase the value of materials through their reuse. Two excellent examples include creating wallets and similar goods from old car tires, and melting down plastic bags to create more durable plastic bags, hence “upcycling”. McDonough's tree example... “If we think about a tree as a design, it’s something that makes oxygen, sequesters carbon, fixes nitrogen, distills water, provides a habitat for hundreds of species, accrues solar energy, makes complex sugars and food, creates micro-climates and self replicates. Yeah, let’s knock that down and write on it! So, what would it be like to design a building like a tree? …a city like a forest? What would a building be like if it were photosynthetic? What if it took solar energy and converted it to productive and delightful use?” McDonough is using a tree as an example of the result of millions of years worth of evolution to result in a design that is in perhaps sustainable, or at the very least, a functional part of the environment for millions of years. He draws the obvious comparisons between trees and buildings and questions what the result might be if we learnt from our observations of the design of a tree and applied it to how we design buildings and other products, goods and services? We could treat our own waste water, collect our own energy from the sun and wind, use the atmosphere, convection, ventilation to heat and cool our internal air spaces, we could grow much of our own food on site and our waste could be food for other organisms, the list goes on. "How do we design a product that loves all children, of all species, for all time?” McDonough is using this quote as a sort of design brief in a literal sense, asking; “How?” How do we design products, buildings, goods, provide basic public services, that don’t merely avoid impacting negatively on present and future generations, but which work symbiotically with all life forms on Earth? He adds finally; “for all time” indicating an open-ended brief that is perhaps endless in a sense, sustainable. Cradle to Cradle in practice... A disposable cup as manufactured today is perhaps the best example of a cradle-to-grave approach to design, manufactured to be disposed, usually made from durable plastics which may or may not be recyclable and are definitely not biodegradable in a natural sense. There are also questions over whether or not these materials leak into the liquid being held by the cup. To redesign with cradle to cradle/biomimicry principals in mind, it would have to be durable enough in the short term to contain water, yet made from biological materials that could biodegrade if the cup was thrown “away”. I did some research and found that there are actually a number of small companies that manufacture biodegradable disposable utensils, plates, bowls, etc. These are usually manufactured from some sort of biological material that is compostable, usually sources from bagasse fibers from sugarcane. For every 10 tonnes of sugarcane crushed, 3 tonnes of wet bagasse is produced. It is also used as a biofuel. There are certifications available for biodegradable/compostable materials such as BPI, ISO’s 14001 and 9001 and ASTM D6868 amongst other regional-specific certifications. Interestingly, bagasse fibers are able to carry hot and cold foods/liquids and it’s microwave and freezer safe. However, sourcing the materials from sugarcane, a natural crop has similar implications as biofuels in terms of land area, water use, etc. It also poses the question, wouldn’t a durable, long-term item be “more sustainable” than even the most sustainable disposable items? There are also questionable issues surrounding workplace conditions in bagasse plants, mainly a result of the manufacturing process.

[verpackung]

The packaging company said it had gained the Cradle to Cradle certification for its baby food and paint can products.

Schauen Sie sich den Vortrag des "Cradle to Cradle-Erfinders" Prof. Michale Braungart an. Aufgenommen im März 2011 auf dem Deutschen Verpackungskongress in Berlin: Cradle to Cradle Prinzip – der ewige Kreislauf

[verpackung]