Forecast #2: Air Mask & Energy

AIR MASK & RENEWABLE ENERGY

Tenley Steinke

A.

http://itechfuture.com/aire-mask-your-breathing-into-renewable-electrical-power/

B.

I thought this was an interesting concept because I am always sleeping and my phone is always dead, so why not kill two birds with one stone? Also, for those who own an iPhone charger, God forbid it being useful for more than one week. With this mask, hopefully the cords would not endure so much stress, making it last longer, and helping iPhone users stay sane. 

By simply wearing this mask, one would be able to charge small electronics, such as an iPhone or iPod. Each time the user exhales, small wind turbines are activated in the mask, creating power. This mask could also be worn during times of excessive breathing: exercise, sleep, or even emergencies. It is a great concept for simple, renewable energy, and could benefit society in several ways. 


C.

1. 
On a global scale, this could provide energy for third world countries in times of emergencies. For example, in some villages, there is a communal computer that is powered by pedaling on a bike. This mask would be similar and would be even easier to use than biking. 
On a national or local scale, this would primarily be an invention based around social convenience. There have been several instances in my life where my phone has died, and the most inconvenient time. With that being said, this would be a great invention to use in times of emergency. If this renewable energy system was made for all types of charging, I could charge my diabetes glucose on the fly if it happened to run out of batteries. These are the types of situations small villages in struggling countries could benefit from as well.

2. 
I think this invention would be a big hit at first to consumers of all ages and demographics. In the first couple of years I could see lots of consumers buying them. However, in years to come after that, I think there would be a decrease in demand. I don't think it is an invention that people (especially in the United States) would deem necessary, but maybe have one stored on their sailboats, or camping accessories in case of emergency. 
In ten to twenty years down the line, I could see this invention's primary use being partnered with charity organizations, as a sustainable source of renewable energy. 
For example, every year my grandparents a card to each person in our family. Inside this card, is a donation made in our names to a specific organization. These organizations have items pertaining to corresponding places in need. One year, my grandparents donated a goat to a community in Africa, in my name. 

3. 
I think focusing on this invention as a way to benefit those in need would create the greatest positive impact. Because it is not a necessity to first world countries, focusing on those who truly need help would be the first place to start. 

4.
I think the greatest negative impact would be to not have universal charging connections. Even though Apple is used by so many people all over the world, it would create several problems for users with other types of charging cables. I think this would create an even bigger problem if the main focus of this invention was to benefit those in need. 

5.
Super Tech, Limit Tech, Local Tech, & Human/Social Tech 

"What’s going to kill us in 2050? Air pollution — and lots of it"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/whats-going-to-kill-us-in-2050-air-pollution--and-lots-of-it/2012/03/15/gIQAgiDgES_blog.html

What's going to kill us in 2050? Air pollution --- and lots of if"

Snapshot from article:

Here is the main summary:
"On Wednesday, the OECD released its “Environmental Outlook to 2050,”which contained a few spots of cheery news. Humanity is making steady progress against malaria. Worldwide, the number of deaths from the disease are expected to fall by half by 2050. And fewer people will die from unsafe drinking water and poor sanitation in the future. But the number of deaths caused by air pollution — which includes ground-level ozone, particulate matter, and “indoor pollution” — are expected to skyrocket, killing more than 6 million people per year by mid-century."

This article mentioned something that I had not heard from before "Indoor Pollution." This is what they explained as Indoor Pollution: "The OECD lists “indoor pollution” as a major cause of death in the developing world, a category that includes black carbon soot from biomass-burning cookstoves. This is fixable: Cleaner cookstoves that run on solar power or burn fuel cleanly already exist. Indeed, it’s such a no-brainer notion that even Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) has co-sponsored a billin the U.S. Senate to aid black-carbon reduction projects abroad."

Another area I was looking into is the pollution that we did not create: Radon. recently my family moved homes and the first thing we did was check the radon levels before purchasing the home, luckily the test came back at a "1" which is outstandingly low and very good! They say anything over 4 is getting lofty when it comes to this radioactive gas. However, my cousin recently purchase a new home on the lake, after a couple months after he purchased the home, he did the radon test which came back at a "13" which is extremely hazardous to your health. Here is a little about what Radon is: "Radon is a colorless, odorless, radioactive gas. It forms naturally from the decay of radioactive elements, such as uranium, which are found at different levels in soil and rock throughout the world. Radon gas in the soil and rock can move into the air and into ground water and surface water.

Radon is present outdoors and indoors. It is normally found at very low levels in outdoor air and in drinking water from rivers and lakes. It can be found at higher levels in the air in houses and other buildings, as well as in water from underground sources, such as well water.

Radon breaks down (decays) into solid radioactive elements called radon progeny (such as polonium-218, polonium-214, and lead-214). Radon progeny can attach to dust and other particles and can be breathed into the lungs. As radon and radon progeny in the air break down, they give off alpha particles, a form of high-energy radiation that can damage the DNA inside the body's cells."

Here is a bit more about what it can do to your body: "Long-term exposure to radon can lead to lung cancer. Radon gas in the air breaks down to other radioactive elements (radon progeny). Radon progeny are tiny radioactive particles that can lodge in the lining of the lungs, where they continue to break down into other radioactive elements by releasing radiation. The radiation released in this “radioactive decay” process can damage lung cells and eventually lead to lung cancer.

Cigarette smoking is by far the most common cause of lung cancer in the United States, but radon is the second leading cause. Scientists estimate that about 20,000 lung cancer deaths per year are related to radon.

Exposure to the combination of radon gas and cigarette smoke creates a greater risk for lung cancer than either factor alone. Most radon-related lung cancers occur among smokers. However, radon is also thought to cause a significant number of lung cancer deaths among non-smokers in the United States each year.

Some studies have suggested that radon exposure may be linked to other types of cancer as well. But the evidence for such links has been inconsistent and not nearly as strong as it is for lung cancer. Because radon and its progeny are absorbed mainly by inhaling, and because the alpha particles they give off travel only a short distance, it is unlikely they would affect other tissues in the body.

The evidence that radon causes lung cancer comes from studies in people and studies done in the lab."

Gas Mask Future?

INSIRED BY: Bunky Echo Hawk’s Gas Mask Paintings 

http://bunkyechohawk.com/gas-mask-paintings/

In Pursuit Of Justice (2010) 11″ x 14″

Witness acrylic on canvas

Article Link:

http://earthzine.org/2012/08/18/study-shows-overall-air-quality-to-worsen-by-2050/

Another Cool Link:

http://www.space.com/27798-u-s-and-china-co2-litters-earth-s-atmosphere-one-year-timelapse.html

Pollution over China blows out to sea. Source: SeaWiFS Project, NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center, and ORBIMAGE.

Source: NASA, Robert Simmon and Jesse Allen, based on data provided by the NCAR MOPITT Team.

Highlights from the article

• The study used the Atmospheric Chemistry General Circulation Model, EMAC, to predict the impact of anthropogenic emission changes
• The model uses basic mathematical formulation to predict the meteorology and the 
• chemical composition of the atmosphere
• Researchers combined demographics and the pollutant concentration projections in the Population Weighted MPI (PW-MPI) to determine the effects on the average world citizen.
• “The model uses basic mathematical formulation to predict the meteorology and the chemical composition of the atmosphere,”
• “In practice, it is a software used to forecast – or hindcast, for past years – the status of the atmosphere at specific times.”
• The study determined that if the “business as usual” use of current technology for food and energy continues, then man-made air pollution will increase in the future.
• urban outdoor air pollution causes 1.3 million deaths per year
• The study found that high levels of pollutants, such as nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide, and fine particulate matter such as PM2.5, will persist in East Asia in both 2025 and 2050
• We show that further legislation to control and reduce man-made emissions is needed, in particular for eastern China and northern India, to avoid hot-spots of elevated air pollution
• This research is the first-ever analysis piece of all man-made air pollutants harmful to human health, covering sulphur dioxide, ozone, nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide, and PM2.5
• “Strong actions and further effective legislation are essential to avoid the drastic deterioration of air quality, which can have severe effects on human health,”

Article Summary

This article discussed the effects of the quality of air, and what the future holds if no effective legislation is established to “avoid the drastic deterioration of air quality, which can have severs effects on human health”. Researchers studied demographics and pollutant concentration projections using a basic mathematical formulation to predict the meteorology and chemical composition of the atmosphere, and determined that use of current technology for food and energy, “man-made air pollution will increase in the future”.

Posed Questions

If nothing is done to improve or lessen the effects of pollution in the air, and despite best efforts or legislations implemented, would the world suffer an “attack” from the atmosphere?

Do we have a gas mask future?

Forecast #2: Smog Vacuum

A) Articles

Press Release
Kickstarter

Dezeen (2013, the original idea)
Daily Mail
Tech Insider
DesignBoom

B) Analysis

Artist and inventor Daan Roosegaarde is known for his work in creating a "glow-in-the-dark" sidewalk among many others. Each project is spawned from every-day experiences and inspiration. 

During a visit to Beijing in 2013, Daan noticed that on a good day he could see the buildings out side of his hotel window, and on a bad day there would be a noticeable cloud of dark smog. 

His first iteration of this concept started as using the idea of an underground vacuum of sort and would suck the smog to the ground and decompose it. Using copper coils underneath grass, an electromagnetic charge gentle enough to not disturb pacemakers and other devices would pull the negatively charged smog to the ground with a visible transition. 

The newest prototype has adapted new technologies that are more transferrable. Thanks to double the donations of Kickstarter, his project has been released this past week and is located in Rotterdam.  

Working as a glorified air purifier, the Smog-Free Tower uses ion technology with three vacuums inside. This creates a "clean air bubble". Moreover, this tower is able to be transported to others cities with high air pollution. 

Daan has gone a step further and has adapted an interesting business model to sustain this project. When ionizing CO2 you are left with carbon. 

This carbon is then compressed into cubes that represent 1000 square meters of clean air. He has solidified these within clear acrylic and set them in rings and cufflinks.

C) Bullet Answers:

1. Global/ National/ Local/ Personal Impacts:

Using one Smog Free Tower, 3500 Smog Free Cubes are able to be produced. 

One cube = 1000 cubic meters (one city block x on city block)

3,500,000 city blocks are able to be cleaned, which is translated in to 219 miles. 

If we consider the distance of smog in relation to Earth, that would be able to clean one city block and 219 miles above it. 

Sure, those who have trouble breathing in high levels of smog are able to enjoy the outdoors without face masks and is a decent amount of clean air, yet it is not significant enough to make a big impact on a national or even global scale. 

Rather than producing one tower that is transported to other polluted cities, why not make one for each city? This would reduce the carbon foot-print that would entail them to travel and the opportunity to continue the clean air process. 


2.) Impact Over Time:

Amount of space of one tower to clean air:

1 Year: 79,935 miles - roughly the size of Minnesota, not including airspace
            -NYC = ~305 square miles, within one year, give or take, to be cleaned. 

3.) Positive Outcome:

To have all architecture implement this system so that the buildings producing much of the air pollution will be held responsible for cleaning up their mess. This is turn would allow them to do what they will with the leftover carbon, such as make plastics or even diamonds!

4.) Negative Outcome: 

If this technology were to be implemented into buildings and they would have the freedom to do what they will with the leftover carbon, the downside would be if they decided to produce man-made petrocarbons that have gotten us into this dilemma in the first place. They would essentially be self-sustaining polluting machines.

5.) Lens: 

Sustainability/Super Tech

Questions:

Is this a step forward in solving the air pollution crisis?

Do you think that this tower has feasible power to clean entire cities of smog?

What would you do with the leftover carbon?

Forecast #2: Food in the air.

A.  Article
http://www.airdo.co/

B. Analysis
This is a website for Airdo, which is an app where before you fly you can order your food super fast so that you don't have to wait in line. This App could save people from missing their flight due to waiting for their food. It's an App that makes sure your close to your gate and gives you option on food choices. Airdo was created by CEO Nathan Bui. It's a small maerket team that really enjoys airport food. So they want to create a special way for everyone to experience fast, delicious airport food. This app at the moment works in California and new jersey airports.

Bullet Answers

1) Global/National/Local Impact: This app  could do more nationally or global . Food is important in our everyday life. Having away to do more with food like "dreaming about chipotle" then getting it in your hands super quick is super neat. An app is a starting point . We use Apps to play games, music, etc. So people who like to fly usually use apps to do things to waste time. So why not create an App to give the flyers more and the best airport experience.
2) Impact Over Time: Hopefully this could change how we see food and how many creators should do more with food. With using the airport there could be an impact how we use air like, food in the air should be a thing. Have Airdo app on the plane where you order your food, and have it automatically on the plane. Many ideas that we can do for Air and food something technology can do.
3) Positive Outcomes: Customers would be happy. This is something this generation wants from technology and giving food a better experience for our taste buds.
4) Negative outcomes: If the app was in the plane could harm the plane due to high usage from customers. Otherwise lot's of people who use the app could cause the app to crash, take to long to get food, which creates disasters. 
5)Region of the Future: Super tech/social tech.

#2 HOW TO GROW YOUR OWN FRESH AIR

A) HOW TO GROW YOUR OWN FRESH AIR

<iframe src="https://embed-ssl.ted.com/talks/kamal_meattle_on_how_to_grow_your_own_fresh_air.html" width="640" height="360" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" webkitAllowFullScreen mozallowfullscreen allowFullScreen></iframe>

OTHER LINKS:

http://www.mnn.com/health/healthy-spaces/photos/15-houseplants-for-improving-indoor-air-quality/a-breath-of-fresh-air

http://www.healthline.com/health-slideshow/air-purifying-plants

B) ANALYSIS: 

Researcher Kamal Meattle shows how an arrangement of three common houseplants improve indoor air quality. The Areca Palm, Mother-in-Law's Tongue and Money Plant can be used in specific spots in a home or office building to produce measurably cleaner air. The plants provide health benefits and contribute to our overall well-being by converting carbon dioxide into oxygen and detoxifying the air.  I feel that using plants strategically is a brilliant and simple way to solve indoor-air-quality issues.  I often wonder how having an air conditioner on all the time, fumes from cars, and other common machines and appliances may be silently affecting our health, and the quality of the air. We often develop so many new technologies, with little to no research into the long-term effects it has on us. I think that more offices, homes and any indoor space should start implementing an air-quality improvement plan which includes having more vegetation inside. A simple combination of plants alone can positively contribute to our health by acting as a natural filter that cleans air and removes toxins. I hope to see more innovations like this in the future.

“     "The Bullet answers”

1)    The global impact, national impact, and local / personal impact. 

Globally implementing this plan may help combat some of our carbon emission issues because it provides better air quality in areas that are overpopulated and have poor air quality such as Delhi, where the initial research was done. On a national level, local, and personal level I feel this provides a way to clean the air, it is affordable and with the proper care the plants can last a lifetime. For me, this is great as my youngest daughter was born with under-developed lungs so this seems like a practical, affordable solution to some of her respiratory issues.

    2) Forecast the range of impact over the short term (the next 2 months to 2 years), to the long term (next 20 years to 20 + decades).

In a matter of days it will improve the quality of air, over years you may ease some health related issues, and over your lifetime you will see tremendous benefits from health to productivity. I feel that within 20 years or more we will see more of this in office buildings and homes. I think this can become a similar to the trend of having green roofs.

3) “What could you do, or could be done to create the greatest positive impact on the future.”

I feel that simply buying these specific three plants is an action anyone can take to contribute to the overall quality of air in our living spaces. I think it is also a great reminder that we can combat big, global issues by taking small actions. Complex technology does not have to be the only answer environmental issues. We should consider putting more research into how existing plants and materials in nature that could offer alternative solutions. This will be more cost-effective, less damaging to peoples’ health and more environmentally friendly.

4)“What could you do, or could be done to create the greatest negative impact on the future.”

If we continue to make technological advances intended to solve problems, like cooling a hot building, the biggest mistake we could make is not considering the long-term impact on the planet and our health. As our population expands, we need to think about what will happen if the majority of people are living and working indoors and not incorporating nature and vegetation into our living spaces. Also, massive deforestation often accompanies population growth is an issue that will make these plants, which can improve our quality of life and health less-readily available. 

5)“Which region of the future” does this related closest most to or does this fit in between – or perhaps a region of the future you’d like to define for yourself.

-Bio-Tech, Human-Tech

QUESTIONS 
Is this a realistic solution for everyone,?
What are other options for people who have a lack of space?
 

AIR: The New Biosphere

A.
“The idea behind the project (and its name) was to create a second, alternative biosphere, which scientists can precisely control and study, in order to learn more about the first biosphere — that of our planet.” 

- [link found here] thefutureofthings.com

 

[Image Source]

B.
This articles main purpose was to highlight that the Biosphere 2 project has been bought by The University of Arizona, saving the research facility from a close call of destruction. What intrigued me most about this article was the background information given on the first and ‘failed’ projects the Biosphere project was intended for. 

[Image Source]

This project, as defined by wikipedia, is an ‘artificially materially closed ecological system or vivarium’. Basically, the scientists experimented with creating their own ecosystem completely shutting out the earth’s biospheres ability to impact what was made or created inside the ‘Biosphere 2’ — giving opportunity to learn more about our own biosphere through experimentation and manipulation, but also [and most intriguing to my mind] the possibility of gaining an ability to create a new biosphere’s where humans and life can sustain itself outside of the only place we have ever known to be able to survive! In summary, this place is the key to human survival no matter what apocalyptic, doomsday is thrown our way.

[Image Source]

C.

• Global/National/Local/Personal Impact
• Completely a Global Impact, with impacts felt on all levels from national, local, and personal.
• Impact: Short term - Long term 
• The greatest impact will be felt long-term, but some smaller short-term discoveries could be felt short-term. 
• Greatest Positive Impact 
• Scientific discovery made from experiments in the biosphere on how to fix all the pollution and damage we have already done to our earth, no longer have a need for a new biosphere. 
• Greatest Negative Impact 
• World War over the technology, scientific discovery over how to create a biosphere 2. Malfunction with long-term impact on human psychological well-being from being inside a ‘biosphere 2’, mass chaos breaks out within and between different man-made biospheres. 
• ‘Region of the Future’ 
• Next 100 years?