82
Fifty TJ Lefebvre
| Date post: | 21-Jul-2016 |
| Category: |
Documents |
| Upload: | tj-lefebvre |
| View: | 218 times |
| Download: | 3 times |
FiftyTJ Lefebvre
i
Fifty
TJ Lefebvres3281948
Lecturer: Liam Fennessy
RMIT University
ii
Contents
Preface iv
Reflection x
Introduction 2
Introduction 30
Smart Energy Groups 6
Introduction 32
CERES 9
Conclusion 38
Conclusion 12
Introduction 40
Approach 41
Human factors 45
Free range 22
Introduction vii
Research 1
Proposition 29
Current Context 3
Agenda 32
R2B2 7
Agenda 34
Sustainable Communities Initiative 10
Approach 40
Future Possibilities 17
Electrical engineering 48
Conclusion 24
60Conclusion
Introduction 17
Conclusion 49
Conclusion 58
68References
Moving forward, changing nothing 18
Artefact 52
53Human power outcomeSome future 20
Introduction 52
56System outcome
iii
iv
Preface
I grew up overseas living in five different countries, often situated in culturally-rich, dense urban environments. These environments introduced a love for city-centres and their operations. I settled in Melbourne in 2007, and discovered the discipline of design. Drawing on literature, the bespoke aesthetic and graphic design, I defined my design process and style. After an energy-based research project early in my design education, my interests culminated in the formation of this project.
v
“Lady, he comes, and we must rise.”
-A.S. Byatt
vi
vii
Introduction
In Australia, 96% of energy consumption is non-renewable, resources that we cannot replicate. Further more, the use of these resources for energy is releasing high amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere greatly contributing to climate change. For urban city-centres, the perceived options to reduce energy consumption are limited. There is a need to educate the public on what the future may look like with current rates of consumption and the opportunities that city-centres have to participate in different models of energy distribution.
viii
ix
x
Reflection
It is heady to assume responsibility for the eduction of a city, and even more-so on an oft-debated topic. I struggle with this constantly, but there is a large part of me that counters with, “how many other people think the same and give up?” I realise that want I want to do is join the conversation, and participate in the city’s future in the best way that I can.
Fifty is often dogged in the belief in a future where Government can instigate the roll-out of a decentralised system, but I have to believe that it can, and those who emotionally invest in this project need to as well. This future is far from unattainable, but it needs a stronger voice and a broader audience, that is my undertaking.
1
Research
2
Research
The idea of ‘sustainability’ is a constant dialogue that is discussed and uttered often as a rhetorical problem in Urban Melbourne. Census information on energy consumption and Government incentivised solutions have been brought to the fore and educational institutions dedicate streams to the cause. So why is it that our future is still unclear in the quest to attain a closed-loop system? What is it about our current economy and environmental status quo that remain to leave us so unsure and concerned? Through research, I aim to answer these questions and take us a little closer to these answers.
3
Research
Current Context
Australian households currently consume 26% of Australia’s energy per year1, 96% of which is non-renewable, comprising largely of black and brown coal2. Coal production is a pollution-ridden system of energy provision that is one of Australia’s major contributor to unsustainable growth and produces one-third of Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions. The prevalence of brown coal allows urban Melbourne homes to continue consuming without regard to environmental consequences. Government tariffs on brown coal electricity also play a role in the increase of electricity cost, but neglects to clearly demonstrate the relationship between electricity consumption and environmental devastation. Would this make a difference in consumption? I argue that it would, as shown in SEG meters, a Melbourne start-up that I will examine later in this section.
The current Australian Government Department of Sustainability, Environment and Water, Population and Communities acknowledges that ‘thousands of sustainability initiatives have emerged across the globe since the mid-1980s’, yet ‘despite this intense activity, many experts have pointed out that progress has been modest and there appears to be little evidence of positive achievement.’3
Australian energy consumption has risen this past year with the 11% of the Australian population who did not take steps to reduce their electricity usage citing belief that their consumption is already low enough as the highest reason for a lack of reduced energy usage, along with the perception that it will reduce comfort, be inconvenient, as well as confusion as to how to go about it.4
99.9% of Australian homes use electricity, with electricity use rising per person by 19% from 2001-02 to 2006-07. The main causes of this rise are, “larger home sizes, more appliances and IT equipment in homes and increased use of heaters and coolers.”5 Breaking down energy use in Australian homes, 41% is attributed to heating and cooling, while household appliances accounts for 30% and finally standby power accounts for 10% of Australia’s total household energy usage.6 These are the key factors to reducing household electricity consumption.
2 Tilbury, D., 2005. A National Review of Environmental Education and Its Contribution to Sustainability in Australia.
3 ABS, 2010. Energy in Focus: Energy Use in Australian Homes 2010. Australian Bureau of Statistics
4. Ibid5. ABS, 2010. Energy in Focus: Energy Efficiency of Australian Homes 2010. Australian Bureau of Statistics6. Ibid
1 Pink, B., 2010. Australia’s Environment Issues and Trends 2010. Australian Bureau of Statistics.
4
5
Research
6
Research
Smart Energy Groups
In the heart of Melbourne’s CBD is a start-up called Smart Energy Groups (SEG). SEG believe that the only way to change energy behaviour is through making the “invisible visible”. A “real-time internet based energy management app”, SEG allows users to see their energy usage visually. This clarity makes room for user behaviour change. SEG uses current sensors which detect the energy flowing through switchboards into differnet appliances. This data is sent to smartenergygroups.com every minute and the data cubes are turned into clear, real-time info-graphics that allow for behaviour change. This system also allows for remote access, allowing for the turning off and on of different appliances, specifically power points.
SEG is sustainable in its design, allowing for the disassembly and modification of each aspect as well as maintaining transparency in their business model, using open-source software.7
7 Smart Energy Groups | energy awareness for everybody. 2013. Showing home » Smart Energy Groups | energy awareness for everybody. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.smartenergygroups.com. [Accessed 19 Apr 2013].
7
Research
R2B2
Christoph Thetard designed R2B2 in 2010. It is a kitchen machine that does not require electricity while providing the same mechanical operation that popular kitchen appliances do. The pedal-powered fly wheel can provide up to 350w of energy which is what is commonly necessary in a kitchen environment. An exercise in aesthetics and function, this project demonstrates the magnitude of possible change in a household environment.
R2B2 allows for four people to use the island unit while providing a high amount of functionality through the multi-purpose tools including a coffee grinder, hand-held blender and a standard blender. It also has slow, fast and neutral gears to best accommodate each function.8
8 R2B2-engl. 2013. R2B2-engl. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.christoph-thetard.de/christoph-thetard.de/R2B2-engl.html. [Accessed 18 Apr 2013].
8
researchResearch
9
Research
10
CERES
Current Australian sustainable communities and initiatives are growing. One of Melbourne’s most well-known is the Centre for Education and Research in Environmental Strategies, commonly referred to as CERES. CERES is an award winning, not-for-profit, sustainability centre located on 4.5 hectares on the Merri Creek in East Brunswick, Melbourne. Employing renewable energy, CERES has cultivated a community that thrives on awareness and the practice of conservation. CERES provides the largest amount of environmental education in Australia. While not functioning on totally renewable energy, CERES is a model for a future with sustainability. But more than that, it is facilitating conversations around a sustainable future. As shown in their rigorous education agenda, CERES’ community demonstrates through its actions that it believes in increased public environmental dialogue to continue to improve and grow Australia’s awareness on environmental sustainability.9
9 CERES | About CERES. 2013. CERES | About CERES. [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.ceres.org.au/about/about.html. [Accessed 18 June 2013].
Research
11
Research
Sustainable Communities Initiative
The Sustainable Communities Initiative (SCI) is a cross-sector partnership helping Australian communities respond to sustainability challenges. “The SCI is a multi-partner program that brings together players from the private, public and community sectors to develop and deliver innovative solutions to local sustainability challenges. It generates important lessons and learnings on multi-partner sustainability projects that will inform the key research question of how can we better work together with communities initiating or responding to change.”10
The SCI acknowledges that environmental sustainability is a complex problem and believes that Australia is poorly equipped at responding effectively to it. The SCI argues that environmental sustainability should be looked at in new ways. These new ways include a collaborative and innovative approach primarily through cross-disciplinary collaboration, or co-design. As a result, the SCI set up seven functioning communities built on innovate and new sustainable models to garner insight for future implementation.
The SCI listed some insights from their operations on implementing sustainable models in 2008. These included local leadership and engagement, trust, understanding institutional barriers and individual priorities and encouraging diversity in ideas and managing expectations as a result.11
11 Rooney, S., Williams, R. & Grunbuhel, C., 2008. Working Together ~ Learning Together II. pp.1–63.
10 The Sustainable Communities Initiative | CSIRO . 2013. The Sustainable Commu-nities Initiative | CSIRO . [ONLINE] Available at: http://www.csiro.au/Outcomes/Environment/Biodiversity/Sustainable-Communities-Initiative.aspx. [Accessed 17 June 2013].
12
Research
13
Research
Conclusion
As raised in A National Review of Environmental Education and Its Contribution to Sustainability in Australia, there have been plenty of environmental sustainability projects since the 1980s, but too few of them are bringing about positive change. With Australia’s household energy consumption deriving primarily from non-renewable energy sources, there is a large amount of room for change in this area. Drivers for this change include education, leadership, innovation and assessing individual priorities. Through Thetard’s work, we see that the view of reducing energy consumption does not necessarily require a change in habits or lifestyle. However, this information is not being transferred to the Australian community who remain unwilling to actively reduce their energy consumption because of a belief that their comfort may be compromised. In SEG meters, there is proven evidence that visual representation of energy can bring about a reduction in the use of it. Finally, Australian households are consuming 26% of Australia’s gross energy output, where most of this energy is non-renewable and used on household appliances. These factors are all important considerations that I will take on to frame this project.
14
research
15
16
17
Future Possibilities
18
Future Possibilities
Given that visual transparency and clarity have proven useful in implementing behavioural change to reduce energy consumption, the following is a series of vignettes about the possible futures of urban Melbourne. Using back casting and inference, these stories tell us how an urban Melbourne 50-year future might look.
19
Future Possibilities
Moving forward, changing nothing
The year is 2063. On a foggy morning, Jack, a late twenties bank teller, gets up at five. He swats at his wind-up alarm clock, jumps into his cramped shower stall, and has a thirty second wash. The water is icy cold; he’s thoroughly alert ten seconds in, but he stays there for the full thirty. Almost mechanically, he dons his prized thermal ski-gear and heads to work.
The bank he works at, as most businesses have, long ago adopted insulated versions of existing uniforms. There isn’t any heating, so each person has to wrap themselves in a cocoon of warm clothes emblazoned with the company logo and colour scheme (in this case, a garish combination of red and white). Jack doesn’t mind, though; he’s paid more to compensate for the money saved on heating costs. Also, he consoles himself, today is pay day. And pay, typically, goes towards lights.
Flush with cash, he and a few select friends head to a bar that has heating, which pushes the price of drinks way up, but ensures everyone attending is wearing enough clothing to form the kind of personal connections you want when you’re drinking after work. Jack amuses himself, and others, by dourly smoking an unlit cigarette and making puppy-dog eyes at the one in fifty people there who are splashy enough to actually afford lighters.
Coffee is another luxury he spends some of his hard-earned money on, though typically of the iced variety; it’s a beverage he shares with his three bachelor roommates. Heating costs and electricity prices generally drive young professionals into living in shared living spaces. Jack spends his nights wrapped up under layers and layers of blankets, reminiscing about the rare occasions when his parents would turn the gas on and cook pasta.
That night, Jack dreams about a party he once attended; the CEO of the bank invited him and a handful of promising employees to a banquet. Food everywhere, and warm. It was so, so warm. But the piece de resistance? The entire hall was festooned with fully-lit chandeliers. It was so bright in there that he could make out everything in the room at a glance.
He woke up the next day, smiled, and bolted to the shower. Before the heat bled out of him.
20
Future Possibilities
21
Future Possibilities
Fifty years ago, The Sovereign State bought up all the coal, oil and gas. Most other countries were too poor, or too tired, to argue. Some of the smaller, richer ones threw in their lot, and some tried to resist, but for the most part, the takeover was amicable. It was less military, more corporate. Less battle fatigue, more sharp suits.
Then, as the years went on and our ability to cope without oil and coal dwindled, they offered us secondary citizen access to receive a token amount off energy to live. It was like watching drug addicts clamber for a fix; it was ugly, and there was no dignity in it. But perhaps that’s why the plan worked; people don’t like to talk about indignities. And before we knew it, we were living on drastically diminished reserves of power, jettisoning our appliances one by one.
Giant dumps had to be built on city perimeters to cater for the mass exodus of now redundant white goods. Well… they still worked, but they were luxury items that two thirds of the world now couldn’t afford to use. Not on their allowance. But things were tough elsewhere, too, which led to a kind of evolution. Small mechanical workshops opened up and allowed people to process food and charge batteries, as a workaround. If they’re not going to give us the power we need, we figured, why not make our own?
The secondary citizen police, however, didn’t like that. We were their subjects, and we paid for the little power they afforded us, and this was the equivalent of a landlord witnessing six people living in a one bedroom apartment, rent free.
They began to silently annex the workshops, and spirit away any dissenters. Soon, in response, mechanical power speak-easies opened up, but they were eventually quashed as well. The organisers were thrown in jail as radicals and anarchists.
So, we went deeper underground, and further off-the-grid. Out in the countryside, amongst landscapes now recovering after centuries of now waning industrialisation, small communes appeared. We all pitched in to dig, build, and ultimately cover the settlements from the Sovereign State’s satellite eyes. Soon we were underground, or hidden in long abandoned factories. Things got better, and we got smarter. We have a ration system that seems not much better than the secondary citizen scheme, but we were free to invent and build what we wanted. It’s ours. We’re not dependent on The State anymore.
These days, we’re pretty much in constant hiding, but we’re using animals to help us power our community. We have bicycle generators that we all have to take shifts on, and that powers our salvaged appliances; appliances long ago abandoned. The police sometimes catch on and move in, but we’re getting good at a nomadic, innovative lifestyle. So if you’re reading this, head out of the cities. Don’t look for the smoke, or the noise, head away from it. You’ll find us eventually. Good luck.
Some future
22
Future Possibilities
23
Future Possibilities
The roll-out began in 2020, and our taxes paid for it. WE paid for it. And before anyone had a chance to kick up a stink, the smart grid now was fully-functional. It became part of our lives quickly, and painlessly. And somehow, ten years in, looking back at the way power was distributed back in 2013 was like looking back at a bizarre, illogical dream.
A dream Mary woke from one morning, woken by the now familiar sound of her husband Jack, panting in the next room as he cycled for his breakfast. June, their daughter, was busy too; she was using the blender to make his favourite smoothie, as his legs pedalled insistently on flywheel that fed into their generator. Mary and June had struck up a crafty, father-daughter deal, of sorts. The deal was this: he would ride for the both of them if she made the smoothie. Mary had no issues with this; Jack needed the exercise. She’d never say that to his face, though.
Their house sat on the Moray smart grid that powered the North Eastern outskirts of Melbourne. The electrical cars belonging to residents of the area serve as back up generators that allow for the current to flow out for supply in peak periods.
Mary and her family live on a smart appliance roster that turns appliances off when they’re not being used, something that meshed well with her absent minded husband and daughter.
The lights in their house are halogen, with the lamps mechanically operated to provide light for 1 hour, you put the wind up cord if you need it for longer.
The house didn’t deserve all the credit, though; within it, each appliance had been converted to work on the smart grid, or function mechanically connected to their bike. Mary made a mental note to check the bicycle chain, and headed out to work - on a bike, untethered to her house. She called it her ‘free-range’ bike, a title nobody else in the family seemed to find as amusing as she did.
Mary works in agriculture for 6 hours a day, three days a week, while Jack takes care of their kids. They spend the rest of the time working with the community, something that has become the norm. You see, the cost of living has decreased as the cost of energy has lowered, as a result of the spread of human powered objects. Kinetic energy and engineering is taught in schools from an early age, and innovation workshops are held in communities to help keep developing new ways to power objects. People putting more energy back into the grid than ended is the norm and the excess energy helps community members who are disadvantaged get back on their feet by providing warmth and shelter. Everything has become a self-sustaining, low-impact cycle.
Self-sustaining, low-impact cycle, thinks Mary, as she pedals along the Yarra, now a thick, velvety shade of blue. That’s what Jack calls my bike.
The guy just doesn’t get comedy.
Free range
24
Future Possibilities
25
Future Possibilities
26
Future Possibilities
Conclusion
In all of these vignettes, we can see that human ingenuity remains, as it always will, but there are more positive ways to live in the future. Currently decentralised energy models are prevalent with smart meters being rolled out globally1. If education is the best way to garner understanding through kinetic energy and renewable energy sources as the Australian Government, SEG meters and CERES show, then educating the public on fixture scenarios is the best way to instigate change in behaviour and energy beliefs. I propose to demonstrate a positive and liveable future through sharing what a household living in a decentralised energy environment looks like. Not only will the scenario aid in the understanding of human-powered objects, but it will demonstrate the liveability and ultimate unchanging ways in which we live and adaptability to this kind of future.
1 McKinstry, G., Galloway, S. & Kockar, I., 2010. An initial assessment of the potential impact of smart metering on a decentralised energy network. pp.1–4.
27
28
29
Proposition
30
Proposition
Urban Melbourne consumption culture is not responding to the environmental crisis that is affecting the Australian energy economy. Without government regulation of consumption behaviour, urban domestic use of energy is inconsistent with the necessary changes that need to made. Only through earnest product design for a future horizon can the status quo be questioned and influence urban behaviour change. There is room to affect change through long term insights via scenarios. Key methods for this project include case studies, back casting, research and prototyping where the outcome results in a human-powered product designed for a 50-year future. The product will power the majority of appliances in an urban Melbourne household, thereby allowing people to live comfortably in an urban environment of decentralised energy. This product will act as a generator as well as a mechanical source for non-electric powered items. Designed to spark a dialogue about the viability of mechanically-operated common household necessities, Fifty is a product to be publicly exhibited along with information on human-powered technologies.
31
Proposal
In these sections, I aim to shed light on the way that I might educate the public through design to better prepare for a decentralised energy future. This project will focus on a fifty year future scenario of decentralised energy to design as a form of back-casting. Called Fifty, I will examine the reasons for which this project is necessary, the ways in which this project should be executed and finally the expected outcomes.
32
Proposal
33
Proposal: Agenda
For a viable design for urban Melbourne’s future, both social and environmental contexts need to be taken into consideration. These considerations inform the project’s frameworks. Current energy issues need to be considered and addressed to reach a necessary project direction.
34
Proposal: Agenda
35
Proposal: Agenda
Melbourne has particular consumption paradigms that are both good and bad. While there is greater understanding of energy issues, Melbourne’s energy consumption per person has increased in the last eight years by 19%. Changes must be made to combat this behaviour to lead to less unsustainable practices, and the best changes are made through education and design. For households to reduce their energy output, the information on how to do so is often contradictory and difficult to collate effectively (ABS). These resources should be vetted and presented in a coherent way, whether they are existing or in their conceptual stages.
There are two ways to designing to this end. One works within current paradigms and responds to current energy practice without challenging the status quo by streamlining the process for reducing current energy consumption without asking for social behaviour reform. The other disrupts social behaviour by working toward a separate social paradigm of consumption.
Fifty focuses on Urban Melbourne, Victoria and use the social and sustainable contexts that surround this region as my “jumping-off” point for this project. As an urban, centralised city-centre, Melbourne is developing the capability (with professionals, entrepreneurs and technology) to respond to resource wastage. However, as this technology and information is coming through a plethora of sources and is often contradictory. It is hard for the urban community to separate the effective from the ineffective practices, and the necessary from the unnecessary.
Households wishing to reduce their energy footprint will ultimately find some helpful products, the aim of this project is to inspire further steps toward a future where the use of electricity is reduced through a touch point. This touch point may be presented as a singular scenario or a product, but must be approached with an educational agenda.
Collating current products that reduce energy as a sustainable endeavour has some drawbacks. This first of these drawbacks is the consequence of designing for the present. I wonder what the social consequences of encouraging the continuing behaviour of resource consumption looks like. If there isn’t a mentality shift, does that mean the acceleration of total resource destruction? Does it mean the continued production of unsustainable, heavily energy-dependent products if the energy to run is somehow branded “more sustainable”? The current climate of consumption that urban Melbourne lives in is largely dependent on both electricity and independence (i.e. no sharing and the need to perform household tasks on one’s own). This is the role of education within the project, identifying unsustainable practices within the household and transforming them to more sustainable practices without sacrificing lifestyle. The problem with design can often be the dichotomy of science against emotion. This project aims to join the two by properly addressing both principles.
The best way of ‘reducing energy output’ is positing a speculative future that is sought after. My concern here is the nature of speculative design, while implementable, potentially discounts the accessibility of the design.
36
Can a speculative future include accessible products? A speculative future of Melbourne would rely on a series of propositions that lie within my idea of sustainability, an idea that lies within a myriad of cross-disciplinary research projects. These include an urban city-centres running on fully renewable energy in what’s called a ‘smart-grid’. For this to happen, a number of changes need to be made to present-day consumption and behaviour. These look like significantly reduced reliance on electricity, accountability for personal consumption, decentralised power and less ‘household product’ consumption.
The pursuit of this fifty-year future is in hope of creating a product that accesses this future in the present. By effectively educating this consumption model through a product, we can circumvent the incongruous assumption that sanctifies large energy consumption so long as it is renewable. This is the way point to further change and introducing good consumption behaviour without being disruptive.
While there are a number of ways to implement behaviour change, through a number of disciplines, design is the only way to demonstrate an alternative future. This creates a new evidence bas and paves the way for anthropologists and engineers alike. Subversive ideas and designs are i9mportant in the future structures of communities and in this case urban Melbourne. Design for the future is the only way forward.
Embedded in this project are a number of social concerns. Energy consumption behaviour has evolved through the idea
of personal independence. Separate laundry loads, separate meals are the consequence of different time schedules, and individual ownership. There is no priority for community practice, so it isn’t perceived to be beneficial. There are social/psychological benefit in spending time with family and community, design can foster these relationships. What if communal effort resulted in greater gain than the outcome of individual effort? I say this in a household context again, examples might look like community gardening, cooking, renewable energy generation and product efficiency. Scenarios that might be considered are communal kitchens where a household needs to all participate to make a meal happen. Perhaps an apartment block needs to facilitate a small fair to wind up the mechanically powered street lights? The scenarios are back-casted and not applicable lend credence to designing for a sustainable future.
My convictions on social and sustainable issues are highly based around the idea of change that can be effected. I want outcomes to be accessible to the public and available for use. With this in mind, I propose looking at a 50-year time line that transforms current consumption living behaviour to a more sustainable one and the measures that need to be taken in between. This way, I can provide the beginning of a potential change and a chance at improving the urban community’s goals for sustainability.
I propose to design the education tools and a glimpse into the future using products and systems that will thrive in a dencentralised energy environment.
Proposal: Agenda
37
Proposal: Agenda
38
Proposal: Agenda
Conclusion
The best way to effect change in consumer behaviour is to demonstrate the reasons for change and the personal impact that this future might have on them. In a decentralised environment of energy, morale increases as ownership of energy becomes apparent and this is important to convey. Current energy consumption behaviour must change, and not just for Melbourne, it must happen on a global scale. If one domino can fall, and that one domino starts with the understanding of a future that doesn’t sacrifice comfort for sustainable practice, then let that domino fall now.
39
Proposal: Approach
40
Proposal: Approach
Any design project borne out of idealism needs to have structure. This project must first be clear about its agenda and subsequently devise a strategy for achieving it. My approach is based on a number of methodologies and understandings that are documented in the following section.
41
Proposal: Approach
I plan to design a product that aids in the transition to a future where urban city-centres function on a decentralised energy network. This product will encourage behavioural change through education and scenario-based thinking.
The way that I plan to approach my design problem for reducing household energy first revolves around a scenario-based timeline for the next 50 years in urban Melbourne. This involves researching a plausible future based on decentralised energy models and the ideal implementation of this system. For Melburnians to be better equipped for the change, current practices need to be steered toward an evolution of thinking that revolves around reduced energy (primarily electricity) practices. This timeline infers a roll-out of smart meters and the implementation of a smart grid over a fifty year period, ultimately changing the environmental and socal contexts that surround urban cities.
Overall, my approach will be based around the education of such future scenarios and planning for them through the use of innovative energy-reducing practices through intelligent design. The first 5 years of system adoption look at utilisin influencers (people in the eye of the public that influence social behaviour and aspirations). The following ten years look at the increased adoption of a system through understanding and better, streamlined information. This, in turn, encourages behavioural change in terms of energy efficiency that in turn encourages government to act on the decentralised energy model that finally instigates urban change on a large scale.
To make the above time line approachable, influencers need to be given a design that can encourage them to adopt
different energy systems. It is important to note that there are already influencers in this area (such as Melbourne start-up SEG meters) and that this project will add to the pool of information and design that make adoption easier.
The first method of approach will look at Australian urban census documents to ascertain key areas of extreme consumption and pin-point influential factors for energy usage, these are household appliances, heating and cooling and finally stand-by power. Focusing on these aspects will produce a well-founded product that targets the most effective areas of energy-reduction.
Case studies further inform the best ways to approach this project indicating successful and less successful ways to influence household behaviour. By analysing the gaps in the current system of energy-efficient products as well as looking at th e overall adoption of decentralised energy modelling, I will effectively be able to design a compatible product with current user behaviour and an ideal future.
Back casting is an important part of this project that relies on inference and research. By creating a scenario based on both of these aspects, a product emerges that puts together a unique context that is necessary to understand the future. Physical prototyping will pull together an image of what will entail the roll-out of products and inform the building process.
As well as physical prototyping, a large part of this project aims to highlight the necessity of energy culpability and awareness. This means that visualising energy usage
42
Proposal: Approach
will be an important part of the design process and an integral part of the design. Not only does the product need to accommodate a future of less energy use, but the implication of such an energy economy need to be considered. If there was a mass adoption of mechanically powered objects, what would happen to the current plethora of household appliances? Would the new energy model justify the exorbitant waste.
While a product for the future, it is inherently a product service system that will take on many factors of the future scenario. This will include chronic ethnographic research where participants will engage in back-casting exercises as well as providing informative studies such as what services and products are necessary and unnecessary in day-to-day life. Ultimately, the questions will be focussed on what people are willing to give up and the social consequences of these assumptions.
A bi-product of this research will look at altered ways of living and thus address the status quo on work and lifestyle behaviour such at what it means to ‘work for a living’. Philosophical questions will need to be asked and addressed to ascertain whether the current model for working is feasible in a reduced future-energy scenario. For example, is the energy consumption of workplaces feasible for a reduced energy output future? Does reliance on electrically-powered technology play a part? Can this be influenced? How can design account for these possible changes? Does it need to?
I will look at horizons as way of ascertaining the answers to these questions. I feel that the project is divided into sections
– specifically the near future and far future implementations. Near future application looks like an online information-sourcing and supplying application. The far scenario-based future, looks like a house-hold unit that is not reliant on non-renewable energy, to spark conversation and demonstrate options.
The two of these designs, while reliant on different contexts and almost juxtaposed in design should be developed in tandem to maintain the current integrity of reducing energy usage. The approach for the online service system should include a capability to run off alternative energy solutions – for example pedal power, solar or other. This could be an interesting approach to the physical development of the product part of Fifty. The energy required to run the program needs to be offset.
In conjunction with this near-future offering, small objects to retro-fit homes will be developed for the key concerning areas. Retro-fitting is an important part of looking to the future as it utilises existing products in its system. This means reduced waste on an urban scale if systems for retrofitting are properly designed and implemented. Some of these products will be based on prior research theses, for example, previously graduated RMIT students. A set of small physical retrofitting products should ultimately work together to create an environment that categorically proves the reduction of energy.
The development of the physical prototypes the future-scenario should consider embodied material energy as well accessibility and easy to understand energy propulsion.
43
Proposal: Approach
I propose to look at pedal power and associated mechanisms to use in prototypes. Research to be done along with the technological necessities should be on average home size, amenities and availability for these stand-alone units.
As a student with the skills to successfully design system services and process complex system information, this project is unique to my methodologies and design process. My design iterations are based on research, which informs my design systems. For a product that adheres to a 50-year scenario based on current ’decentralised energy’ papers as well as collating current energy practices, I have previous experience and passion to create a product that will help illuminate a possible positive future. My background in marketing will effect successful communication of the idea and my extensive electricity research will help to create a well-considered outcome.
This is a passion project to help that first domino for a sustainable future fall.
44
Proposal: Approach
45
Proposal: Approach
Human factors
To ascertain the most likely behaviours in future urban Melbourne households, in-depth co-design workshops will be held as well as surveys. These will identify products and procedures that will cause significant distress in the urban community if removed from current household activities. Maintaining these identified products and processes will cause less friction with the urban community in the quest to reduce energy usage. Groups will be taken through the process of rolling-out a decentralised system and then discuss what that scenario might look like for them. We will follow that discussion with how they might move closer to the scenario by altering their current household habits and product usage.
46
Proposal: Approach
47
Proposal: Approach
48
Proposal: Approach
Electrical engineering
Part of product development will look at converting existing household appliances to be compatible with a human-powered generator. These iterations will look at popular existing items that are prevalent in existing households and seeking to generate the same wattage through human-power. This will require researching current technologies and engineering and working to implement them into the product system.
The ultimate goal of this experimentation and research is to create a product that encourages reduced electricity usage without causing mass waste of existing household appliances.
49
Proposal: Approach
Conclusion
It is clear that I need to employ many different methods to effectively achieve my goal of a product that sits in a future environment of energy consumption restraint. These methods will focus on human-centred design, product iteration and research. What has emerged in this research is the necessity to consider many factors in the creation of this product and system to productively contribute to our energy use and efficiency.
50
Proposal: Approach
51
Proposal: Artefact
52
Proposal: Artefact
The ultimate end use of this product and system is determined by a number of factors, namely the design of human-powered energy products and a system in which we tap into. Both of these outcomes rely heavily on research, but overall design must come from a place of unique human understanding. This is the role that design takes on, bridging science and human faculties to communicate deeply complicated principles in an accessible fashion. The outcome of Fifty needs to be both functional and clearly iterated. Here, I take a look at how these outcomes might look in their final stage.
53
Proposal: Artefact
Pedal power outcome
The outcome of Fifty, first and foremost is an alternate view of the way we consider energy usage. It demonstrates the feasibility of functioning in an environment of decentralised energy with little impact on the way that we live our lives at home. This outcome will be a product that acts as a generator and a mechanical energy operator. It will have the ability to take on household systems that are currently reliant on mains electricity and take them ‘off the grid’.
To function in a human-powered capacity, the best energy conversion is through pedal-power. (EXAMPLE). This means the prototyping of wheel based products that can take bicycle action into its system of parts. The beginning of the product iteration stage will employ an old bicycle to pull the parts together. The wheel will dictate the form of the product, which will rely on human-centric design for full-functionality.
Second, the generator of the product will use energy conversion parts to connect to electrical items such as blenders and computer power packs. This will mean the fitting of common Australian plugs and the controlled wattage of converted power. The product will need to take into account the ways in which these items will be connected and used. How many products can be attached at once, can the product allow for two bicycles to be connected? Is it modular? These possible outcomes will become more pronounced as product iteration and technology possibilities move forward.
A full account of the necessary 240W Australian standard wattage will be researched and implemented into the product. Is it possible to get 12V out of the generator?
The fully-functioning unit should provide the basic privileges that power points offer.
The design will also convey the transparency of human-powered energy conversion. It is important to show the effort required to power particular outcomes to better equip the public with an understanding of energy resources. As a result, the design will be open and visual, perhaps in where you see the wheel spinning, or the rotation of a motor, a simple visual, electronic display might also be used to indicate other important energy statistic with regard to previous use to bring in concepts of gamification and tap into the ‘smart-grid’’, where smart appliances may play a role in the future.
My personal bespoke aesthetic will also be employed where raw materials such as timber will be used, such as pine from a sustainable plantation. This aesthetic will inform the design of the associated communication and the way it is emotionally received. As part of a household, the feel should be both functional and warm, insomuch as a family should feel attached to the product for it to be an accepted part of their home.
54
Proposal: Artefact
55
Proposal: Artefact
56
Proposal: Artefact
The system aspect of Fifty will be simply designed as a way to convey current and available technologies to better reduce energy consumption. More an information booklet, this is a communication piece that requires interaction. Living both online and physically, this platform will provide participants an access point to existing technologies to reduce energy. Part of this process will involve talking to Melbourne based companies and looking at how to streamline the accessibility of thei9r products.
This communication piece will take the form of a functioning website that make access available. Not only will this platform provide a healthy array of available products and services, it will provide a forum of information for parts of the community that are interested in this field. Aimed at introducing the energy problem to a broader audience, this forum will have to maintain clarity if it is to be widely read. Heavy marketing will be put in place to make this site accessible and work to include the influencers in Melbourne to be on board with the project.
The site will provide access to documents and unbiased information about the roll-out of decentralised energy which will in turn, look to Government for answers. Not only will there be products and information, but current sustainable practices will be profiled as well as energy companies who are working to better the environment. It will be a forum of positive enforcement, rather than negative.
This system will use current technology platforms to make itself available to the public, such as social media. This will help its user-base grow as well as maintain the message that current comforts do not need to be sacrificed.
Users will have a community of like-minded thinkers and be able to engage in conversation to reduce energy by signing in. This system, while predominantly a touch point of accessible information, products and services, will be shaped to allow for greater action in the sustainable Melbourne community that doesn’t only pertain to energy.
Education is the overarching goal of my Fifty, and this is the design framework for this system.
System outcome
Proposal: Artefact
57
58
Conclusion
Ultimately, the system and the product of Fifty will work together to cohesively pull the project into focus for the urban Melbourne community by presenting identifiable current availabilities (system) and tethering them to a possible future scenario (product). By doing so, we can associate performing current energy saving techniques with a decentralised-energy future. As people involve themselves in ‘the system’s’ outcome, they will associate it with ‘the product’s’ inhabited future, identifying a future that urban Melbourne sees for city-centre sustainability.
One of the most important aspects of Fifty are the communication points; the clarity of human relationship with power, and the association of a sustainable future with the ‘smart grid’ and decentralised energy.
59
60
Conclusion
61
62
Conclusion
Every year there is more and more research to support climate change and our dwindling non-renewable resources. So why isn’t there a change in our status quo? There current beliefs in place the make communities think that changing to a sustainable model requires a sacrifice of comfort, but this isn’t the case. If more people knew that the shift to sustainable practices meant better lifestyles and a better future, then why isn’t it happening?
This project aims to translate the available information on our energy futures in a clear manner while placing it in urban Melbourne’s social and environmental contexts. If the urban Melbourne community is prepared to shift to a decentralised energy model, then the Government can move forward easily. The only way to move forward is by designing for the future.
A fifty-year future is close enough to get current Melbourne communities in change. Instant gratification is so prevalent now with the age of technology, that education is an important part of Fifty. The information needs to be conveyed in an accessible way, so as to incite understanding and a will to adopt better practices for reduced energy consumption.
Our current outlook for energy, is bizarre. More people are aware of the impending energy crisis and say that they have taken steps to reduce their energy footprint, yet there has been a rise in household energy consumption. Behavioural information suggests that it is too hard and confusing or perceived as a loss of comfort to reduce energy usage. This is a information gap that needs to be bridged, and Fifty can do it.
By looking at case studies, we can see both technological and mechanical advances that make reduced-energy an attainable concept. We also see sustainable communities functioning in CERES as well as the SCI. Having these examples of success helps push the sustainable agenda into a space where the future can be shaped, Fifty makes this collation of ideas, projects and proof available and communicated in an accessible way.
Not only does Fifty present current facts, but acts as an emotional gateway to further understanding. Design allows for the creation of empathy and has an intrinsic knowledge of human motivators. But creating scenarios, design can access human factors to accurately design for education, knowledge and adoption.
By designing a product that can power the majority of appliances in an urban Melbourne household, it demonstrates the ability to allow people to live comfortably in an urban environment of decentralised energy. Acting as a generator as well as a mechanical source for non-electric powered items, Fifty can demonstrate the positive effects that design can have in future scenarios and spark a dialogue about the viability of mechanically-operated common household necessities by being publicly exhibited.
63
Conclusion
As the energy crisis is no longer debated but a quiet fact, its issues need to be brought into the public forum. By accurately researching urban Melbourne’s current energy climate, we can provide a picture for the adoption of a feasible decentralised energy model. Further, by employing design methodologies to bridge the gap between science and user-acceptability, Fifty can access the urban Melbourne community in a unique way.
Finally, the outcome of Fifty is completely unique to myself with a set of concerns that are deeply embedded in the way that I design. The result of this project will reflect a high amount of research and thought that are embodied in it’s form and communication. As we hurtle toward a future of environmental undoing, this is the way that I can contribute to averting that disaster.
Conclusion
64
65
66
67
68
References
2013, C.O.A., 2013a. Towards the Australian Environmental-Economic. pp.1–108.2013, C.O.A., 2013b. Waste Account, Australia, Experimental Estimates. pp.1–60.Australia, 2011. Sustainable Australia - Sustainable Communities,Author, N., 2005. New Title. pp.1–126.Aye, R.J.F.L. & Aye, L., 2012. Renewable Energy. Renewable energy, 48(c), pp.326–332.Barca, S., 2011. Ecological Economics. Ecological Economics, 70(7), pp.1309–1315.Bentley, I., 2005. Urban Transformations. pp.1–296.BREE, 2012. 2012 Australian Energy Update. pp.1–26.Burger, C. & Weinmann, J., 2012. The Decentralized Energy Revolution, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Chick, A. & Micklethwaite, P., 2011. Design for Sustainable Change, AVA Publishing. Available at: http://proquest.safaribooksonline.com.ezproxy.lib.rmit.edu.au/book/graphic-design/9782940439775/bibliography/169.Colmenar-Santos, A. et al., 2013. Renewable Energy. Renewable energy, 60(C), pp.302–312.Committee, A.S.O.T.E., 2011. Australia State of the Environment 2011,Cross, N., 2011. Design Thinking, Berg.Daniella, T., Amanda, K. & Amy, L., 2005. A national review of environmental education and its contribution to sustainability in Australia: further and higher education.Department of Sustainability, E.W.P.A.C., 2010a. A sustainable population strategy for Australia - Population advisory panels fact sheet. pp.1–2.Department of Sustainability, E.W.P.A.C., 2010b. A sustainable population strategy for Australia: Issues paper and appendices. pp.1–286.Department of Sustainability, E.W.P.A.C., 2011. Summary | State of Environment 2011. pp.1–18.Dobbins, M., 2012. Urban Design and People. pp.1–402.Dowrueng, A. et al., 2009. Decentralised Energy Management System with comprehension of fluctuated renewable energy resources. pp.316–319.Elliott, D., 2001. Simple thinking on energy. Refocus.Erl, T., 2007. Soa: principles of service design, Prentice Hall Press.Etienne Wenger, R.M.W.M.S., 2002. Cultivating Communities of Practice : A Guide to Managing Knowledge. pp.1–299.Forbes, L., Galloway, S.J. & Ault, G.W., 2010. An approach for modelling a decentralised energy system. pp.1–5.Fry, T., 2008. Design Futuring, Berg Pub Limited.Fry, T., 2009. The foundation of the unsustainable. Waste Management and Environment.Fry, T., 2011. Urban futures in the age of unsettlement. Futures, 43(4), pp.432–439.Fuad-Luke, A., 2012. Design Activism, Routledge.
69
Gladwell, M., 2008. Outliers, Penguin.Gladwell, M., 2006. The Tipping Point, Little, Brown.Hewett, C., 2001. The future is small: The role of RE in a decentralised energy model. Refocus.Holland, R. et al., 2006. Decentralised rural electrification: the critical success factors. Experience of ITDG (Intermediate Technology Developmental Group). USA: MIT.Illich, I., 1974a. Energy and Equity, London: Calder & Boyars Ltd.Illich, I., 1974b. Energy and equity,Kelley, Thomas, 2007. The Art of Innovation, Crown Business.Kelley, Tom & Kelley, David, 2012. Reclaim your creative confidence. Harvard business review, 90(12), pp.115–8– 135.Kolko, J., Johnson, B. & Ericson, G.M., 2011. Exposing the Magic of Design, Oxford University Press.Krippendorff, K., 2006. The Semantic Turn, CRC Press.Lebel, L. & Lorek, S., 2008. Enabling Sustainable Production-Consumption Systems. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 33(1), pp.241–275.Lewis, J.L., Casello, J.M. & Groulx, M., 2012. Effective Environmental Visualization for Urban Planning and Design: Interdisciplinary Reflections on a Rapidly Evolving Technology. Journal of Urban Technology, 19(3), pp.85–106.Lindberg-Poulsen, K. et al., 2010. Energy harvesting from an exercise bike using a switch-mode converter controlled generator. pp.1–5.Lund, R.N.J.M.P.D., Mikkola, J. & Lund, P.D., 2012. Renewable Energy. Renewable energy, 48(c), pp.524–536.Margolin, V., 1989. Design Discourse, University Of Chicago Press.Massoud, R., 2012. Energy Storage Devices to Support Functional Movements’ Restoration. Energy Procedia, 19, pp.63–70.MATHEWS, J.A., 2010. Designing Energy Industries for the Next Industrial Revolution. Organizational Dynamics, 39(2), pp.155–164.McKinstry, G., Galloway, S. & Kockar, I., 2010. An initial assessment of the potential impact of smart metering on a decentralised energy network. pp.1–4.Molyneaux, L. et al., 2013. Renewable Energy. Renewable energy, 60(C), pp.215–221.Muratore, G., 2011. Incentive based energy market design. European Journal of Operational Research, 213(2), pp.422–429.National Sustainability Council, 2013a. Sustainable Australia Report 2013: section 14 - Environmental indicators. pp.1–49.National Sustainability Council, 2013b. Sustainable Australia Report 2013: section 16 - Contextual indicators. pp.1–22.Papanek, V. & Papanek, V.J., 1984. Design for the real world, Academy Chicago Publishers.Pink, B., 2010. Australia’s Environment Issues and Trends 2010. Australian Bureau of Statistics.Rooney, S., Williams, R. & Grunbuhel, C., 2008. Working Together ~ Learning Together II. pp.1–63.
References
70
Ryan, R., Denby, L. & Tilbury, D., 2007. Sustainability in Government - Making Change for Sustainability,Simpson, R. & Gill, R., 2007. Design for Development: A Review of Emerging Methodologies. Unknown, 17(2), pp.220–230.Stiassnie, E. & Shpitalni, M., 2007. Incorporating lifecycle considerations in Axiomatic Design. CIRP Annals-Manufacturing Technology, 56(1), pp.1–4.Stickdorn, M. & Schneider, J., 2011. This Is Service Design Thinking, BIS Publishers.Syed, A., 2011. Energy use reduction and input productivity growth in Australian industries. (100715).Tilbury, D., 2005. A National Review of Environmental Education and Its Contribution to Sustainability in Australia,Towler, G.P., 1996. Integrated process design for improved energy efficiency. Renewable energy, 9(1), pp.1076–1080.V2, 2011. Blowup. pp.1–53.Vallance, S. et al., 2012. Almost Invisible: Glimpsing the City and its Residents in the Urban Sustainability Discourse. Urban Studies, 49(8), pp.1695–1710.Wan, G.S., 2010. Reliable energy for developing countries. pp.437–442.Zhang, H.C. & Li, H., 2010. An energy factor based systematic approach to energy-saving product design. CIRP Annals-Manufacturing Technology, 59(1), pp.183–186.
References
71
