44 people think this is good

    Alessandra Rizzotti beeaaatriz Tom Bree Erica De Guzman hello20 Belem Cabrera Ray de Mesa tintin.lontoc Arif Yusof

Discuss

  • Stewart YardleyStewart Yardley

    We have heard of quite a number of water-saving methods that are common because water seems like the most important natural resource that is necessary for a person to continue living. We have already built that mentality until we often forget other resources such as plastic which needs to be conserved as well. This cheap plastic for lighting purposes is a good way to start small before proceeding on to try something bigger and more efficient.
    http://www.businesswaterscotland.co.uk

  • mikekatomikekato

    While I completely agree that the technology if fantastic for nations like the Philippines, I also believe that the true measure of its success will be when people in nations where we can afford the electricity opt to use it instead of conventional lighting where it provides sufficient lighting - just because it is better and more sustainable.

    • Bright Green EnterpriseBright Green Enterprise

      Good point! I sometimes wonder if countries will unwittingly develop themselves out of this innovative time in product design. Half of creative green-thinking engineering seems to me to be spurned by the need for its use in struggling environments. Once an area enjoys easy living mod-cons, it might drop such great work. There are incredible designers here in the UK where I'm from but you don't see that much green-energy in use in your average home.

      • mikekatomikekato

        Ditto. I am from the US and live/work in Japan. The kinds of "eco" products that sell well in these countries are generally high technology, high investment, and utilize some kind of subsidy. This way, both the user and the subsidy provider (usually government) can say that they are socially responsible. But the kinds of technologies that are simple, usually designed to reduce usage or eliminate unnecessary "needs" are ignored; often they are vilified. Until we, in the "have" nations restructure our use to match real needs and reasonable "wants", then the engineering that goes into providing more with less to struggling nations and struggling people in well-off nations will be perceived (accurately) as being false and condescending. I believe that real social responsibility and ecological living requires a reduction of our footprint, both individually and socially.

  • saidahwksaidahwk

    Well, I guess we finally found something to do with some of the water bottles!

  • Kimber BlairKimber Blair

    Wow is right! It seems so perfect-- it's sustainable. It meets (one of) the needs of people without taking advantage of them. And it's simple. I love it.

  • Hannah WassermanHannah Wasserman

    Wow. This is awesome. What an ingenious idea! It's crazy how quickly it has scaled. Definition of K.I.S.S