Comments

• 

  Gabe

  17 years ago

  Z

  Z

  Reply
  The grand prize winner is incredibly appropriate. The second place winner, Gravia, looks beautiful and is a lovely idea; But I don't understand how it survived the critique while the KRANK light got ousted for the improbable physics of a light lasting very long on human power. To get 600-lumens for 4-hours using the most efficient LED's available, I think you would need over 20,000-lbs of weight for the Gravia to meet it's specs!
  Basic Physics says: Force=mass*acceleration and Power=Force*distance/time. Solve for mass.
  
  Awarding ideas that have little foothold on reality in an ecologically focused competition, is demeaning to designers actually trying to make a positive difference in their work. It's making a statement that green design is impossible, like an oxymoron. Core77, take some responsibility. You have influence in the design world. You had plenty of realistic entries. Award green designs that could actually make a positive difference. Do the world a favor and bring recognition to your contestants that have good solutions, not good fantasies.
  
  I'm sure you meant well. But you did have a month to think about this.
  

  !Report as spam