It would be hard for us to not do something in support of our local football players. So we’ve been hanging a terrible towel every sunday for the season, especially today.

Remember, you can also show your support year-round on your bicycle too! We have special retro-reflective vinyl applied onto fenders in the shape of the classic steel mark. Visible day and night to get in your Steelers pride.

So, here’s hoping to jamming those Jets, and taking Pittsburgh to the Super Bowl.

What’s wrong with you? You’re on a bike, why aren’t you smiling?!

Which of course, made me smile.

Credit goes to LiveLeak.com for the video which I found at digg.com

(Credit: Denmark Tourism Bureau)

It takes only 15 stationary bikes to maintain a full brightness of the 700 LEDs which cover the 17 meter tall tree.  Impressive and though provoking, especially as the article at CNET then dives into the eco and global warming side aspect.

Not covered in the article is the interesting highlight this puts on technology and improvements in various related arenas. Bicycles and generators have been around for the past century, but very infrequently saw use as electrical generation machines. Only after improving generation and light yielding devices, can we fall back on a primitive form of mechanical energy.

We have toyed with the idea of occasionally powering either of our two belt driven items (Leo and the yet un-named drill press) via bicycle. In this thought process, the issue of power must be looked at, and whether to convert the bicycle to electricity, then power the existing motors, or instead adapt the belt system. When written like so, it seems almost obvious that the most efficient system would be to skip the electric middle man. So why don’t we more often?

Maybe the answer to energy consumption does not lie in hydrogen cars and LED lights. Everyday simplicities brought to mechanical tasks use thousands of kilowatts each day. So maybe we should all hop on our bikes next time we want to open one of those automated sliding doors.

The interest in past objects as things of value is never mentioned in the latest eco-blog or Portland-based zine. The reclamation, appreciation and preservation of these antiques is arguably one of the most sustainable practices one can partake in. In reality, this is a hobby, or profession, which does not garner enough attention or praise. Worse yet, will the niche market even exist in a decade? Gone in a century?

With today’s throw-away culture, perhaps in different industries worldwide, there is little motivation to keep an object beyond its built-in lifespan. Certain industries have escaped this grim fate, such as the automobile. Here, the cream of the crop is still retained, pride remains in the premium or rare products. Will there still be appreciation for a 1992 Chrysler LeBaron in fifty years? WIll one even exist? The same can be said of incredibly popular, but less “innovative” products, such as the fourth generation iPod,  the handheld Dyson vacuum cleaner, or any of the hundreds of new models of Nike shoes.

[singlepic id=66 w=520 h=390 float=center]

The blame should not be place on culture, nor on any one catalyst. Instead the point should be taken under consideration both by producers and consumers alike. It is arguable that the age of plastics killed the antique. Thousands of injection molded artifacts would be hard pressed to hold value as well as a hand crafted chair from the 19th century. It is just as easy to argue that the digital age ushered in the destruction of this type of appreciation, as knowledge is now freely traded. Objects are used only to access this knowledge, why would they themselves hold value? Under this mantra, even the Gutenberg Bible has little value compared to the revision trackable, alternative comparable web 2.0 versions flooding the web.

A carpenter or furniture wright earned a higher wage the more solidly constructed the table he built was, as it would last longer and suit it’s purpose more appropriately. In many industries today, however, the faster an Industrial Designer shames “last year’s” design, the fatter his paycheck.

[singlepic id=65 w=520 h=390 float=center]

These are of course all generalizations, many out of context to underline the point. Further research could, and should, be done on the subject before any statements are made. The core thought and interjection still remains, what happened to the appreciation of antiques, and will such an art exist in 50 years?