Talk:Appropriate technology

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Water supply[edit]

I suggest adding a variant of the picture Water system with cistern

Water System With Cistern.svg

, where the pressure vessel is removed and the cistern itself works as a pressure vessel. This would allow the system to be build DIY (rather than needing to buy a pressure vessel or weld your own pressure vessel casing. Please include in article.

Perhaps diy water towers can also be included, as they allow multiple users to take advantage of a single system (reduces cost). However, the downside would be that if the tower fails, part of or the entire village would be affected. If this happens (especially in remote arid/desert-like locations, repairs will go slow aswell (water being important to work in order to make repairs) and replacement parts may not always be available. Also, another thing is dislike in water towers is that they are outdated and somewhat inefficient (a pump is required too to pump the water up, its only after the elevation that it can works without electricity or extra pumps). 81.246.161.76 (talk) 12:21, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Also, the waterpumping windmill described in NGC is a useful piece of material. A picture schould be made and uploaded to wikimedia commons.

Water tower conversions[edit]

Water towers in the developing world may be used as a energy storage device. This can be done by adding a hydropower generator on the tube. This allows the height difference to be used as a energy source. Conversions of regular towers are theoretically also possible —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.245.163.19 (talk) 12:05, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Hair removal machine[edit]

Perhaps hair removal and laser hair removal machines can be presented as appropriate technology (increase hygiene and thus decrease disease, ...) see for example the Rio Salon Laser Scanning Hair Remover. This machine or a low-cost derivated machine can be proposed (home-use, 200£). 81.246.183.119 (talk) 12:34, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Telepresence robot with Multimachine[edit]

Perhaps a telepresence robot (eg Sparky) fitted with the multimachine (see Open-source robotics) could be useful for closing the technical inexpertise in workshops of developing countries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.246.183.119 (talk) 13:01, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Direction where AT should move towards[edit]

A section can be included with the section in which the recycling of materials is explained. This section can include references to shows as the Salvage Squad, Scrapheap_Challenge and Junkyard Wars. Also, a reference to Burning Man festival can be made. Ideally, cities will need to be constructed entirely from waste material, similar to what Biotecture does. Perhaps for some visual impressions, references to Flushed away (see http://kids.nationalgeographic.com/Stories/MoreStories/Flushedaway ) and The Fifth Element can be made.

Appropriate technology founders[edit]

M K Ghosh, Chaman Lal Gupta, Sen Kapadia, B.V. Doshi (see http://www.indiaenvironmentportal.org.in/node/5799 and http://www.auroville.org/thecity/architecture/two_at_once.htm and Mahatma Gandhi (1869-1948), E.F. Schumacher (1911-1977), Buckminster Fuller, William Moyer (1933-2002), Satish Kumar (1936-present), Amy B. Smith,Amory Lovins, Sanoussi Diakité,Anil K. Rajvanshi Victor Papanek, Johan Van Lengen and Arne_Næss (1912-present) should be added in extra sections and hailed as the founders of AT. Also add them in the category appropriate technology or subcategory Perhaps include the tinytech machines (see here, supposedly a AT factory) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.245.168.190 (talk) 08:54, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

These people are not appropriate technology founders. At most two of them Mahatma Gandhi and E.F. Schumacher can be called as such. The others are well known practioners. Hence I have made the necessary changes in the heading.

Phniwasi (talk) 04:25, 20 April 2009 (UTC)

International language and electricity system[edit]

A simplified english as the only spoken language is an appropriate technology and can be implemented in appropriate technology documents and books. Also, standards and rules to only use one type of mains electricity system (amount of volt & frequency) is best used to allow the building of internationally invariable electric devices and machines. see http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Juridical_national_measures_on_climate_change#Optional_digitalisation_of_city_communal_services and

Thanks, 81.246.130.16 (talk) 13:29, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Chainless bike with airless tires[edit]

Perhaps bikes without chains (eg shaft-driven or hydraulic bicycles) and Airless tires are more appropriate bicycles. Would reduce malfuntionings and more difficult bike repair trainings required today. Perhaps tubeless wheels can be used as a basis in which latex can be poured. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.246.163.71 (talk) 10:55, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Electronics[edit]

I was wondering whether anyone knows whether there are ecological and simpler alternatives to PCB boards. I was thinking about Wire_wrap, Stripboard and the like yet am not sure whether environmental and whether any difficult circuits can be made with this. Wafer-level packaging (this is I believe only used with certain components) can also sometimes? be used. Also not sure whether very environmental (presence of glues, and hazardous materials as certain plastics, ...). I also heard about the Tin-Lead ban, see leadfree soldering which has introduced the creation of alternatives (eg SnAgCu, SnCu and Sn alone). I also heard about anisothropically conductive glues (these are not environmental) and isothropically conductive glues (respectively ACA and ICA), glues for flip-chip assembly... yet not sure whether truly ecologic and whether its any durable. Perhaps Sn alone is most appropriate? This will need to be checked and further compared dough. See http://www.europeanleadfree.net, http://www.imec.be/IMECAT/, http://www.imec.be/IMECAT/documents/16_2004_IPC_Frankfurt_Vandevelde_paper.pdf A appropriate solder and soldering method should be the following:

  • easy assembly and disassembly of board, components and solder (so best no alloys as this reduces options with melting the parts off)
  • no etching (this would promote loss of soldering material); instead direct application of paste eg by hand soldering as in reflow soldering or automated (with workshop pick&place robots)

An alternative is the use of organic materials (which are thus consistent to cradle-to-cradle design). Certain (not all!) smart plastics can be used. Examples are PEDOT:PSS. However, this approach is not yet suited today to make any durable or more advanced circuits. Also, could any other techniques as flow soldering, E-blocks, FPGA, EasyControl I/O, ... be used. E-blocks also uses flowcode as a coding language. Not sure whether this is easy to learn (aldough most coding can be simply downloaded if open-source). In addition, a suggestion on the LED-lamps. These are I believe quite expensive. In order to decrease price, I was wondering whether LED's may be made DIY (they are composed of a die, lens, cooling body and connection wires. Compounds used include aluminum, indium, gallium, phosphor, nitrogen. Especially low-power leds seem easy to build, high power ones may?? be achievable using techniques as Lumiramica (uses phosphor plates instead of powder). An alternative is the procuring of mere high-power LEDs (eg Lumileds Rebel Led, Osram Opto Semiconductors Golden Dragon, Cree X-lamp, ...)and installing them yourself with the open source LEDbus system. This may be cheaper than buying LED lamps with imbedded electronics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.246.131.67 (talk) 09:59, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Synthetic biology[edit]

Synthetic biology could make cheap generators for hydrogen gas and could provide a cheap and easy way to make electronic boards. See Angela Belchers project 81.245.168.62 (talk) 14:27, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Open-design circuit board oven and solder robot[edit]

The Elector SMT reflow oven may be used as is (or after modification) with the Sn solder (or other soldering method) noted above to solder boards ecologically and appropriate.

Note that this open-source project demonstrated how easy it is to implement controlling the temperature of ovens. Perhaps that a similar temperature control may be integrated in the recasting of materials. In the document made by Ingénieurs Sans Frontières it was described that casting was done "on sight". To make solder for these sensitive equipments, perhaps controlled temperature casting is better as it may allow a better purity of metal (improving the performance of these sensitive devices)

for the soldering itself, I was thinking about a open-source soldering robot (which can be probably made with a diy embedded (low-cost) microcontroller (to make a embedded computer with output devices (movable soldering syringes. This primarily as I have doubts about the local workers performing this very precise and difficult job. The local workers are probably more suited to gathering the source materials (metals, ...)

Component tester[edit]

As described above, with component boards as strip boards, easy replacing/repairs of devices are possible (allowing the repair of broken boards by replacing certain components, rather than trowing away the entire board alltogether). For this, a simple? voltage meter is needed to test the components individually (eg whether they still let the power trough). This open-source elektor meter may be used herefore

Disassembler device[edit]

Besides an oven and solder robot, an easy open-source board disassembly device would be appropriate. This would allow boards found on the junkyard (which are thus completely broken; having no more working components) of being effciently disassembled. The solder, board and components can then be easily seperated and reused (solder and metals can be recast, chemical components may be derived from large amounts of diodes, and other known components). The chemical substances and amounts are known to be in each type of component (eg diodes, leds, ...) and may therefore still be recovered if they are all seperatly detached and sorted together.

Open-design washing machine[edit]

Design of a appropriate technology washing machine

A open-source washing machine should be created. The washing machine is to have a induction engine for the drum and a brushless DC engine for pumping the machine dry after the wash. It probably best uses (the technology of; buying the modules from the company directly may be expensive) the Motion SPM in SMD or Tuny DIP housing. see Energy Saving through Motor Control and Motor app gains efficiency with electronic control Perhaps water-saving features may be added (see Washing_machine#Washing_machine_milestones 2008 Berkeley washer) Cleaning agents used should be eco-friendly; see Natural cleaning product

Use of alternative currency[edit]

After some research (see updates at Alternative currency), the use of a specific alternative currency (not devaluating in time; eg no "schwundgeld") could be useful. This currency would be a currency specific for trading between villages (thus not between individuals). It would be a city gift currency; and the working would be as follows: each city is given at the start a same negative amount of credits. If a certain city requests the ordering of eg a set of windturbines, casted metals, tools, ... the product is made and delivered abd at the same time, the giving partner is given a same amount of negative points which they can use to ask another product in return (of a same value of negative points). The negative value of a product depends on the amount of workhours and the type/amount of source material used. The current amount of negative (good) or positive (bad) credits can be shown in the cities townhall (preferably on a electronic billboard together with other information; supplied via RSS) The system would encourage city trade of autonomous energy products, and other products required for ecologic, autonomous functioning of the city. As such, it would increases economy, employment and promote healthy rivalry/competitions (building new systems and trading them, ...). it would increase specialisation of each system, dividing the production of different autonomous systems (eg water harvesting, energy generation systems, ...)? This would decrease the costs as less workshops would be needed for the cities of a certain area (one area should have several cities; each specialising in the essential systems and located at a manageable/transportable distance) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.246.146.11 (talk) 15:17, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Improved solar heater[edit]

I just added another design for a low-cost village. See here. This design has some new features including the seperation of rooms and making them communal (reduces cost, decreases cleaning, ...) This design makes use of a solar batch heater for heating the water for the showers. This batch heater would be a heater like

this one

, but automatic temperature control (set to eg 40°C) should be added. As such a open-source design for this temperature controller should be made. The automatic control can be created in practice by 2 tanks --> 1 with cold(er) water (eg 20° or so; ambient temperature) and 1 with warm water (this tank can be the batch heater itself). The tank with colder water needs to be shielded from the sun (eg by underground placement, ...). The 2 tanks can be connected to 1 large(r) tank that will be the primary buffer for the shower (here the water needs to be 40°). The valves of the (hot&cold) tanks will be automatically controlled by the temperature controller. The batch heater itself may be fitted with a electric coil for heating when the water cannot be heated enough by the sun; in not so sunny areas the batch heater can be improved by targeting light at it with parabolic dishes.

The 40° water generated by the solar/electrical heating system can also be used for the laundry center/washing machines noted in the design. The piping may be merely extended (1 branch offcourse already going to showers; another continuing to washing machines/laundry center) and the 40° water inmediatelly enters the (open-source design; see above) laundry center. Here the water may be used as is, or be heated again in the washing machines (depends on washing program; imbedded machine thermostat will determine this) Note that instead of the batch heater, the Concentrating Solar Power plant itself (noted in the design) can also function as a batch heater. However, the CSP would then require 2 piping circuits (one for heating the shower water and 1 for the energy generation; the latter runs on chemical fluids and not water). Nonetheless the 2 circuits can be integrated into the same tower and make use of the same solar power. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.245.166.227 (talk) 07:54, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Fraction 1 protein[edit]

Does anyone know fraction 1 protein; which can be made by making a paste from tabacco leaves ? It was invented by Shuh Sheen of the Kentucky University see here I was wondering about whether this crop may be used as an easy food source (contains high amounts of protein). This would physically strengthen population and tobacco is easy to grow in tropical/subtropical areas. Not sure whether tasty, ... dough. Also not completely sure about potential toxic substances (eg nicotine). Let me know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.245.166.227 (talk) 08:04, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

The agriculture simulator proposal sent before, could be made using the 3d models from Jochem Evers/Virtualplant.nl. See www.virtualplant.nl, http://www.cwe.wur.nl/UK/Staff/Dr+Jochem+B.+Evers/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.246.180.114 (talk) 18:01, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Irrigation[edit]

Low cost water transport system.JPG

The Nabataeans had ceramic pipeline irrigation in the old days, which I believe could be an appropriate irrigation system. The Jacob Blaustein Institute conducts research to these nabataeans irrigation techniques. This in order to make low-cost irrigation systems to cope with the flooding periods (strange but true). It will help in preserving the rain that falls in these periods to water the crops for a great amount of time. Eg ceramic pipelines/terracotta canals can be a low cost solution see http://desert.bgu.ac.il/desert/EngSite.aspx?SiteId=3327&ItemId=4945 http://www.hackwriters.com/Nabataeans.htm http://www.amnh.org/education/resources/rfl/pdf/petra_guide.pdf —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.246.180.114 (talk) 18:37, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps this terracotta irrigation should be mentioned in article ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.246.171.164 (talk) 07:38, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Finally, there is also a new system described by agrivision (see irrigation:talk), yet this probably also has the same problems as drip irrigation (eg plastic corrugates, not easily reachable/hard to repair, ...) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.246.171.164 (talk) 08:09, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

Improved MayaPedal[edit]

I recenently take a look at the mayapedal (http://www.appropedia.org/MayaPedal). Seems to me that a open-sourced version of the Pedal-A-Watt (see http://www.econvergence.net/electro.htm) would be more approriate as the bike can still be used for transport. Also, should Nanosolar best be added to article, according to time magazine (50 greatest inventions) their solar panels are way cheaper made and sold. However, there are a great number of other panels (see peswiki) that may be cheap and/or have greater energy output (making price perhaps competetive if they are compared per watt produced). However, not all produced energy is always stored on the other hand in developing countries, making a cheaper panel perhaps cheaper in all. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.246.148.68 (talk) 14:42, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Hydrogen and oxyhydrogen generator[edit]

A DIY hydrogen and oxyhydrogen generator should also be added. It allows to generate hydrogen which can fuel converted internal combustion engines (eg of old fixed-up cars/vehicles; found abundantly in the developed world).

DIY shematics/documents for electrolysis can be made from instructions such as in the following book: http://www.goodideacreative.com/h2_sys2.html , aswell as many other DIY low-cost generators can be found online; eg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NX-vbcaEEWA http://www.instructables.com/id/SODA-CAN-HYDROGEN-GENERATOR/ water4gas HHO generator

however, the best generator would be made using bacteria. Synthetic biology can be used to create a generator that uses no initial power (which is the major problem with hydrogen; more power needs to be generated than what is produced in hydrogen). However, at present it has not yet produced a viable organic hydrogen generator. [1][2][3]

81.246.176.42 (talk) 08:45, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I recently read about liquid nitrogen. Apparently, this "fuel" can also be burnt in a ICe engine. If so (and if liquid nitrogen generation is possible at home), a liquid nitrogen generator too should be added. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.245.167.2 (talk) 14:46, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

Soil survey using satellite-images[edit]

I recently looked at a project of Agro Vision, and it seems that satellite images can be used to determine moisture, nitrogen, co²-intake, ... They are working on localized fertilisation (eg by gps-controlled fertilisermachine) were the input data (nutrient content of soil) comes from satellite data.

If this approach allows enough minerals (nitrogen, potassium, ...) to be recorded it may be very useful. See http://www.articlesbase.com/environment-articles/agriculture-crop-management-and-production-improved-by-satellite-remote-sensing-technology-and-geographic-information-systems-gis-463274.html

and the AgriVision-project at http://www.agrivision.net.au/variable-rate.php

This approach could be used to replace the more expensive sampling of the soil (by hand) in remote areas. In one of my designs sent earlier, I also mentioned a "farming-manual (telling people in developing world how they may farm more productively and without non-biodegradable pesticides). This approach should be mentioned herein.

Besides checking whether enough parameters can be recorded, it should be checked whether UAV's can also perform this "remote sensing". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.246.142.167 (talk) 14:16, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

TerraCottem[edit]

Not sure whether its worth mentioning: http://www.terracottem.com/pages/en/home.htm it is somewhat similar to terra preta, yet retains moisture better; not sure how its made (DIY?)and whether it is thus appropriate in developing world (remote) locations

Purushotham Reddy[edit]

http://www.flipkart.com/environmental-education-prof-purushotham-reddy/8183161219-9v23frh15b Not sure whether it is a appropriate technology advocate and whether he may be included to list. May have some ideas in book the AT community may use —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.182.176.136 (talk) 12:21, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Workshop tools[edit]

I propose to make a article called workshop tools mentioning the most important (multifunctional tools). Also, i'm not sure whether it is most useful to use molds or use stuff like a 3D CNC milling machine to make stuff like gears, ... Anyone knows what a 3D printer is? the article isnt that clear, it appears that wooden, ... objects can be made with it but not sure. Some of the tools (eg screwdrivers) need to be simplified; meaning that the amount of different types of screws, ... needs to be limited to keep the amount of different workshop tools, ... low —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.176.1.77 (talk) 17:09, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

POV[edit]

This term seems like a POV smear. Those who use it are characterizing others as advocating "inappropriate technology". That is of course a straw man. I challenge anyone to point to one person who says "I think people should use inappropriate technology". Michael Hardy (talk) 21:15, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

This wikipedia article should be neutral, but the term 'Appropriate Technology' is not! It is supposed to highlight the inappropriate nature of high-tech industry that is driven by profit rather than ecological concerns. You can't complain if they chose a name you find objectionable any more than you can object to the Democratic People's Republic of Korea. Jambaltine (talk) 03:10, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
I just removed two POV tags in the opening para. There's a confusion: There's a difference between a term that has a strong "politically correct" connotation, and mis-defining that concept so that it distorts the meaning of the term. I.e., if someone wrote that "appropriate technology is the work of luddites" or "appropriate technology is the only hope for mankind", then THAT would demonstrate a non-neutral statement.
This is NOT what is going on with the opening sentence as it stands ("Appropriate technology (AT) is technology that is designed with special consideration to the environmental, ethical, cultural, social, political, and economical aspects of the community it is intended for.")
Notice also, Michael Hardy, that a slur is not implied in the definition. One could design a product to be "cost effective" or "supporting national industry" or "user friendly" or "advancing technology" or "energy efficient" ... or any combination. "Appropriate technology" is simply that which emphasizes a broad spectum that places special emphasis on cultural and environmental factors. That there is some business -- some potentially displaced business -- that has their priorities differently organized does not mean that the fault lies in the concept of appropriate technology. After all, any viable business rival is going to have a business plan that is in conflict with established businesses. That doesn't make the rival's business plan somehow dishonest, biased or in any remarkable way POV. Regards, Piano non troppo (talk) 11:14, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
I do not see a POV problem here. I suggest removal of the POV tag (and the other tags too). Rlsheehan (talk) 23:03, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
The term "appropriate" is not POV and is not inappropriate. The term "appropriate" as used does not suggest that other technology is innately wrong in any way. Most technology which is developed using expensive engineering design tools is optimized based on the assumed resources, manufacturing, and tooling of a generally technologically advanced and well infrastructured society. These technologies aren't appropriate for a society which doesn't have the resources, manufacturing, or tooling in place to build or maintain it. That doesn't mean that expensive engineering design techniques (computer simulation, prototyping, automated optimization) can't be applied to create a technology which is optimized for the particular resources and manufacturing ability of a society which isn't as well infrastructured. There is no value judgment being made by the term "appropriate", it is really indicative of using the right design assumptions for the right end user environment. -CVDon
I recently added the POV tag. However it is not in reference to this discussion. I too agree that "appropriate technology" is a recognized term and not a POV issues. However, per this section I started on the talk page, I believe the second paragraph of the lede (summary) is clearly biased and I am recommending it be rewritten. EstellaGr8 (talk) 01:06, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
Concur with EstellaGr8. This older (circa 2009 to early 2010) "POV" discussion is on a rather different topic than the question of some bias in the lede of the article. The discussion on bias in the lede is below, in section entitled "Bias?". N2e (talk) 12:42, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Health care[edit]

Would it be useful to mention the Talk:Stethoscope#Vuvuzela_stethoscope ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.182.227.212 (talk) 12:34, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Bias?[edit]

Though cited, I wonder if the second paragraph of this article summary is too biased in nature?

"With environmental and ethical goals in mind, AT proponents claim their methods require fewer resources, are easier to maintain, and have less of an impact on the environment compared to techniques from mainstream technology, which they contend is wasteful and environmentally polluting."

With the community's approval I would like to suggest it be revisited and most likely rewritten or removed. I believe it is possible to convey the tenets of appropriate technology with out directly criticizing other forms of technology. Though this difference between appropriate technology and other forms is clearly something to include in the article, I question the placement in the summary and as the second paragraph.

EstellaGr8 (talk) 12:56, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

I concur, and would support your proposed change. You may want to consider placing an article-level tag such as {{lead rewrite}} or {{POV-lead}} at the top of the article while this discussion is going on. It let's other readers and editors of the article know that a discussion is going on and invites them to weigh in. Generally, these sorts of article-level tags are best if used only for a short period of time while active work is going on to improve an article, or gain consensus in the wikicommunity who frequent a given article, and then remove it as the issue is addressed. Cheers. N2e (talk) 16:37, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Proposed WikiProject Edits[edit]

As part of the Public Policy WikiProject, I plan to work on the following edits:

  1. Edit the lede to remove possible biased information. I have created a rough draft of my proposed lede in my sandbox and would appreciate any comments from the the Wiki community. With the community's approval I would like to replace the existing lede with this proposed lede before April 10, the course deadline for these changes.
  2. Expand the background section to includes greater detail and a history of appropriate technology (possibly incorporating the founders section).I am working on the rough draft of my history section in my sandbox and would appreciate any comments from the the Wiki community. I am also suggesting a slightly new organization to the article which is reflected in my sandbox as well.
  3. Expand the appropriate technology in developing areas section to include more detail.

As part of these edits, I plan to consult the following sources:

  • Hazeltine, B. & Bull, C. (1999). Appropriate Technology: Tools, Choices, and Implications. San Diego: Academic Press.
  • Ghosh, P.K. (1984). Appropriate Technology in Third World Development. Center for International Development. London: Greenwood Press.
  • Willoughby, K.W. (1990). Technology Choice: A Critique of the Appropriate Technology Movement. London: Intermediate Technology Publications.
  • National Research Council. (2006). The Fundamental Role of Science and Technology in International Development. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press.
  • Pursell, C.W. (2007). Technology in Postwar America: A History. New York: Columbia University Press.
  • McRobie, G. (1981). Small is Possible. New York: Harper & Row.
  • Akubue, A. (2000). "Appropriate Technology for Socioeconomic Development in Third World Countries." The Journal of Technology Studies. Vol. 26, No. 1 (pp.33-43). Bowling Green, Ohio: Epsilon Pi Tau.
  • Montgomery, J.D. (1979, March). "Beyond Appropriate Technology." Bulletin of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Vol. 32, No. 6 (pp.19-37).
  • The Cooper Hewitt Design for the other 90% Exhibit.
  • Village Earth.
  • Practical Action.

I appreciate any comments/suggestions/encouragement/assistance from the wiki community.

EstellaGr8 (talk) 02:16, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

American vs. British English[edit]

I recently undid an edit that changed "industrialized" to "industrialised." My logic for this is that the article appears to use American English throughout. Other examples, such as "utilizing" and "practice" are spelled in the American way and not the British way ("utilising" and "practise"). As far as I can tell the Wikipedia Manual of Style does not have a preference for either usage, but it does indicate a preference for internal consistency. Thoughts? EstellaGr8 (talk) 11:40, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

I support the internal article consistency. And it appears that the article is/was already utilizing the American variation of English. N2e (talk) 04:56, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

The "appropriate technology practitioners" section should be expanded and cited or removed[edit]

In its current form, the "appropriate technology practitioners" section contains an un-cited list of supposed appropriate technology practitioners. Though the links provided for some of the names clearly indicate the person had either developed technology widely considered as an example of appropriate technology or has promoted appropriate technological choice, several of the names have no supporting materials in the link provided. Furthermore, I believe the supporting materials should be clearly indicated in this article either through mentions of their appropriate technology work or through in-line citation to reputable materials naming them as appropriate technology practitioners. EstellaGr8 (talk) 13:35, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Please see WP:BOLD (Go for it!) ---- Steve Quinn (talk) 04:24, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Substantive changes[edit]

As mentioned here I planned to make several changes to this article. I have since rewritten the lede, created a history and terminology section, expanded and renamed the section on appropriate technology in developing countries, and moved the extensive examples to a new section called "Applications." I welcome any comments. EstellaGr8 (talk) 21:21, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Please see WP:BOLD (Go for it!) ---- Steve Quinn (talk) 04:23, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

"Appropriate technology in developed countries" section[edit]

It its current form this section is redundant to existing information in the article and does not address the topic the section lable indicates it will. I recommend it be entirely rewritten to include information on the energy crisis of the 1970s, appropriate technology groups in countries such as the US, UK and Japan, and the current use of appropriate technology in these countries. EstellaGr8 (talk) 21:23, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Please see WP:BOLD (Go for it!) ---- Steve Quinn (talk) 04:25, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Applications section[edit]

The information in the sub-sections under "applications" seems like an information dump. There is little structure or substantive information. I recommend a extensive edit of this information. EstellaGr8 (talk) 21:41, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Please see WP:BOLD (Go for it!) Thank you for your contributions. ---- Steve Quinn (talk) 04:27, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

"Beating around the bush"[edit]

having just arrived at this article i found it incredibly hard to discern what it was that appropriate technology entailed. i feel that this article could go a very long way to include a simple, single sentence summary of what appropriate technology actually is. The following line from http://lsa.colorado.edu/essence/texts/appropriate.htm was far more useful to me than the existing background, and i suggest that someone find a means to incorporate it, or something similarly "to the point" into the beginning of the article. I would do it myself, however as an unregistered user i do not have the confidence to go about editing the article.

"Appropriate technology is small-scale technology. It is simple enough that people can manage it directly and on a local level. Appropriate technology makes use of skills and technology that are available in a local community to supply basic human needs, such as gas and electricity, water, food, and waste disposal. " ---- Anonymous (talk) 01:02, 07 April 2012 (GMT-5)

Mokshda green cremation system[edit]

Perhaps the Mokshda Green Cremation System (MGCS) can be mentioned ? 91.182.27.70 (talk)

Cleaning up Alternative technology[edit]

You guys did a great job here and hope some of you are still watching the page. Since many people get appropriate technology and alternate technology confused, and the alternative technology article is very poor and doesn't define the differences, it's an article some of you might want to beef up. I'll try to at least fix the definition aspect. Thanks. CarolMooreDC 18:48, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Intermediate technology[edit]

Is intermediate technology really the same thing? Surely that refers to technology that is neither low technology nor high technology? Whether such technology is 'appropriate' or not is another matter. The article isn't completely clear on this point - first saying that the two terms are synonymous, and later saying that intermediate technology is a subset of appropriate technology. Ben Finn (talk) 10:42, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

When the terms first came into use, they were very close. However this has since shifted.
One of the major shifts in recent years has been the result of telecommunications and cheap globalisation. Mobile phones are now cheap and they're also relatively cheap in much of the 3rd world. It is still difficult to obtain a wired phone line (poles and cables still cost serious investment) but it is now affordable to obtain mobile phones and even an internet connection (the cost is high relative to basic food and shelter, but low in relation to a wired phone). This gives access to information such as weather forecasting and market prices, information that can make a "knowledgeable" fishing village a more efficient and competitive vendor than a similar village without such information. The smartphone is appropriate technology (it delivers a benefit in relation to its cost) even though it is not intermediate technology (it's made in the same Chinese mega-factory that other such phones are made in). Andy Dingley (talk) 11:55, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Exchange the words "recent" with an indication of a year[edit]

It's never good to use the word "recent" in Wikipedia articles... Can someone replace the "recents" with a year indication? In particular in this sentence: In more recent years, the appropriate technology movement has continued to decline in prominence. - For that one, as it talks about the German GATE project which ended in early 2000 I think, if not earlier, we could perhaps say "Since the late 1990s..." ? Unless people disagree about this statement regarding the decline? Perhaps it only relates to AT in development cooperation? EvM-Susana (talk) 07:47, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Honey Bee Network[edit]

Perhaps the National_Innovation_Foundation_-_India#Honey_Bee_Network Honey Bee Network can be mentioned somewhere on the page ? 109.130.161.237 (talk) 15:59, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Intermediate technology[edit]

Needs its own page -- you can certainly have inappropriate intermediate technology -- this needs to be slit off. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.106.36.109 (talk) 00:59, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 external links on Appropriate technology. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

YesY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:03, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Appropriate technology. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

YesY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:11, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Appropriate technology. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:53, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

  1. ^ Synthetic biology and hydrogen
  2. ^ Synthetic biology to make hydrogen
  3. ^ Synthetic biology at Berkeley Lab