Monday, April 20, 2009

Cradle to Cradle

I really enjoyed the book Cradle to Cradle. I think the views of William McDonough and Michael Braungart mixed views we have already learned with a unique twist that came from their background and the industry they are involved in. Those who are involved in design- such architects and chemists, are important for the future. Many people are focused on technology becoming cleaner and greener, while that is important, architecture leads to long term changes that are greener- if it is done correctly. It was neat reading about the office building that was designed to keep the building cool with good insulation, air passage and soil and trees on the roof. I remember seeing a design in my hometown with plant life on the roof and wondered the purpose for that. It was also good that chemists were involved in the creation of a safe, non-toxic, biodegradable upholstery. The water that ran into the factory came out just as clean after its use. This makes me wonder... why couldn't anyone else have thought to do that before?? These changes not only make sense for health and aesthetic purposes, but they make economic sense too! In the short run, the costs to build the more energy efficient and aesthetically pleasing office buildings and factories may be higher, but it is made up in the higher productivity of the workers and the variable costs are less, such as electric and heat. The same concept applies for the factory that creates natural, non-toxic upholstery. As an economics double major, I have not really seen a reason why firms should be so against becoming 'green.' Is it the pain of transitioning to cleaner fixed costs (capital)? The lack of access to resources that aren't as harmful? The lack of company will to want to come up with a green solution? There certainly is great pressure by the population for industry to become green and safer. Reading all about what kinds of cancers I am likely to get by studying on the carpet in my home and through other such things is very scary and yet nobody knows about this! This is a case in economics of asymmetric information. This occurs when one party in a transaction does not have the same information as the second party. The tobacco industry has regulatory labeling on their products displaying all the potential diseases one could accrue through smoking cigarettes so why can't the linens, carpet, furniture, etc all have the same? 

No comments: