Magic Carpet

How to make a profit by reusing waste.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


The key to resource efficiency is to understand products as a means to deliver a service to the customer, rather than thinking of them as things. This idea of “products as service” was first put forth in 1993 by German chemist Michael Braungart and William McDonough, dean of the University of Virginia’s architecture school. Braungart and McDonough advanced a new way to conceive of products, breaking them down into three categories: consumables, products of service, and unmarketables.

Consumables are products like bananas, jute, or aspirin that can harmlessly go back to the soil as compost. Products of service are usually durables such as cars, TVs, and refrigerators. Braungart and McDonough argue that these products should be “licensed” in the same way that software is today. The product would always belong to the manufacturer, but unlike software, it would eventually get returned to the manufacturer, who would be responsible for recycling or reusing the product. Manufacturers would have to design and create their products so that all the components have value when they return (just as in nature), and not just when they leave the factory.

Unmarketables are compounds like radioactive isotopes, persistent toxins, and bioaccumulative chemicals. Ideally, no one would make or use these products. But because eliminating their use will take time, Braungart and McDonough suggest in the meantime that these unmarketables should belong to the manufacturer and be molecularly tagged with the maker’s mark. (Then if I found a noxious chemical in my well water, for example, I could call a county agent to come check the tag on the chemical and call the manufacturer — who would then have to get the chemical out of my well. It may sound far-fetched, but it’s really just common sense: You’re responsible if your pit bull gets out and creates mayhem, so why shouldn’t the same principle hold true for chemical wastes?) Together, these three categories would create a product system that would begin to place responsibility where it belongs.

One CEO, Ray Anderson, has taken the “products as service” concept to heart. The founder of Interface, a $1 billion multinational carpet and flooring company, Anderson has developed the “Evergreen Lease” to transform his commercial product, carpet tiles, into a service. Normally, flooring companies just sell carpet tiles, but Interface wants to lease the services of the carpets to building owners. As carpet tiles wear out and are replaced, the old ones are recycled and made into new tiles as part of the lease fee. The customer does not pay an installation cost, only a monthly fee for constantly fresh- looking and functional carpeting. Over time, the amount of material used will drop but employment will go up, all the while saving the customer money and providing a superior product (the carpet never looks old, worn, or frayed).

With a “products as service” system, customers could keep a product indefinitely, or sell it to others, just as they do now. The final user, when finished, would take it to a de-shopping center that would return it to the manufacturer for reuse and remanufacturing.

Of course, such an approach requires entirely new thinking with regard to design and engineering. The leading practitioners in this field, not surprisingly, are McDonough and Braungart (see The McDonough Principles)

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate