Just before COP15 Denmark has gotten its first carbon neutral building - the groundbreaking of the Green Lighthouse. The lighthouse is a part of the University of Copenhagen in Denmark. A place for students to study the future. The spectacular sundial-shaped building is designed by Christensen & CO. The building of course has solar-cells on the roof, it has intelligent solar shades, the led-light automatically adjust to daylight, there is natural ventilation, and surplus heat from the summer is not just pumped out with energy using air conditioners, but the heat is stored deep under ground and pumped back into the building during the cold winter.

During the COP15 Conference you will be able to come in and see the student services center. The building is hoped to be of inspiration to the negotiators and serve as proof that carbon neutral buildings are possible with good design and planning. 75% of the energy reductions achieved is due to a good, well-thought architectural design,  and not as we always hear of, caused by fancy technology.

Read more about the house and see a presentation movie here.

“The terrestrial water-cycle needs to be transformed. It is not a magic stream. It is running dry. Your role in the water-cycle is the cause and the solution. […] Over the millennia humans have continued to develop technologies to make it easier to obtain this essential resource to our lives. None of these technologies give any indication of when our water use has exceeded the renewal of our supplies. Nor was this technology designed to share water resources with other ecosystems.” (Tse-Hui Teh)

Tse-Hui Teh gives us, in her article RE: URGENT – You in the Water-Cycle, a fascinating insight into the water-cycle, which we in the industrialized world most often take for given, but which we none the less are a main ingredient of. Because we are the only species that has managed to find ways to transport more water than we can carry, we have manipulated the water-cycle in a non-sustainable way, leading way to much fresh, drinkable water out into the salty ocean. This doesn’t only makes us run low on drinking water in some places of the world, but the water further more crosses all kind of borders on its way, transporting and washing away as well natural minerals and human pollution and shutters and destroys our fragile eco-system.

“Knowing our role individually and collectively in assembling water-cycles and ecosystems will compel the design of new material configurations, boundaries, social values and administrative systems.” (Tse-Hui Teh)

How can we design new technologies that make us more aware of our use of water in our everyday life – that divides the use of water equally between the worlds inhabitants and between humans and other organisms? How can we make technology that connects us with the entire water-cycle, and make us understand that water is not a magic stream but a limited resource.

Is it possible to make technologies, that make us chose when and how we use water, the same way as we each day chose clothes depending on the weather? And how will such technologies effect our social lives so we for example do our laundry in the evening or washes the car when it rains anyway?
 

“If bloggers had the same kind of influence in 2000 that they have now, would that have changed the outcome of the election?
Oh, my God. No question, no question. Absolutely.” (Al Gore)

In an interview in Rolling Stones magazine Al Gore argues that the Internet will eventually overcome TV in the political discussion (we are not yet quit there, but we are getting there), and this will enable a shift in power and a shift in the public opinion to important matters such as climate change. Obama took the White House using the "here comes everybody" strategy. He is not yet able to rule the country through this people lead structure, but Al Gore are positive that this structure will one day, through the popularity of the Internet and social media,  be possible and effect the way big changes happen.

Knowing that the capitalistic system and the senate are still ten times more powerful than the people, I am convinced that activists, grass-roots organizations and the public will gradually mark a new era for power structure, and make action against climate change happen – the question is just if this will happen in time to save the planet?

Many climate-related events and political actions are already being organized through the Internet (see for example http://www.350.org/actions). Copenhagen will be full of events and activists during COP15, it will be interesting to see how much effect this ‘noise’ will get!
 

“The climate crisis introduces us to the fact that our immediate surroundings are being mediated by complex visualisations, interfaces, statistics and carbon quotas – thus an imaginary computer interface lurks in the blue sky, even deep in the country with no computers in sight!” (Søren Pold)

Climate is being measured and monitored all the time through pervasive computing and satellite systems. We don’t see the interface for climate measurements, but being a part of our climate, we as well get observed and interface/interlace with these ubiquitous technology systems. How does this situation change our perception of our being in the world, our nature and our climate. In his article, Imaginary Interfaces in the Blue Sky, Søren Pold describes this situation through a number of climate art works. We have to make interfaces for the climate problem in which the viewers are given the opportunity to understand and influence it.
 

“Will technology save us all?
Yes - But only if we RETHINK our perception of energy consumption and the role of technology” (Entwistle)

In her article, Rethink energy consumption and the role of technology, Johanne Mose Entwistle presents eleven meaningful voices that constitute the emotional, social and cultural meaning of energy consumption, which we will have to take into account in order to rethink our perception of energy consumption and the role of technology. Her article is based on the major anthropological research and development project ‘Minimum Configuration Home Automation’ carried out by the Alexandra Institute in order to find methods to make use full home automation technology that can help us reduce our consumption of energy.

“The voices point towards a role for technology as a helping hand and an added value in everyday life.” (Entwistle)

Read her article and learn more about how to take all levels of individual, social, and societal life into account to design use full technology for a greener future. Is this survey sufficient? Is it applicable to the design of technology you work with?
 

“The only sustainable way to get out of the current global financial and ecological crisis is to promote new economic models, new production systems and new ideas of wellbeing. To define and implement these new models is, of course, very difficult. But it is not impossible.” (Manzini)

Ezio Manzini, Professor of Design, suggests in his article Small, local, open and connected a new model for designing social innovation towards sustainability. The new scenario is called SLOC (small, local, open, connected), and is based on tendencies are all ready developing in our society such as the green revolution, the spreading of networks and the rising interest in designing complex solutions for daily problems. Manzini argues, that to reach the goal of reduced CO2 emission, we have to reorganize our lives and that new socio-technical systems build on small, local communities that are open and connected globally is the way to go.

But are we willing to live in such small, local societies? How do we build them? And are they really enough the rewind global warming?
 

Alex Steffen is the co-founder and head of Worldchanging, an organization full of good ideas and suggestions for new technological developments that can make it possible for us to, not only reduce our carbon footprints dramatically, but at the same time get to live more healthy and stable lives. Steffen coined the term ‘Bright green environmentalism’ (2003), which shaped an ideology believing that technological and social developments and innovation is the best way to deal with the climate crisis. The movement can be seen as opposition to the ‘deep green movement’ or ‘deep ecology’, as it is also often called. The ideas here are based on the ideology of Gaia, and are more skeptical towards the escalating development of new consumer goods and tecnology. Instead they wish to go back to more primitive life styles, maintaining a closer connection to Earth.

Steffen presents his optimistic view on how radical, technological innovation will provide the best foundation for a sustainable development, and tells how this is possible also within the limited time line the scientists give us. This bright green future will not only be more sustainable and positive for our environment, but will also provide us with better lives. Steffen’s optimistic view is often being met skepticism by ‘the older generation of well-heeled white men’, who request him to be more ‘realistic’.
 
“We can build that bright green future. We have the technological prowess, the design insight and even many of the working examples we need to transform our systems and reinvent our cities. We have the money. We may even be gaining the most needed components, vision and political will.” (Steffen)

In his article Planetary Boundaries and the New Generation Gap, Steffen argues how this is possible-- how the new generation has to lead the way with optimism. We have to prevent instead of treating, he suggests, in order to make a planet that stays healthy, and this we can do with new technological developments – developments that we shall also be willing to share with the developing countries.

Is it really possibly to design and invent a future that is both bright green and sustainable - and even provides us with better lives? If this is the case, then why hasn’t it happened yet? How can this turn become practicable? What do we need to do? What can the politicians at COP15 do to create a bright green future? Are people like Steffen and the bright green environmentalists optimists detached from reality, as the older generation of well-heeled white men would say? Or is it people like the Steffen who will lead the way towards a changing world?
 

Welcome to the debate forum for rethinking and discussing new technologies and design solutions for the age of climate change. It is my hope to establish and moderate a discussion that covers a broad variety of perspectives on the subject of new technological inventions and solutions. The debate forum is still only in its initial phase but more content will soon be added.

Within ‘the bright green movement’ (as they are called in opposition to ‘the deep greens’) there exists a positive trust in new innovative technologies and designs as the way to mitigate and adapt to climate change. But will the new technologies really get the tremendous effect that they have so often been predicted?

Can we somehow invent our way out of the rising energy consumption, and the natural damages that coal and oil based energy sources produce? How do we design us to a sustainable lifestyle without reducing our standard of living? How can we make new green cities, houses and cars? How can we produce designs that help us become more aware of our private and social energy use? Can new technologies restructure our lives making us consume less? How can we ensure that the new technological inventions also become available for countries that cannot afford to develop, produce or buy them, but for whom they are maybe the most crucial? And, perhaps most importantly, how can we invent design solutions that help us adapt to the all ready existing changes in climate such as droughts, tsunamis, earth quakes, rising coasts etc.?

How should the politicians at COP15 implement these new technologies into their decisions, securing not only the future development of these technologies, but also incorporating them into our everyday lives and making them available for people all over the world?

These questions and many more you will be able to read about and debate here on this blog.

Writers that contribute articles, which you will soon be able to read:

• Ronni Tino Pedersen, New Media Days, Denmark
• Tobias Lau, Head of Social Action, Denmark
• People speak, artist and activist organization