Author Archives: jmukofsky

Posts by jmukofsky

Bag in a Bottle

Posted on March 23, 2014 by jmukofsky

bubble bag

I drew a picture about the future of bags.  Many a time have I found myself carrying multiple heavy bags after a long day of shopping.  This has not only contributed to a lot of complaining but also a bad back.  So I envisioned a future that would carrying heavier objects easier, making them lighter than air.  All one would need is a bottle and a bubble wand.  The bubble serum is made to withstand the Earth’s lowest atmosphere and will not pop unless it leaves this atmosphere (i.e. airplane cruising altitude) so it will not pop seconds after being created.

The Times They are A-Changin

Posted on March 2, 2014 by jmukofsky

The main theme behind the articles seems to be summed up best by “The Founding and Manifesto of Futurism”.  “Do you, then, wish to waste all your best powers in this eternal and futile worship of the past, from which you emerge fatally exhausted, shrunken, and beaten down?”  In other words, why remain stuck in the past when the future is what will save us?

In “Incinerators vs Zero Waste: Energy to the Climate”, it’s understandable to want to move toward the future to protect the earth’s environment.  By ultimately getting rid of landfills and incinerators and replacing them with “waste to energy” plants quite a portion of greenhouse gases can be decreased.  “Fuel from Waste, Poised at Milestone”, is very similar in that it offers a new efficient way of making fuel that will release fewer greenhouse gases and are made from compost.

It is also understandable that architecture be made to help improve our living style.  However, it seems that the author of “Manifesto Futurist Architecture,” is not so concerned with this.  In fact, more or less, he is preoccupied with the art of future architecture.  What I find hard to understand is, why is this so important?  The author seems to think that architecture now is just a copy of the past. The only difference is the new materials used.  He insists that a new style of architecture be started to “invent and rebuild the Futurist city like an immense and tumultuous shipyard agile, mobile and dynamic in every detail.”  How is the image of a building going to improve our society by being environmentally friendly?  Is there any point to this argument?  Is not the copying of old architecture styles through the use of different supplies a type of art in itself?

Comments by jmukofsky

"While I think it is important to focus on both the structures that are being built and the buildings already standing, I believe more emphasis should be placed on the constructions in the planning stages and the ones in progress. After reading “PlaNYC”, it has come to my attention of how hard it may be to go back and fix some of the older establishments, especially the ones that have been recorded as landmarks. It will take a lot of time and effort to figure out how to make landmarks “greener” without angering anyone, and to convince building owners to change their ways. By focusing on buildings in the process of being built, owners will not have to go back and find a way to update their establishment. Also, these buildings that have “green” infrastructures from the very beginning will be role models, showing old building owners what this new “green” technology can do and how much money they can save from it. Thus making a “greener” system more desirable in the long run. If there is enough proof of low risk of a “green” system failing and high proof of money being saved over time, not many would turn down updating their buildings especially if the government were assisting them financially to do so."
--( posted on Feb 23, 2014, commenting on the post )