TechnoBrands

I am currently reading “Cradle to Cradle – Remaking the Way We Make Things” by William McDonough and Michael Braungart. Though I am barely half-way through the book, I feel a deep sense of inspiration and frustration: inspiration to change the way that we make everything from laptop computers to in-house vacuum systems, and frustration that this book was published in 2002 and the world has not changed significantly yet. Where do you start though? There are lots of examples in my world where McDonough’s Cradle to Cradle (or C2C) “biological and technical nutrients” paradigm rather than the current “landfill” mindset could be driven by consumer demand: consumer electronics such as computers, printers and accessories, MP3 players; packaged goods containers (the container does not have to last 100 times longer than the product it contains); automobiles. The book I read previously was “Tipping Point – How Little Things Can Make A Big Difference” by Malcolm Gladwell. The problem with getting the new C2C paradigm to catch fire is that people (and corporations) are happy with the status quo – being “less bad” on their way to reducing the impact of people on the environment. There is no imminent crisis or threat to our lifestyle, so even being less bad can wait until tomorrow.

This may seem like an over-simplification, but lets be simple today: to elicit change, there needs to be an epidemic of environmentalism and stewardship. This requires a charismatic group of connectors, mavens and salesmen that “get” the reasons and the need for the C2C paradigm shift. How about if we start by making the C2C book mandatory reading in our engineering and science programs? Over time, a country (or group of countries) will take the lead and decide that being less bad with regard to environmental impact is not good enough (China and India are the most likely candidates). I’m working on the “stickiness” factor – that may take a while. There needs to be proof that the long term profitability of the paradigm shift is worthwhile (how about if getting rid of industrial toxicity reduces the cost of healthcare by billions of dollars? That’s a no-brainer!).