Re-thinking Progress: The Circular Economy

There's a world of opportunity to re-think and re-design the way we make stuff.

'Re-Thinking Progress' explores how through a change in perspective we can re-design the way our economy works - designing products that can be 'made to be made again' and powering the system with renewable energy. It questions whether with creativity and innovation we can build a restorative economy.

Find out more about the circular economy at http://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org and http://www.facebook.com/EllenMacArthurFoundation and follow us on Twitter http://twitter.com/#!/made2bmadeagain

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• ellen macarthur
• foundation
• ellen macarthur foundation
• circular economy
• rethinking
• progress
• sustainability
• cradle to cradle
• closed loop
• sustainable design
• sustainable business
• restorative economy
• performance economy
• LCA
• systems thinking
• future economy
• made
• to
• be
• again
• design for disassembly
• sustainable
• development
• resources
• STEM
• new economic model

[Jamrozio87]

Theres only one serious problem - Recycling electronics and plastic materials is UNeconomic - it costs way more than produceing new one, and as we know companys goal is to have bigger income, so far there is only symbolic point of Ecological circle production.

Now more important is to find a perfect replacement for petrol.

It will hapen one day...

[made2bemadeagain]

@Jamrozio87 But with resources like copper and indium (materials often used in electrical products) running out, doesn't it make sense for a manufacturer to keep hold of those valuable resources? And if they don't recover them, perhaps they won't be able to make any new products at all...

[Jamrozio87]

@made2bemadeagain Mayby one day, mining resuorces will be more expensive than recovering them, mayby recycling process will become one of ours every day duty, but not NOW... :( ... Economy is based on money, and everything turns aroud it. Mining resuorces is and will be cheper for a very long time from now. Bigger problem we have with petrol and oil - if we solve it, if every single engine will run on clean energy source (hydrogen etc.), then we'll shurely begin to think about toxic wastes

[made2bemadeagain]

@Jamrozio87 That 'one day' might not be as far off as you might think for some crucial resources. And we have the opportunity to re-think things now, to build a positive future rather than the 'use less, do less harm' approach.

It's important to develop engines that run on clean, reliable and renewable energy sources. But they must work as part of a system. It's this systems thinking that can help us develop a model that can really work long-term, rather that have a quick fix that works now.

[Paladinoocara]

Greet video! This video is like watching a little resume of a "resource based economy"

It seems (by comments here) that people are starting to be aware of the "deadly" cyclical consumption caused by the "necessity" for "infinite economic growth" wich causes lots of ambiental problems.

Take a look at the "ZEITGEIST: MOVING FORWARD" here on youtube, it shows in a very deep way the major causes of our current problems and a real possible solution (called a "resouce based economy").

[albatrizzle]

lets make it happen

[znubzz188]

@Jamrozio87 whether its economic or not depends on your conception of time. in the perception of time of the current economic dogma mining is still cheaper. if we manage to shift towards projections of longer time scale in terms of whats economic we'd come up something much more intelligent like this vid

[Genezistan]

This procedure was in use until WWII in HUngar in small farms that neither the Communits notr the Capitalsi found lucrative enough for them so they expelled the rural population to towan just as others have been doing it elseweher ever since

[evilgenius747]

This purports something like land tax. you buy the land, and if you fail to pay land tax, the government/corporation takes it back away from you. So you really never owned anything in the first place.

[evilgenius747]

It's a nice Idea, but it's still built on the commercial/capitalist model w/c if you think about it is cheating since you do not own the stuff you bought but simply have rights to them. Hence the corporations retain ownership. However, a more advanced idea is... since we can make this happen, why not give it to the people for free. :-)

[leonidasreal]

what a lie!...production works since the 18 century (200 years of waste!...we should be burried in industrial waste if recicling didn't existed already,).Using plain arguments (very naif one's, to say the least) to say that ownership is "bad", and apointing existing manufacturers as agents of recicling (as if that didn't existed since the early industrys ) is plain propaganda to endure wealth and promote growth to existing main manufacturers

[charlespontoon]

Sounds like a plan

[AlastairRonald1]

@Jamrozio87 To clear things up:

1. Making prdocts from scratch both uses exothermic and endothermic reactions, which change the covalent molecular structure of the material.

2. Recycling means, in most cases, heating the materials up, changing the phase of the material from solid to liquid, and then letting the material cool down.

When recycling materials, it will use energy to heat them up and it may be uneconomical if making the products from scratch is EXOTHERMIC. Comprenday?

[AlastairRonald1]

@Jamrozio87 To clear things up:

1. Making prdocts from scratch both uses exothermic and endothermic reactions, which change the covalent molecular structure of the material.

2. Recycling means, in most cases, heating the materials up, changing the phase of the material from solid to liquid, and then letting the material cool down.

When recycling materials, it will use energy to heat them up and it may be uneconomical if making the products from scratch is EXOTHERMIC.