Thursday, March 29, 2012

It's Time to get Technical

When it comes to shopping for apparel, everyone has that one item that is always difficult to find. Once it is found, the next challenge is keeping it from being used too much too fast. Personally, I have a difficult time finding the perfect shoe. Because I wear a size 5, I am usually in a pickle majority of the time as many stores are incapable of stocking their shelves with a size small enough to fit my baby feet. When I do find my size in a shoe that I actually like, their usable life is a short one that immediately puts me back to square one upon their disposal. In coming up with my design concept to extend the life of my perfect shoe, the technical metabolism concept of cradle to cradle was much more conceivable and more likely to be maintained in the life of a consumer.

Technical metabolism is a process of which a material is maintained and reusable through multiple product cycles in a closed-loop system. In this system, used materials can create new products or be used to replenish the lives of previously used products. In the apparel industry, I envision technical metabolism to be more feasible as far as actually being a method that is practiced religiously by consumers. This is due to the fact that we are currently in an economy that is focused on getting more “bang for your buck” when it comes to purchasing products. Consumers are constantly finding ways to save money and invest more carefully in the goods that they buy. So why not offer them a product with a concept that does just what they want? It is a simple notion that has yet to be recognized in the world of sustainability.

My idea of extending the life of my perfect size 5 shoe involves a shoe box made out of bound recycled materials that act as a sole replacement for when the first life of the pair of shoes is at an end. A shoe box is automatically thrown away upon purchasing a new pair of shoes, so it only makes sense to turn its composition into something that can be seen as an additional asset to the consumer. If the shoes are priced the same as they are now, the consumer would be paying for up to five lives of the product rather than the one. A nifty investment is being made in the mind of the consumer, and the manufacturing company is producing up to five less pairs of shoes. The way that it works, is the shoe box and the pair of shoes can be taken to either the store that they were initially purchased from or to a local shoe tailor where the box will be broken down into the necessary pieces to create the new soles. The old soles can be sent back to the manufacturer where new shoe boxes can be created, and the same method applies for the pair of shoes once every inch of the shoe box has been reused and there is no functionality left. The environment is happy with the food it is receiving from the waste of the shoe box, and the consumer is equally as happy with the extended life of their favorite pair of shoes.

In the reading, Cradle to Cradle, McDonough and Braungart point out examples where technical metabolism has been practiced within different industries over the decades. In the automobile industry, Henry Ford had his Model A trucks shipped in crates made of material that eventually became the vehicle’s floorboards upon being received at the dealerships. The interior design industry also demonstrated material reuse when a new carpet design composed of a bottom layer and detachable top was made available to consumers wishing to replace their carpeting. It was these cases that inspired me to come up with my idea of a sole replacement shoe box since they display mutually beneficial products while extending the practice of innovation.

The video this week also got my creative juices flowing when the concept of technical metabolism was brought up. It was explained that technical metabolism focused on the service of the product, or how the service can be replenished upon end use of the product. The nutrients of the product is recaptured within its own cycle, rather than being a source of direct nourishment to the environment. The piece of recyclable fabric that was created by Rohner Textile mill in Switzerland was compressed with used fibers and materials to form a strong, new piece of fabric. This concept inspired my idea for a durable material to construct the shoe box that will be equally as durable for the replacement of shoe soles. The picture below is a rough sketch of the way that the material used for the shoe boxes would look, without the addition of recycled fibers from used clothing.

My idea highlights on some previously discussed issues within the apparel industry, such as overconsumption, disposal, and problems associated with fiber processing. Overconsumption would not be an issue if my idea were adopted since consumers would not be enticed to make as many shoe purchases. The disposal issue is taken care of since the shoe box’s materials would be entirely used up to replace the soles of the shoes as necessary. Waste virtually doesn’t exist. Fiber processing and production would be constructed with the mindset that it may eventually be compressed into the material used to construct a shoe box with dual purposes. The entire process of my idea is a feasible one, and would make many steps in the right direction toward satisfying both the human race and the environment. Even though finding the perfect shoe seems impossible, we have the capability of making it possible on multiple occasions.
Picture: http://www.core77.com/blog/exhibitions/material_connexion_thai_materials_exhibition_photos_new_york_20074.asp

4 comments:

  1. Hey, Mallory!
    This is a facilitating idea . . . and very well argued and articulated! You obviously understand the mechanics of C2C and I think the product category you have chosen to alter is a good one. Keep those creative juices flowing!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for the positive feedback, Dr. Armstrong! I'm glad that you understand and like my idea. I'm looking forward to the feedback from my blog buddies.

      Delete
  2. Mallory,

    I like the way you took Henry Ford's concept and applied it to apparel. I think you have a very interesting product on your hands! In the C2C reading they discuss the concept of "reusable" products, and use the concept of a toaster. They say that today so called durables are tossed, instead of re-used. And that in todays society it is much easier to purchase something new than to track someone down to repair an item for you. How would you go about convincing consumers that your shoe product that requires more "work" should be purchased over one that requires less? You mention the shoes being priced the same as they are now, but lasting longer. As a consumer I love this concept, but how do you think the company's who stand to lose money due to less people purchasing shoes would feel? Do you think this loss would cause them to opt out of renewable shoes? This being said, I really do love your idea. In fact, I have a show repair place in Edmond that I constantly frequent because I would rather fix my favorites than by new. Well done!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kimberly,

      Thanks for the feedback! I do remember reading about the toaster, and I agree with the statement that it is easier to purchase something new than to find a trusting person to repair our used items. This goes back to our fast-paced lifestyle, and how our time is so important to us these days. The way that I plan to convince consumers to buy my product even though more "work" is required, is through the numbers. Showing exactly how much money would be saved overtime if consumers invested in my longer-lasting shoes would have a stronger impact, in my opinion. I am a numbers-based person in general, so giving consumers this information would hopefully be more effective. I am aware that companies selling the shoes have a slight chance of losing profits, but they also have a higher chance of increasing their customer base and customer loyalty. If customer base is increased, then the lost profits would be made up for through increased consumer usage. I'm glad that you love my idea!

      Delete