Page 3 of 3

Re: "Green design is just a fashion"

PostPosted: April 11th, 2017, 7:30 am
by Mr-914
I think there are headwinds and tailwinds. People like Trump are certainly headwinds, however he is not omnipotent.

Some tailwinds:
1. The Paris Accords continue. At least from what I've read, most other signatories have decided to continue on their plans to cut emissions with or without the US.
2. It takes a long time for many of these regulations to take effect. Therefore, business has been planning to follow the previous regulations for years now. It's too late for them to change course now. Moreover, with the uncertainty of a 2020 election result, it's likely that companies will continue to plan for a return to the Obama regulations in the near future.
3. Carbon taxes are being adopted and more widely supported. For example, my home province has had one for a decade now. These taxes are having an effect on behaviour and will continue to shape market outcomes for years to come.

I'll try to think of some more over coffee later.

Re: "Green design is just a fashion"

PostPosted: April 11th, 2017, 7:39 am
by iab
Mr-914 wrote:
I'll try to think of some more over coffee later.

Nespresso or Quebecian blend?


Re: "Green design is just a fashion"

PostPosted: April 11th, 2017, 11:10 am
by Mr-914
Tim Hortons...mmmm

Re: "Green design is just a fashion"

PostPosted: April 13th, 2017, 10:04 am
iab wrote:
IDAL wrote:
CO2 is just one of them, you have a bunch of other gases responsible for climate change like Methane that are way worse than CO2.

I understand. And as a matter of fact, not only does the biodegrading process create CO2, it creates methane too. Composting biodegradable materials hastens release to the atmosphere. Sequestering plastic in a landfill solves both problems.

IDAL wrote:
However, plastic are affecting wildlife and, indirectly, also affecting climate.

While I agree, what I don't know what is worse, having a low percentage of plastic waste directly in the environment, or biodegradables contributing to greenhouse gas build up.

The low percentage of plastic is actually millions of tons that affect life in the ocean which is actually capable of transforming CO2. I agree is very complicated to say which one is worse without any data or research. Both are pretty bad anyway, discussion should be how to limit both.

I believe we are going too far and that soon we'll reach a point of no-return. It's pretty sad, we could actually change things but only if there was political will and somehow people started listening to what scientists are saying.

Re: "Green design is just a fashion"

PostPosted: June 12th, 2017, 2:12 am
by ralphzoontjens
I am mostly thinking in terms of wildlife. While developing better gill nets is also top priority, plastic is having an enormous impact.
It's a good thing this ends up in a central location in the pacific so we can clean it up, and some animals are evolving towards eating plastic, and recycling processes get more sophisticated. But it's still going much too fast. Bioplastics are great because they are absorbed back into the soil again, and can be digested. There are also other alternatives that are currently expensive, but if we invest in it can be automated increasingly further. Think for example hot pressed bamboo for enclosure shells instead of plastic - it needs no synthetic materials as it can be self-bonding when pre-processed well because of the lignin content.