The document discusses energy in three sentences:
Energy exists in many forms including kinetic energy, potential energy, thermal energy, electromagnetic energy, chemical energy, nuclear energy, and renewable and non-renewable energy. The availability and practicality of different energy sources depends on factors such as environmental impact, sustainability, and cost. New technologies aim to improve energy efficiency and transition to more sustainable energy sources.
Hi....I’m James Pierce \nToday I'm going to be presenting my work with Eric Paulos on MATERiALIZING ENERGY. \n
Energy is clearly a matter of great concern these days.\nRising concerns over sustainability, global warming and energy security have made energy a major issue. \n\n\n
while without questions a matter of great concern, energy itself is a strange matter. \n
Physicists tell us that we can’t create or destroy energy. \n
At the same time, everyday language tells us that energy IS something we produce and consume. \n \n
Within HCI and Interaction design a number of works have engaged with sustainability and energy. \n\n
As well as sustainability and material consumption. \n\n
But rarely have they engaged explicitly with energy and materiality integrally. \nIn our work we have been approaching energy through the lens of materiality,\ndrawing on diverse literature from philosophy, material culture studies, design theory and other areas to develop a perspective on energy-as-materiality. \n
Previously backlund et al have explored the aesthetics of energy as material in design.. \n\n\n
our work builds on and incorporates this perspective,\nalthough we importantly also proceed from an understanding of energy as a material OF DESIGn..\n something that exists and is designed into existence.. \n
as well as a material THAT DESIGNS,\nas something that actively structures how we live in and experience the world. \n
in the remainder of this presentation ill present and employ and design approach of materializing energy...\nwhich involves explicitly designing energy to be experienced as something more tangible and meaningful in our everyday lives. \nill present three critical themes...\nand we develop each theme through a combination of critical inquiry and material design exploration. \n(building things while thinking about the things we are building)\n \n
but first, an important backdrop for our work are the dominant and emerging regimes of energy\n
throughout our work we tend to challenge unchallenged assumption about how we interact with energy\n\n
for example, one important context is energy decentralization and microgeneration, where energy is produced on smaller scales through methods such as solar, wind and geothermal generation\nas its been pointed out, the deployment of new technologies such as microgeneration and smartmetering technologies not only challenge accepted ways of imaging or talking about energy... \nbut are likely to raise the salience of energy issues... and offer unprecedented opportunities for "in sight and mind energy systems"\n
along these lines, we argue that these types of emerging technologies offer unprecedented opps to materialize energy,\nrather than simply embracing such technologies as CLEANER and more EFFICIENT technologies \nwe instead should see them as opportunities to re-design how people interact with and experience energy. \nfor example, consider the idea that you might treat your energy DIfferently if you produced it yourself....\n\n
more generally, our work calls attention to the idea that new technologies such as microgeneration technologies offer opportunities to more radically re-shape cultural practices and expectations for sustainability. \n\nthis is a really crucial point.. what we are saying is that we can, and should, consider designing toward very different and sustainable ways of being... for example, instead of restricting our thinking to encouraging people to turn off the lights to save money, we could instead imagine that the normal social practice is consider--at a very instinctual level-- the availability of OUR COLLECTIVE COMMUNAL energy. maybe it’s simply not normal or acceptable to use lights during the day, especially during periods when energy supplies are low. in the same way that it’s not, in our culture, acceptable to not tip a restaurant, or to take someone else’s jacket on the coat rack at the restaurant. how could we MATERIALIZE these types of everyday practices with and around energy?\n\n\n
\n
our methodological approach is somewhat unique, although aligned in part with prior approaches including\n
our approach involved a combination of\nengaging with theory from various fields\nwhile also engaging in material design explorations\nand in more limited capacity interviewing people about these things\neach of these strands mutually informed one another.... so the things we built helped us both understand and develop theoretical ideas\n
we deployed 3 sets of artifacts to a small set of participants\nfor everyday energy things, we assembled a group of common objects in order to engage participants in a discussion about energy and materiality. \nenergy mementos are small objects for collecting, keeping sharing and activating small bits of personal energy\nlocal energy lamp explores engaging people with local energy and energy metadata \n\n
the first theme ill present is the intangibility of energy\n
as a point of departure for our work we asked ourselves the question: ‘what is energy?”\n
a review of literature on the concept of energy revealed many different notions of energy. \nfor example, the common physical definition as the ability to do work. \nor energta social necessity\nor strategic material\n
looking at the concept of energy, we arrived at several diverse notions of energy\na complementary method for understanding what energy IS, we asking participants about energy. \n
we assembled a range of everyday things and asked particpants questions including: \n
participants expressed diverse, sometimes conflicting understanding of energy\nfor example, many participants differenitated between the scientific concept of energy they learned about in school\nand the energy they used when turning on lights or charging their phone\n
for example.. \n
for another particpants “you can’t hold it in your hand and say THIS is energy”\n\n
so while energy per is in many ways intangible, we consider what it would be to actually hold energy in your hand, and say THIS IS ENERGY. \nand we present a framework for designing energy as materiality, as something tangible\nthis involves 4 types of interacting with energy as materiality\ncurrently, design is focused almost exclusively on consuming, or activating energy..\nalso focusing on collecting, keeping and sharing energy opens up a range of design possibilities to be consider \nespecially in the context of technologies such a microgeneration and smart-metering technologies \n
building on this idea of energy as intangible--and our focus now is on electricity-- we argue that energy as we commonly experience it is undifferentiated . and by WE I am referring to us in this room. and others in quote “developed” contexts. \n\n
and while in some ways energy may be differentiated in terms of, for example, scale\n
from the perspective of use all energy is basically the same\nits interesting that for examplewe rarely use the word energies--the plural form of the word energy-- in everyday langauge. \n\n
the fact is energy does not typically matter to us\n \n
in contrast, from material cultures studies we know that some things DO matter to us.\nthat all things have meanings.. and some even acquire deep significance in our lives\n
from this understanding of material culture, we can think about approaching energy itself as material culture\n
we can take concepts and theory from material culture studies and extend them to energy\nfor example, with physical objects we exhibit a range of possession rituals\ndisplaying, repairing, cleaning, gifting, bequeathing, and so on... \n
how might we design for energy possession rituals?\n
even seemingly identical physical objects are in fact unique and particular\nand in many cases we become attached to particular things in our lives\n
extending these ideas to include energy...\nwe can consider what it might mean to have singular energy,\nor become attached to PARTICULAR energy. \n
approaching energy through the lens of material culture allows us to ask questions that we haven’t asked before\n such as “can we become attached to particular energies?”\n
in order to begin to materially explore such questions we designed and prototyped Energy mementos. \nthese are small objects for collecting, keeping sharing an activating small bits of energy, \nwe designed them to not communicate any clear utilitarian function. \n one of these energy mementos is the shake light bottle... \nwe presented the energy memento prototypes and engaged partcipants in a discussion about them and proposed scenarios such as receiving and giving as a gift. \n
for some participants, the prototypes seemed to clearly communicate concepts such singular energy and energy attachment. \nfor example, this participant described the prototypes as “Pure, like special little energy....”\n
however, others struggled with the concept of energy that could be impractical and meaningful\nthis idea that energy could be MORE or OTHER than strictly a means to some end was a strange idea.. \n
we tend to view the energy mementos as a way of helping to materialize the idea that energy itself might have symbolic value\n\nso while energy and energy-related physical technologies necessarily have symbolic value\nin many ways these symbolics values are weakly defined \nfor the most part, energy itself is not designed to enter into the symbolic realm of consumption\nfor us, this suggests huge opportunities to re-design or re-code the material symbolic value of energy for sustainability. \n
for example, we might recode energy for the notion of CARE.\nwe might design for caring for energy in ways similar to the care we at times exhibit when cultivating and preparing food to consume\n\n\n\n
we also point out a potential danger in designing explicitly for energy per se to enter into the symbolic realm of consumption. \ndoing so could in fact lead to the increased consumption of energy as an unsustainable object of desire\nlike, for example, the ways we consume things like clothing, cars, and portable electronics\n
\n
something remarkable about energy is that it is so readily available\nso much so, that we hardly realize it... except on the rare occasion when we find ourselves without power\n(like, for example, when, Ironically, I got to Aarhus with no laptop power adaptor... and needed to work on this presentation... \nand so I DID actually TREAT the energy stored on my laptop differently in some sense... )\n
so this remarkable availability of energy allows us to remarkable things\nlike adjust the temperature in our homes with the touch of a button. \n
and while it may be difficult to argue that central heating has not improved our lives\nat the same time we have lost certain value from the elaborate and involved cultural practices around the hearth--the center of the home--- \nwhere heating the home was INTEGRATED with practices such as chopping wood, tending to the hearth, cooking, eating and gathering as a family. \n\n
philosopher of technology albert borgmann describes this as technological availability\nwhere technology renders things such as warmth available to us instantaneously, ubiquitously, safely and easily. \n
and, while often a good thing, what borgmann points out is that much is at once lost\nborgmann describes positive types of active engagement with and through technology as focal engagement and focal practices\nwhich are never purely means to some end.\n
this opens up the possibility of considering engagement with energy as a focal thing\n
we can ask: how might we design for focal engagement with energy\nin particular, we propose designing for focal engagement with local energy and energy metadata\n\n\n
in order to materially engage with these questions we designed and prototyped the local energy lamp\nthe basic idea behind this is to materialize various qualities of energy--such as its age and source-- using energy metadata and the actual light of the lamp\n\nfor example, orangish tinted light might indicate the use of local solar electricity, while bluish tinted light might indicate the use of local wind energy. \n\nwe presented the lamp along with some microgeneration systems such as solar and hand generation, and proposed different scenarios of use\nsuch as reading or watching tv when the lamp was blue and the wind was blowing... \n
\n
\n
another partipant in that study described actually changing their heating practices depending on the availability of energy based on natural wind patterns\n\nsimilarly some of our participants described potentially doing activities at different times such as doing laundry when the wind was blowing.\n
this suggests the concept of energy attunemnt-- rather than shouting at people ABOUT their energy.. which is often what energy feedback monitors do-- we might instead try to design to invite people to be more in touch with their energy.\n\nand so here we’re hitting on some the ideas we heard this morning about TUNING from Richard Coyne \n
\n
as we have argued throughout..... \n
\n
\n
\n
and although energy has been designed not to matter to us in these ways\nwe can design things to be otherwise... \n
thinking about collecting keeping sharing and activating energy-as-materiality opens up a vast new design landscape to explore... \n
although I’ve stressed designing for sustainable interactions and practices with and around energy throughout.. we have also aimed to design interactions with energy as more pleasurable, enjoyable and meaningful to individuals and communities. as well as integrated in the normal, everyday ways we live and organize our lives. (not simply provocative statements or novelty objects)\n\nBUT I hope it’s clear that even designers and researchers who are NOT centrally concerned with sustainability can think about designing new and interesting interactions with energy in terms of collecting keeping sharing and activating. \n\nin closing, I hope that in the future designers and researchers will find these ideas useful in imagining and materializing more sustainable and desirable ways of interacting with energy in everyday life. \n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
similar can be said for electronic music players that allow us to listen to virtually any music, anywhere at any time\n
compared to creating music with instruments played by hand\n
or pressing a button on an electrical food processor for several seconds\n
versus preparing food by chopping, grating and crushing with the power of ones own hand \n
while borgmann is highly critical of newer technologies, peter-paul verbeek argues that such types of focal engagement are possible even with electronic and digital technologies. \n
we hope that in the future designers and researchers will use these ideas to imagine and materialize more sustainable ways of collecting, keeping sharing and activating energy in everyday life. \n\n\nmention future work\n
\n
it should also be noted that emerging paradigms such as microgeneration and energy decentralization ARE in many ways real. \nAnd reports indicate future adoption at even larger scales.\nfor example, govt reports indicate the possibility of the 40% house having low-carbon microgeneration technologies by 2050. \n
as researchers and designers concerned with sustainability, we also call attention to the potential to inadvertently help sustain the unsustainable through faith in technological solutions. \nso while we are not proposing that microgeneration is the solution to our energy problems, we are suggesting that it is likely to play a significant role in our lives in the future and that we, as interactive designers and researchers can and should help shape-- or unshape-- such technologies for sustainability. \n\n