As unsustainable as Print Command (Ctrl+P)!

Universal blanket standardization of best practices to save our planet

Oh, another bunch of refined paper goes to waste-bin thanks to extremely complex and varied document printing processes across the varied software environment, across the government, corporate and educational institutions, across the world. Taking heavier and heavier toll on environment with every “Ctrl+P+Enter”, possibly every second rather micro-second in some corner of world.

It’s fairly easy for a planner specially an architect planner to acknowledge this fact of unsustainable printing practice and track down the reasons behind that due to their diversified nature of work, active participation in software environment and multiplicity of technological affinity. An average planner with architectural background is usually familiar with at least 10 to 15 software even excluding downstream subsidiaries of parent software programs, comfortable working with 7 to 10 software and currently must be using 3 to 7 software applications spread across desktop to online to cloud based environment; Some frequently used software tools ranging from drafting to data gathering and aggregation, to data analysis and interpretation, to collaboration, to mapping and image interpretation to presentation and simulation and so on, printing system ranging from tiniest of printers to the largest of plotters available. And he or she can easily recognize that one thing common in all these tools, systems and activities, is that nothing is common when it comes to Ctrl+P, i.e. print command i.e. printing process. Hence the huge environmental losses!

It’s not that you must have a global authority to control printing behavior across this technological landscape, its more about morality of tech-producers, corporate management as well responsibility and choices at user’s end. Still, it won’t be a bad idea to have some form of global printing governance and management through a nodal or distributed agencies across the globe just to identify, evolve and clinically establish the best probable practices in printing, standardizing and implementing the best printing practices and related programming practices through integration at software programming stage itself or to introduce plugins at regular intervals as tech-retrofit or to printducate (education of best practices about printing) while kids are still getting educated or even through organizational incentives if needed. Some examples of technological intervention even if you consider these at lighter note can be like default “Always draft mode otherwise specified” setting across the printer and plotter community and product lines across the world no matter small or large, something like having two big display/ push buttons one green and one stark red which will appear the moment you press the Ctrl+P (print command), green bottom (default draft mode) saying something like- “Thanks for choosing me because you are helping mother nature to thrive, btw do you really need to do even this?” and the red button (customizable for higher resolutions) saying “think twice before going ahead with higher-resolution, with this single click you might add little more burden to our mother nature, can’t you think of some other way to communicate to help save little more of ink cartridge and little more of paper?”

One interesting and probably right observation and recommendation is that we might need to revise the definition and perception of Draft Print Resolution. At present drat image or text resolution is kind of too much pixelated draft, and creates vast disparity in the outcome of high-resolution (even normal-resolution) and draft-resolution print, hence more and more people are opting for either high or normal resolution across the organizations, leaving draft unattended. We need to raise the print resolution of default draft resolution little higher than the present configuration so that people do not immediately make higher resolution print choices discarding the draft.  There is one dilemma here as well, a common educated person, environmentally conscious as he or she thinks of himself or herself, making more damage to environment than the average person with stubborn but consistent printing behavior.  Most of the environmentally conscious persons take draft mode printouts as a natural choice to protect the environment only to realize that printouts are too hazy, unclear, un-presentable to the client or audience and they end up taking same print again in normal or higher resolution format (shear wastage point No. 1, in the name of being environmentalist), they also tend to take higher size/ A3 content on an lower size/A4 paper in their deliberate (sometimes showing-off) effort to save paper/ environment, only to realize that the texts printed are almost unreadable or at least not presentable and hence they end up taking printouts again on larger size paper (shear wastage point No. 2, in the name of being pro-green or something), same story in case of slide Vs handouts as well. All of this wastage can be avoided just by keeping print command in universally default draft mode while making draft mode with little better resolution format so that people don’t always have to make choices between mostly discarded draft mode and frequently chosen normal or high resolution mode for print.

A random thought which also comes to mind is that may be the life cycle cost of providing every student and employee an upgradable device like ipad or tab or something for the regularized communication, discussion and presentation purpose within the premises or on the go might be much less than lifecycle cost of all the printing gimmicks that goes across the educational and organizational landscape (someone need to do the math), annual, monthly, quarterly, weekly and daily reports sometimes in hard copies, documentation and stacks of documents in so called database or reference library, presentation pamphlets, organizational profile handouts, educational assignments, submissions and so on and on; you know it better or better know it early! Similarly the lifecycle cost of buying and operating ipad or tab or something for reading news (which also has added customization advantage) might be much-much less than the lifecycle cost of buying newspaper for rest of your life. Just a thought though!!       

Need for printed information is not going to go anywhere anytime soon but we can always find out better ways to communicate and better print management at product design end as well as programming and user end, to save the paper and ink cartridge, just to contribute a bit for making this planet a better place!! 

A to Z Satellitexted : Urban Planning Text

Satellite view or architecture and planning resembling English alphabet 

Its took one bright idea, couple of days, several dozen cities, hundreds of Google Earth rotation and thousands of zoom-in-out to compile this piece of work for you. Enjoy Satellitexted* urbanism!    

*Satellitexted : Building plan in satellite view resembling Alphabet!

Still untapped potential of raw satellite images for city planners!

Urban Planning satellitexted

Satellite view of urban alphabet

Love exploring cities from the eyes of satellites! they tell stories which were never written, imprints of time still visible, you see a city, you see it growing, you see where its going, you learn where it comes from. They say you need to travel if you want to learn, you confront with knowledge and experience while travelling. Some tools like free or else satellite imageries were not available for planners decades back or even recently, by the time it arrived for planners as a tool, GIS and satellite image interpretation etc. also accompanied and hence all the focus shifted towards degitising the whole world including your neighborhood street and front yard, making layers after layers, though they sure help planners in many ways, but you know at times on feels that in this whole process of mechanization and automation and interpretation, the shear beauty of raw, as it is satellite images and views are loosing its significance. 

The naked and raw satellite images of earth like as seen in google earth can tell things and give clues which even high level high resolution satellite image interpretations can't tell, the judgement of human eyes and brain, not just the computer processor, once in a while for sake for fun learning at least. Urban planners, transport planners and so on planners need to see and understand the random behaviors of random cities across the world, travel wont be possible and you don't have enough time to wait for that as well so go explore a city, any city or settlement or villages on google earth or something, every time you will go there you will learn something. Don't get simply spoon-fed by other's version of what that particular city is  all about, go learn yourself through your own version of experience, through satellite images, if you are not familiar with the streets and terraces and vegetation of a city from its aerial or satellite dimension, your all efforts to become a good planner is halfhearted. Explore to understand and share with the world or simply use this learning in you next city planning or development project. There is always more than you can explore there!

Architecture Satellitexted

Satellite view of architectural alphabet 

Early collaboration - The only sustainable way to a successful project!

Skewed focus on man hours shows lack of vision and macro level perspective.

We are trying to deal here two separate but overlapping subjects.

Apparently it will take another century for people to realize and acknowledge that amount of man hour invested for certain outcome has very less or at times has nothing to do with the outcome, except in a production environment. They have glamorized work rather than results because that’s what they have done throughout preliminary to mid evolutionary stage of their existence, it’s only recently that they have realized that they should pause and rethink, re-strategies their way of working, possibly that’s why there are so many managerial positions and functional hierarchy exists in any work environment, that’s why machines and automation today. In the bygone era when people used to rely on theirs hunting instinct and brute strength to gather food day and night just for their survival, at that point of time outcome was directly proportional to amount of man hour invested, but if we are carrying that same attitude in our present life even after countless centuries later whether its work or daily chores or educational environment, then there must be something wrong in our approach or mindset. Though all these novel mindbits are not going to change anyone since people have and will find out traditional or innovative ways to invest their precious time and resources in some not so productive or rather wasteful laborious works in the name of engagement, work ethics, traditional methodology and so on. Man hours are still essential today but is not and should not be monumental, rather than putting mindless hours of shear hard work on a certain issue or project one should engage there mind towards strategic intervention, re-intervention and resource-optimization regarding that particular issue or project for lesser hour of work per outcome which in turn will lessen the stress level, provide work satisfaction and give more hour of leisure time. 

   

Let’s take an example of project lifecycle. You start with an assumption or a vision, say we have to build a new state-of-art sustainable or something city. It is primarily driven by demand and project economics, you estimate and gather resources accordingly, you set a timeline, you of course have a template of timeline which you as a consultant or a developer apply everywhere because you see it’s a proven methodology or timeline. Construction and project management process has a time span with only marginal flexibility since it’s a production environment and it has its own time and technological limitations, so keeping that aside let’s see where is the scope of improvement in terms of saving work hours in a project lifecycle from the very beginning right from the moment when that bright idea first strikes somebody’s brain.  Project and business development you know also has its own pace of progress depending on which particular part or location of the world your client and project is located, but for the time being our focus would be planning and design process and understanding how much man hour and resources we usually apply for certain outcome and how to optimize that, whether there is even scope for optimization or not, though one feels there is, indeed. You quickly prepare a vision plan statement right or wrong but appealing, you allocate responsibilities; you start on a blank sheet with a mug of coffee to catch ideas out of thin air or relying on one’s experience and knowledge or understanding of the contemporary regional market or in some cases straight sanitized ideas from Google, bravo! After a quick brainstorming session one person or maybe two lays the broad outline of plan or design based on certain assumptions while rest of the workforce starts filling the intermediate details and ruthlessly keep on detailing only until they realize that something went grossly wrong in the broad outline or the assumptions, or may be client changed their mind or may be a new board of director or project leader with his or her own particular vision or idiosyncrasy has appeared either your side or on client’s side who wants everything to be re-done from scratch to align things to his or her vision, or may be market situation has changed or may be a new technology has surfaced and so on.   

What was wrong here? Putting ruthless countless hours of detailing is okay but only if the project framework is robust and logical enough to sustain any or most of the future dynamics, an outline and assumptions accommodative and smart enough to absorb and negotiate inevitable future changes as it proceeds ahead. What was wrong here is that when most of the collaborative effort was needed then only one or two people were deciding the fate of project due to their commanding position. In this exemplary case of new city vision plan, when it was the time where urban and regional planner, transport planner, economist, real estate expert, social scientist, environment planners, landscape experts, urban designers, architects, and public and community representatives had to be present at one platform at the beginning of the project to brainstorm and formulate an inclusive, sustainable and future proof plan with democratic consensus, at that vital point of time only one or two people where making the decisions according to their own particular idiosyncrasies, which was inevitably unsustainable. Hence, the several repetitive cycles of wasteful man-hours till the completion of project.  You should know when is the right time to collaborate; you can keep on detailing endlessly afterwards, if you want! Thousands of sincere man hours put in wrong direction is a serious toll on increasingly scarce resources which we can’t really afford if we want a sustainable future or even otherwise and all this thoughtless waste just because we didn’t collaborate when it was needed most.  

You see there are frequent cases when some projects of regional or national importance get stuck for infinite time even when they were just about to complete, only because community representatives were not part of the planning process irrespective of whether there is such provision or not, either they didn’t have proper say or they lacked motivation and incentive to join or collaborate early, such a waste of resource as a result!     

  

A place called Street!

Route De Sospel, Menton, Monaco

View Larger Map

The only sustainable retrofit whether it’s a product or city environment

To leave scope for future retrofits in the moment you conceive the idea of product or vision of a city.

Today you realize after 5 or 20 or 30 years that this product or system or infrastructure which you had planned back then with the most sophisticated tools and technology available at that time, with the best brains at disposal and the best hands available, that robust system of past desperately needs a technology overhaul and efficiency retrofit today, just to validate its contemporary relevance and to drag itself for few more miles in the tomorrow, but it would have been quite difficult for you to confront and accept this apparently unpleasant fact that this product, infrastructure, system or even strategy which you claim to be the most advanced and avant-garde today is very soon going to be outdated, very soon indeed!! Acknowledge it or not, that’s how it works, especially when technology, planning and policy is concerned only thing which remains eternal is aesthetics and nostalgia associated with such technology, possibly that’s why many people still prefer analog watch over digital one, that’s totally a personal choice.

Change is not only an integral law of nature but equally a law of technology, inevitable like growth of humanity, because humanity is curious and that’s why innovation and hence need to replace and retrofit old technology. Problem with the contemporary approach of planning and product design is that we tend to conceive and create a system or product which is 100% complete in its form and design “today” leaving no scope for future integration except few exceptions, even knowing that need for retrofit is waiting only at the next turn of system or product life-cycle  You see those overly stuffed embedded products, jam packed conduits, circuits and channels, overcrowded service corridors, saturated underground utility trench, suffocating right of ways (ROW), chaotic narrow streets, thousands of unventilated unlit city rooms and residences, all of this have two things in common, one, is the shear lack of vision and second, ignorance to change. Change which is inevitable, but we are happy and content with what we have planned today, who cares for tomorrow? Meanwhile, you enjoy all the attention and praise because of your new product and system. They might even have bagged few awards for best innovation and work in the field, but it all doesn't really matter if that product or vision fails in next couple of years. The single largest criteria of product or planning judgment and evaluation has to be sustainability, which means your product or system or vision have to have an inbuilt scope for absorption of future technology and efficiency integration for sustainability, to keep up with future pace of life and lifestyle.

Lets talk something about "sustainability" here. The word "sustainability" has been exploited much in recent years  increasingly assuming a very narrow meaning just revolving around "anything green". Lets keep in mind that being or doing green is just a piece of sustainability. Sustainability is much more, it is vastly inclusive a phenomenon, it is about the whole life cycle of product or system or plan. if you make a greenest product on earth which has a life span or tech-viability span or people-acceptance span of one or two year that is not sustainable when compared to a product which is though not so green in its DNA but which has a larger life span or acceptance span of may be half a decade or so or more. All the resources  which has gone into making of that short lived green product goes to vain at the end of its functional or acceptance span but the similar resources  which has been consumed in making that not so green product with a much longer life span seems more sustainable an option.  Using 5 most "greenest" products of same use one after another in just five years is much less sustainable than using 1 single "not so green" product for 5 years.

Now today you realize that environmental laws have become more stringent, people have become more educated, aware and choosy  technology has become more and more complex and sophisticated, every coming tomorrow product or system of yesterday is becoming obsolete, what to do. We can’t really plan for something which has not been invented yet, but we can always try to leave some scope for future integration, for the time when it is invented. It might add to few percent of capital or man hour but it’s worth giving a thought. Acknowledging the need for future retrofit and leaving some scope for it today will make our life easy tomorrow, products more relevant and cities more sustainable.