'Greener Gadgets' Isn't an Oxymoron

Allan Chochinov of design network Core 77 explains why designers need to step up to embrace sustainability

SPECIAL REPORT

Green Design

• America's Green Policy Vacuum
• Using Nature as a Design Guide
• Rise of the Carbon-Neutral City
• Cities: A Smart Alternative to Cars
• 'Greener Gadgets' Isn't an Oxymoron
• Green IT: Corporate Strategies
• Nice Guys Don't Finish Last

EnerJar, by Matt Meshulam and Zach Dwiel, was the winner of the popular vote at the recent Greener Gadgets contest. It allows consumers to monitor power usage of any given device with a kit they build themselves. © Core 77

Theo Richardson proposed Green Cell, a universal format for rechargeable power supplies. © Core 77

Story Tools

• post a comment
• e-mail this story
• print this story
• order a reprint
• digg this
• save to del.icio.us

• View Slide Show

The very idea of "green" technology is somewhat problematic. How can a product that's chock-full of electronics, wiring, complex components ever truly be environmentally friendly? What precisely constitutes "green," anyway? And what can or should designers do to act as standard-bearers, facilitators, or innovators in this confusing world?

These were some of the questions addressed at the recent Greener Gadgets conference, organized by green blog Inhabitat.com and consultancy Marc Alt + Partners. The day-long affair brought together companies and individuals to discuss the challenges of looking at the tech industry through a greener lens. Representatives from companies including Hewlett-Packard (HPQ), Intel (INTC), Sony (SNE), and Nokia (NOK) were on hand to talk up their respective environmental programs. And it quickly became clear that there's a real lack of consensus or methodological approach to corporate sustainability, not to mention a gulf between corporate and consumer-focused green activities.

Programs to address this are under way. The Green Electronics Council recently introduced the Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool (EPEAT) to allow companies to gauge the sustainability of their products. But it's an optional scheme, and persuading companies to adopt the system or promote it to consumers is a hard slog. Likewise, the Designers Accord (BusinessWeek.com, 1/18/08) aims to provide focus for designers and their clients, ensuring that sustainability is an accepted, mandatory feature of every design program. But it's still early days.

As a part of the Greener Gadgets conference, the organizers and design network Core 77 held a competition with a simple challenge: to design a greener gadget. The entrants were many and varied—some entirely unlikely, others with promising real-world application. Innovation & Design editor Helen Walters chatted with Core 77 co-founder Allan Chochinov about the competition and its wider resonance for the business and design communities.

What are the challenges of designing a greener gadget?

I believe that there are challenges right from the get-go. In today's culture, the notion of planned obsolescence seems to be part of the definition of the word "gadget." So the first hurdle is uncoupling the more redeeming characteristics of the notion of "gadget"—utility, pleasure, portability, for example—from the assumption of a short, disposable life span. Rather than retiring the word, I think we need to work towards redefining it.

When is a gadget really green?

At a minimum, a greener gadget needs to give no less than it takes. Again, the perception of a lot of gadgets is that they are wasteful, indulgent products—playthings for people with too much time and money on their hands. But a greener gadget can be something that feeds you and provides value. Devices that depend on renewable energy sources (solar, kinetic, wind, for example) get you halfway there.

The other half is embodied in how the materials are sourced, manufactured, shipped, and ultimately disposed of.