1. The Rise of Personal Fabrication (Mota, 2011) Olga Jemeljanova Joona Kanerva Niko Kuki Mikko Nummela Group 10 23.2.2016

2. Question “Discuss implications that future increased use of personal digital fabrication will have on sustainable development! Devise two lists of effects on the environment: one of positive implications and one of negative implications. As regards to various dimensions of sustainable development, do you think that the positive implications or the negative implications will have a stronger effect? Why?”

3. Outline Digital Fabrication Sustainable Development Positive and negative implications –Environmental dimension –Economic dimension –Social dimension Conclusion

4. Digital fabrication Digital fabrication is a type of manufacturing process where the machine used is controlled by a computer. Typical digital fabrication tools –Laser cutters –3D printers –CNC mills

5. Digital fabrication New factory services –Online fabrication services –Distributed manufacturing networks –Local production shops –Personal 3D printers Makers –Professionals –DIY community

6. Factors for widespread adoption Creative remixes and mashups Problem fixers Kits are cheaper than assembled goods Turnaround time

7. Sustainable development ”Sustainable development stands for meeting the needs of present generations without jeopardizing the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” (European Commission, 2016)

8. Sustainable development €

9. Implications on environmental dimension Minimal material waste Infill reduces –Needed material –Weight Shorter supply chains No need for packaging No molds required Extended product life cycles –Customized products –Repairs High reliance on plastics Unnecessary products High energy usage Fumes and dust

10. Implications on economic dimension Less materials wasted Manufacturing less labor intensive –Production may move back to consumer countries Broader access to manufactured goods Supply chains shorter Efficiency in spare parts –Low to no storage costs –Shorter delays New business models Lighter parts provide savings More expensive materials required Manufacturing less labor intensive –Production may move away from developing countries Weakened IPR as “anyone” can manufacture Middlemen lose clients €

11. Implications on social dimension Freedom of creativity Feeding one's creative and playful nature Ability to fix problems Ability satisfy one's unique needs Saving money = happy human Who likes waiting? 24/7 availability "Social production" Accessibility Peer learning, sharing, collaboration, communities Misuse and injuries = safety concern Bad quality = unhappy human Common sense – How about DIY phone? – Nope, let's leave it to the manufacturers...

12. Conclusion BUT traditional manufacturing is currently better in Production of large volumes (energy use) Production of complex products (several materials required) Personal fabrication implications:

13. References Mota, C. (2011). The rise of personal fabrication. C&C ’11 Proceedings of the 8 th ACM conference on Creativity and cognition, pp. 279-288. Gebler, M., Uiterkamp, A. J. S., & Visser, C. (2014). A global sustainability perspective on 3D printing technologies. Energy Policy, 74, 158-167. European Commission. (2016). Environment: Sustainable Development. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/. [Accessed on 22th February 2016]. Kreiger, M. & Pearce, J. (2013). Environmental Life Cycle Analysis of Distributed Three-Dimensional Printing and Conventional Manufacturing of Polymer Products. ACS sustainable chemistry & engineering, Vol. 1:12, pp. 1511–1519.