The Far Side of Tech » Green

Cheap Dye-Sensitized Solar Cells Coming to a Backpack Near You

Devindra — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 07:39:33 +0000

Among the many emerging solar technologies out there, dye-sensitized solar cells are perhaps the most interesting due to their incredibly low cost, coupled with their fairly high ~11% efficiency (at least among thin-film panels). According to Technology Review, backpacks coated with the cells for portable gadget recharging were recently unveiled at the Hong Kong Electronics Fair. The cells are based on the tech invented by a chemistry professor, Michael Grätzel, who mentions that they work well at wide light angles, are less susceptible to degradation in sunlight, and also work efficiently with indoor lighting.

As someone who’s always fretting about the battery life of their portable devices, I could definitely see the value in having recharging capabilities right out of my backpack–assuming it doesn’t cost a fortune. There’s little word on pricing for these backpacks, but as the first of their kind to market I don’t suspect they’ll be on the affordable end of the spectrum.

Cheap Dye-Sensitized Solar Cells Coming to a Backpack Near You

Why I Believe Technology Will Save the Environment and Environmentalism

Devindra — Tue, 16 Oct 2007 03:21:28 +0000

For this Blog Action Day I wanted to discuss an issue that I’ve been pondering for the past few years. Growing up I’ve always had a fascination and concern for the environment. Yet I realized early on that despite my adoration for nature, I never really agreed with the philosophies and tactics of so-called environmentalist activists. I particularly hated the luddism, or anti-technology tendencies, inherent in many of their beliefs. Perhaps it was just the budding technologist in me, but I’ve always held the notion that we should be looking towards technology to help us save the environment instead of rejecting it.

To be clear: I hate to generalize and I’m sure there were some environmentalists while I was growing up that weren’t complete luddites, but the overarching opinion among the environmentalist crowd that I gathered was certainly anti-technology. It’s the sort of thinking that led Greenpeace to fight against the proliferation of nuclear power, even though the only viable alternative power back then (and remaining until today) was coal power–a far dirtier and less controllable option.

Patrick Moore, a controversial ex-founder of Greenpeace, has long touted the fact that nuclear energy is our only realistic primary power source until green technologies become more viable. His entire argument is laid out clearly in a 2006 Washington Post article, “Going Nuclear.” Even though he has seen his share of controversy, and his views on global warming have been undeniable laissez-faire, I find it hard to ignore the strong case he makes for nuclear power.

Imagine what a difference a pro-nuclear power mindset would have made for our country. While it certainly has its share of risks, there is also the guaranteed reduction in CO2 emissions and all of it’s effects on nearby populations. While nuclear waste is tremendously dangerous as well, at least we have a fair amount of control in handling it.

Back to the main point: I’m less ashamed to consider myself an environmentalist now that they view technology with less fear. Pro-technology environmentalism is a relatively new thing, but I attribute the rise of the Internet and the apparent exponential growth of technological progress as reasons why this new trend has sprung up. This new generation of environmentalist is aware of the benefits of conservation, but also equally aware that new technologies can help increase conservation efficiency.

They’ve made the Prius trendy, shop locally at organic-friendly stores like Trader Joe’s or Whole Foods, and have made environmentalism a somewhat chic lifestyle choice instead of an activist position.

With less technological fear, we’re seeing more ingenious inventions like the Windbelt, a tiny wind power generator that promises efficiency gains in the 10-40% range compared to competing microturbines. There’s a great video demonstration on the site that doesn’t embed well on this blog, so be sure to check it out!

This thesis is unfortunately too vast to cover in a single blog post, but consider this the basis for all of my environmental posts (in the Green category) on this site. There isn’t much content in that category yet, but with the unstoppable force of green technologies gaining steam I suspect it will fill out quickly.

Why I Believe Technology Will Save the Environment and Environmentalism

An Example of Apple Going Green?

Devindra — Sun, 06 May 2007 14:57:34 +0000

Earlier this month Steve Jobs posted a response, entitled “A Greener Apple”, to the various allegations against Apple’s eco-friendliness by Greenpeace. In the article, Jobs lays out a more transparent view of Apple’s current and future plans towards being green by noting their efforts to remove toxic chemicals and recycling of older products. He also spends an inordinate amount of time saying that their processes will only get better in the future. (Somehow, I think this is obvious, but no matter.)

It’s certainly nice to see Jobs finally responding to Greenpeace. The group has been dogging Apple with environmental complaints since 2004, even going so far as to create a dedicated website to voice their complaints and allow consumers to join in. It did certainly seem ironic that Apple, a brand synonymous with everything hip and progressive, and a company that has held Al Gore in its board of directors since 2003, has taken so long to address the situation.

I was content with Jobs’ response until I had the pleasure of opening a few packages from the Apple Store at work this past week. The order was for a wireless keyboard and a 13″ sleeve for a Macbook, but you couldn’t guess that judging from the boxes that arrived. Not only were the boxes disproportionally large, but to make up for that they were also stuffed to the brim with filler paper. Needless to say, it was disheartening to see a supposedly “green” company rely on such innefficient packaging practices.

Here are some pictures of the items ordered next to their packaging. Overkill is the word to keep in mind here.

Thankfully, all of these packaging materials are recyclable. But while I give them kudos for that, it still seems incredibly wasteful. I’ve never seen packaging like this for any of my orders from Amazon or Newegg. Given my job in desktop support (not to mention my geeky proclivities), you should know I’ve seen many variations on the art of package shipping.

Now to give you an idea how much paper was stuffed in these two boxes, I present to you my recycle bin: It was only 1/4 full when I opened it, but after stuffing the paper in the bin was completely full! This isn’t a small bin either, I would wager that it’s slightly over 5′ tall.

I’m not entirely sure if this is a widespread problem, but I will definitely be keeping a closer eye on future Apple Store orders now. While their computers are shipped in very compact and form-fitting boxes, it just seems that the same doesn’t appear to hold true for peripherals.

Update 1: I would just like to clarify the general point I’m trying to make here, because it seems as if some folks are confused about it. I realize that proper packaging is incredibly important when shipping expensive products, but that really isn’t the point here. Apple could just as easily secure these items with more efficient packaging if the boxes were smaller. I stupidly forgot to take a picture of the items in the boxes on their own, but trust me when I say that the boxes were much bigger than they needed to be.

I think this picture best illustrates what I’m trying to say. The box on the right was for the wireless keyboard, and the other for the laptop sleeve. As you can plainly see, the height of these boxes are far beyond that of the items they’re holding. What I’m most annoyed about is the horrible inefficiency of these packages. All they really needed was smaller boxes!

An Example of Apple Going Green?