When a child begins washing their hands, the sink calmly advises them to, “HURRY UP YOU LITTLE F—KER OR I WILL BITE YOUR F—KING HANDS OFF AND CHEW YOUR BONES RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU! YOUR LITTLE ARMS WILL BLEED ALL OVER THE PLACE, SPILLING OUT MY MOUTH AND ONTO THE FLOOR. YOUR DEATH WILL COME SLOWLY AS YOUR PERCEPTION PAINFULLY FADES TO GREY AND THEN BLACK — BY THE WAY, YOU WON’T BE GOING TO HEAVEN BECAUSE THERE’S NO GOD, SO YOUR BODY WILL JUST ROT IN THE GROUND AS YOUR EXISTENCE AS YOU KNOW IT CEASES FOR AN ETERNITY YOU’LL NEVER SEE. AND DON’T EVEN GET ME STARTED ON WHAT DAD WILL SAY WHEN HE SEES THE MESS YOU MADE! WHAT A FU—K UP! NO WONDER YOUR PARENTS ARE GETTING A DIVORCE! WHAT? THEY DIDN’T TELL YOU? WELL STOP YOUR GODDAMN CRYING ABOUT IT, TEARS ARE A WASTE OF PRECIOUS WATER!”

(Or the sink uses an IR sensor, like you find in public rest rooms.) [Design Boom via inhabitots via inhabitat]

I assume the consumption only increases through time, but let’s take the daily 2007 numbers from Global INForM Cases Sales database, the total number of Coca-Cola cans sold per worldwide is 67,873,309. Diet Coke and Coke Zero sold 35,387,241, while MyCoke sold 103,260,550. Yes, that’s all per day.

So taking only the classic Coca-Cola, that’s 24,773,757,785 every year. Twenty-four billion cans. That is indeed a lot of paint and paint removal products. Because this doesn’t only affect the production. It also affects the recycling, which will eliminate a step:

The naked can help to reduce air and water pollution occurred in its colouring process. It also reduces energy and effort to separate toxic colour paint from aluminium in recycling process. Huge amount of energy and paint required to manufacture coloured cans will be saved. Instead of toxic paint, manufacturers process aluminium with a pressing machine that indicates brand identity on surface.

Sounds good to me, and it even looks better if you take into account all kinds of Coke. That brings up the number to 75,380,201,500 cans. I don’t know how much paint that represents, but I’m guessing quite a few thousand tons. [7760 via Likecool, Sales info from Let's Get Together]

Only a concept now, but this charger — that’s also an iPhone stand — is easy enough that some Chinese company could quickly put out a solution in a few months.

[Petit Invention via Into Mobile]

According to the witches and wizards at NEC Electronics and Onryoku Hatsuden, their new remote generates electricity when the users clicks on any button. They are planning to see the first production remotes in 2011. [Aiajin via Crunchgear]

Gold Winner: PAD (small domestic helpers) are “digital pets” that monitor heat, air quality and the welfare of plants in the home.

Silver Winner: ‘Stand Off’ turns off appliances remotely using Bluetooth technology.

Bronze Award: ‘Re-Siker’ is a recycling station that automatically sorts, bags and tags recyclable items and provides information about the items to the user.

The ‘Intelligent Organiser’ conserves energy by preventing “line over-charging”.

The ‘Recycle’ Bike translates movement into energy for the home.

The ‘E-Plant’ keeps track of energy consumption in the home.

‘Light’ provides “luminescent and fluorescent illumination without the use of electricity”.

The ‘Self Control’ meter is like a thermostat that provides information on energy consumption.

DNA is a semi-portable unit that generates electricity from the sun and wind.

It’s only a prototype at the moment (one of many that have come out lately focused on saving energy), which probably explains why it still looks like a child’s toy. Not a good idea when you consider that it sits between the wall outlet and the plug of your gadget. At any rate, PowerZoa transmits details on your power usage to a secure website, where you can use the interface to turn specific devices on or off.

Sooner or later something like this will be widely available, and there will be a mobile phone app that would allow me to control everything. And when that happens, I will be all over it. [Powerzoa via DVICE]

At the moment, only 10 per cent of PCs or TVs are actually recycled in this country, and even those generally have a cost involved with them. The introduction of a mandatory recycling scheme should see that number increase to over 80 per cent, which could save up to 2.5 million tonnes of e-waste sent to landfill over the next 20 years.

The scheme is most likely going to be industry driven, and will consequently mean that the TV manufacturers will pass on the costs to consumers at the point of sale. The good news is that the EPHC (Environment Protection and Heritage Council) report reckons that the cost would be between $5-$10 for each TV, which is such an insignificant sum when buying something worth hundreds or thousands of dollars that it makes you wonder why this wasn’t introduced years ago.

So far, Panasonic, Sony and Sharp have filled my inbox with press releases stating their public support for the scheme. Lets hope that all the other manufacturers jump on board as well, and this thing gets up sooner rather than later…

[EPHC (pdf)]

The T.27 is designed to be driven in the city. Since it’s ultra-light, Murray says it will be the most efficient car in its class, which probably sits somewhere between golf carts and failed European mini cars from the ’60s. The most innovative aspect is that it’s made using a process called iStream: Instead of stamping metal sheets like in normal car factories, this manufacturing method welds metal sheets together.

That results in factories that are one-fifth the size of traditional ones, less energy consumption and a car that looks like crap. And that, my friends, is the problem with the T.27: If something looks like crap people won’t buy it no matter how green and efficient it is.

Update: And yes, it looks like crap even with the fibre covers. People want real cars that feel solid. Not glorified golf carts painted in bright colours. [Daily Mail]

Frederik Krebs came up with this combination of solar panels and LED lights which, while definitely a work in progress, could bring cheap light to some of the world’s poorest regions. I call the lamps a work in progress because despite being durable enough to last several years, they run at a mere 1 per cent efficiency. But with the expected final cost of $US7 a piece, they’re full of life-changing potential.

Some prototypes of the lamps are currently being tested in Zambia. As seen in the picture, the solar panels are left laying flat during the day and then rolled up (and secured with a snap button) into a cone-shaped lamp. I’m definitely looking forward to seeing the results of the prototype tests and a final product, because no one should go without artificially lit nights. [IEEE Spectrum via Pop Sci]

According to Internode, the entire 3000km journey cost just $126.11 using Greenpower electricity. And that’s peak service – if they’d bought the power off peak it would have cost just $69.11. That’s the equivalent of running at about 1.22 litres per 100km for petrol users.

Of course, I reckon it’ll take quite a few 3000km roadtrips to justify the $160,000 price of the Roadster. But as a justification for the environmental benefits of electric vehicles, this is pretty persuasive.

[Internode]