Maximum Flexibility… Controller CECX for Electromechanical and Pneumatic Actuators >> Modular controller with PLC and multi-axis motion control functionality: ideal fit for systems and solutions requiring flexibility in programming and high performance interpolated motion control. Fully compatible with different control architectures and communication interfaces such as Profibus, CANopen and Ethernet.
Servo Performance for the Price of a Stepper… >> Closed loop controller CMMS-ST offers true servo performance based on stepper technology, without the traditional issues of resonance, heating, and loss of step, inherent in conventional stepper systems. CMMS-ST offers an easy-to-use and cost effective control solution for single and multi-axis handling applications.
Animation: High Precision Pneumatic Mini Slide with NPT Ports DGSL-N >> With 5 NPT sizes and 8 metric sizes in a family ranging from 4mm to 25mm, DGSL is unique in its high precision, high load capabilities, compact design, and ease of installation. Delivering linear accuracy of 0.01mm, the ultra-precise DGSL slides easily assemble into a pick and place system without an adapter plate.
Subsystems designed and built to your exact specifications
Utilizing electromechanical, pneumatic, and control technology
Delivered complete with one part number… for less than the costs required to plan, design, order parts, assemble, and test it yourself
White Paper: Reduce Energy Costs of Pneumatic Systems by up to 35% >> To increase throughput while using less energy, machine builders and manufactures alike require accurate energy consumption data. This paper provides guidance on where energy is typically wasted, and details how to measure losses and identify corrective solutions to maximize system efficiency and value.
The president has promised to produce 5 million of them. Congress passed an act about them. States are lining up for funding to support them. Educators are creating classes about them. What is this new phenomenon? It is Green Jobs! But what is a green job, and is it really anything new?
My favorite source for definitions of emerging ideas is Wikipedia. It says that a green job is "...any job in an organization that provides a product or service that allows consumers to either consume less .... or produce more due to the utilization of this product or service, both of which actions reduce total energy use and environmental impact on the planet". Sounds simple enough, but maybe that is the problem.
I sat in a 90 minute presentation this month by two university professors who are tasked with counting green job creation for government. At the conclusion of the presentation, which attempted to define green jobs, the audience responded with; "you can't leave it there! We still don't know what a green job is!"
Is a wind turbine mechanic a green job? Probably. Is it a job that didn't exist before? Maybe. Is it really significantly different from a packaging mechatronics technician? I'm not so sure.
I'm told that it takes the same amount of steel to build the tower for a new wind turbine as it takes to build 235 automobiles. Is steelmaking a green job? How about coal mining to make the steel? Most probably wouldn't call that green, but without it, we can't build the wind turbine.
Haven't packagers, engineers and business managers ALWAYS tried to reduce total use of material and energy? Haven't these always been green jobs? Everything that we pay for is either matter, energy, knowledge or some combination or derivative of these. Left alone, business will evolve to the lowest cost, and therefore the lowest consumption solutions that are consistent with the goals that are established for a product or service. Solutions that cost more generally use more matter, energy or knowledge to create.
When we artificially incent solutions that aren't cost competitive on their own merits, aren't we actually consuming more than necessary? Maybe that is the definition of a green job. If it is a job that wouldn't otherwise be done by the free market, but will only be done if government throws greenbacks at it - maybe that is the definition of a green job.
"If it is a job that wouldn't otherwise be done by the free market, but will only be done if government throws greenbacks at it"
On June 30, 2009 Andy Ward wrote:
When the government counts the green jobs, will they count the jobs lost in non-green areas in the same report? Most unlikely!
On June 30, 2009 wrote:
... the old name for green is productivity improvement. Anything that takes less resources to make is green. Isn't that what we packaging professionals do and have been doing as part of our job.
Outstanding! Your analysis is much clearer and comprehensive that regular media including some science magazines! We should keep the debate open and alive. I have not seen the first "green job" created.
On June 30, 2009 Paul Zepf wrote:
Governments need to stop wasting our lives.
In thinking about this. Is a Senator or Congressman a green job? Is a GreenPeace protestor a green job? Is a banker a green job? Seems to me most of these consume and waste and give little to nothing. Would be interesting to see how they justify themselves in stopping waste.
On June 30, 2009 Eric wrote:
This is exactly my problem with sustainability. What started out as a positive initiative seems to have turned into a concept that can not get out it's own way!
Most of the money, probably as much as 70% will go to government agencies to administer these programs.
Your editorial is spot on.
On June 30, 2009 wrote:
Keith:
Great article. You may be getting yourself on the "hit list" if you keep peeking out from under "The Wool".
If we (the packaging community) develop a packaging material that extends shelf life or insures products are delivered to consumers in a saleable condition, haven't these innovations reduced the need for energy? If packaging allows for food stuffs and fresh produce to be grown in optimum conditions yet distributed throughout the continent, haven't we reduced carbon emmissions? If packaging allows consumers to prepare nutritious meals faster, more conveniently in their homes, doesn't that impact our health and energy consumption?
We (the packaging community) should stand up in a unified way to explain the "green" benefits we provide our planet insyead of taking it lying down while the media and governments try to relegate us into the "dark ages" and criminal status.
Let's all aspire to the Triple Bottom Line and start telling the truth about Green.
Thanks for the opportunity.
Mark V. Ewing
Braveheart Strategic Services, LLC
On June 30, 2009 Glenn Whiteside wrote:
I really like your points - how can we have "green" jobs (e.g. wind turbine mechanic) without the steel to assemble it? To build "green" infrastructure requires non-green industry input - at least for now. In the future
perhaps we can have solar powered steel mills but we have to build them first. Continuous improvement of manufacturing processes is really a "green" process in itself (unless perhaps the "improvement" involves using toxic chemicals).
About Keith Campbell
Leaders learn from the past while
looking to the future - and bring both to bear on the here
and now. This is the philosophy that has steered Keith Campbell's
30+ years in manufacturing. It has worked for him in operations,
maintenance, engineering, R&D, education, consulting and
professional organizations--and now he's putting it to work
for you--taking you to the edge of his thoughts on packaging
operations.
Keith's
Travel Calendar
