New Balance Excellent Makers

Osian Batyka-Williams, another nutty Maker

I'm working with New Balance to design and make a sculpture incorporating remnants from the shoe manufacturing process (think swiss cheese-like pieces of cloth, leather, and the synthetics used when manufacturing shoes) as part of their Excellent Makers campaign.

New Balance is working to emphasize the craft in their products and that many of their shoes are actually made in the US, a respectable claim given that much of the competition favors sending those jobs overseas.  

Initial tack-welding of metal framework over which I'll stretch the remnants

An example of the types of remnants I'll be using from NB's manufacturing facilities in Maine and Mass.

Here are a couple of the other artists involved in the Excellent Makers project:

Osian Batyka-Williams, sculptor & designer:
http://www.osianbw.com/Product.html

Kate Gibb, printmaker
http://kategibb.blogspot.com/

Swing on by the Outdoor Retailers show in SLC this week and take a look at the sculpture-in-progress -- I'll be constructing it over the course of several days; it will be auctioned off at the end and the proceeds donated to a local non-profit.

Wheel Trellis, completed

Just finished installing the most recent work, a trellis fabricated from bicycle wheels.

I had the good fortune to work with CJR Homes in Ft. Collins, CO for the installation; as it was a new exterior wall we could mount the anchor points directly to the framing for maximum support before the exterior and interior finish treatments were applied.  See their progress here.

My main artistic concerns were to not visually distract from the circular and organic shapes with mounting and attachment hardware, as well as use recycled (ha, ha!) materials with a finish that wouldn't look old and crumbly when matched with the new stucco finish on the home exterior.

The construction and design of the home itself I had nothing to do with, but was impressed with the re-used materials in its construction and the energy efficient details.  For example, it uses radiant heating which takes advantage of the floor's thermal mass to maintain a comfortable temperature and has siding fabricated from beetle kill wood which has some fantastic natural orange and blue coloration.

Healthy Chemicals: an Oxymoron?

As my collection of paints, thinners, stains, degreasers, oils, finishes, and primers grew, so did my requirements for masks, gloves, respirators, and flammable cabinet real estate.  It seemed like a good time to reevaluate what chemicals I’m using in my studio and if there was a good way to use fewer toxins in my work and lessen the chance of mushroom clouds appearing in place of my shop (or the change of poisoning myself).  I’m no chemist or environmental scientist, so the information I’ve gathered is a mixture of advertising from environmental paint companies, wikipedia, common sense, and guesswork.

A few guidelines that rose to the top:

1.  It may go without saying, but the more you want to modify a surface from its ‘natural’ state, the more stuff you have to use.  So, the best way to avoid using toxins is not to use chemicals at all, or only use those that protect a surface rather than changing its color/texture.

2.  VOCs (volatile organic compounds) are to be avoided or eliminated where possible.

There are a few sneaky paint manufacturers who advertise “zero VOC” paint, but this is only true for the base color – as soon as you add color tints it emits VOCs.  What numbers constitute acceptable vs. dangerous VOC levels are somewhat a matter of debate, depending on the location of use, sub-category of compound, and how much money the source stands to loose (or make).  From Consumer Reports :

Federal VOC limits are now set at 250 grams per liter (g/l) for flat paints and 380 g/l for others . . . California's standards are stringent: 150 g/l for nonflat finishes and 100 g/l for flat. Even tougher is the 50 g/l level for all finishes set by California's South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD), around Los Angeles.

My own experience is that anything over 100 g/l requires a lot of ventilation and zero VOC is by far the best -- I have to evacuate my 400 sqft studio when I use Minwax stains (250  VOC).

3.  Water-based chemicals are generally better than those that require solvents.  When you need to use solvents, use the citrus-based ones.

4.  MSDSs (material safety data sheets) are your friend – there is certain information that manufacturers are required to disclose about their product.  My experience has been that the harder it is to find the MSDS on a manufacturer’s website, the more they have to be chemically ashamed of (are you paying attention, Minwax?)

5.  Some products that seem very similar may in fact have very different properties, even if the change is only color.  Cadmuim oil paints, for example, are toxic.  Titebond II wood glue has fewer health dangers than Titebond I or Titebond III (although III is more waterproof, so you’ll have to evaluate if its is worth the extra risk for the added durability – a trade-off I saw in many wood finish products as well).

A few products that seem promising:

The Home Depot’s FreshAire Choice – I haven’t used it yet but hopefully it signifies that the push for healthy paints isn’t just a niche market/industry.

Vermont Natural Coatings – fantastic customer service, and a product line that uses the byproducts of the cheesemaking process.  I’ve made a few sample pieces and am waiting to see about durability.

BioShield – they use clay pigments in many of their products and have a nice range of wood tints.  Some of the colors I ordered arrived dried-out, so there may be some manufacturing/packaging issues to be sorted out.

Earthpaint – I haven’t tested their finishes yet, but they seem to walk the talk.

The 'Greenest' Companies in America

The following was submitted as a response to Newsweek's recent article on the '100 Greenest Companies in America':





I was surprised to open the recent issue of Newsweek (Oct 25, 2010) and find Coca-Cola, Raytheon, and McDonald’s listed in the top 100 ‘Greenest Companies in America’ (ranked 54th, 75th, and 79th respectively).  I understand that your ranking system used many experts, numerical metrics, and number-crunching algorithms, but what about common sense?  How is it that a company substantially involved in promoting obesity, a weapons manufacturer, and a fast food chain are ranked so highly?


When promoting environmental stewardship we cannot loose sight of what these companies do, regardless of how they do it.  Otherwise, we could pat ourselves on the back for clubbing baby seals with sustainably harvested  trees.


Sincerely,


Joe Norman