Related
Looks like the days of worrying about carrying around your charger and spare batteries are going to be a thing of the past if this article is anything to go by. No only does this technology allow for much longer lasting batteries but they are cheaper to produce and they will be even smaller. Hurray!
Wonder when we'll actually see them on the market though?
Colorado State University’s clean energy commercialization arm, Cenergy, has co-founded Prieto Battery to manufacture charge insertion (Li-ion) batteries using a 3D structure to enable a larger functional surface area. The resulting batteries are cheaper, up to 1,000 times more powerful, and 10 times longer lasting than traditional batteries, according to CSU. Using an electrodeposition process, Amy Prieto, PhD, assistant professor of chemistry, grows nanowires that comprise the anode — the first key piece of the battery. She uses electrodeposition again to coat the tiny structures with a polymer electrolyte. Cathode material then is added around the coated nanowires, resulting in a three-dimensional battery. The nanowires that make up the anode cover a surface area that is 10,000 times greater than a traditional battery, Prieto says. The high number of three-dimensional wires creates a much larger functional surface area than other current batteries. According to Prieto, the electrodeposition manufacturing method is fast and inexpensive, allowing the technology to be scaled up to create batteries that can be used for everything from pacemakers to automobiles.
Prieto Battery is the first start-up produced by Cenergy. Prieto, who also serves as chief scientific officer for the new company, expects to demonstrate the first prototype of the battery by early next year. In February 2009, CSU’s TTO applied for a patent that encompasses all Prieto Battery technology. The patent has been exclusively licensed to the start-up. Bohemian Asset Management in Fort Collins, a privately held division of the Bohemian Cos., supplied the first round of funding for the company.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.technologytransfertactic...commercialize-“3d”-li-ion-battery-technology/
Heard many of these reports in the past, but none proved to be viable, first see then believe..
yep, still waiting after all these years
I know it's illegal in the US, but VHF/UHF and HAM radio equipment is f***ing expensive. I was browsing 850/1900 MHz repeaters and it looks like the maximum legal cellular transmit power is something infinitesimal like 3.5 watts.
So... What I'd like to do is fire up Garmin Mobile XT's PC-based map managing utility and map every AT&T and T-MoUSA tower within ~500 miles of my house (2,000lb cars with 1.5L engines and a 5 speed ftw, except when they malfunction outside of free towing range). Then I want to either purchase or make a somewhat large directional antenna (not sure which kind, asking here to see if the mods or somebody knows whether or not this is even possible before sinking dozens of hours of research into this) to plug into an amplifier. By amplifier, I don't mean one of those FCC licensed ones. For emergency situations out "in the sticks", it'd be handy to to have 25-50 watts of transmit power attached to a directional antenna that's pointed right at a tower. AT&T has 95% of the places I roam covered with EDGE and all of it's 15 kB/s glory, but then there are the capacious swaths of "middle of nowhere" that I like to hike in several times per year for several days at a time. Usually I bring friends, and at least every couple of years some f***tard inevitably tags along and isn't used to irregular terrain, 90+ Fahrenheit temperatures with relative humidity in excess of 90%, proper equipment (particularly cold weather gear; coldest it's gotten here in my 21 years is 7 Fahrenheit, and I still went duck hunting), and is generally unprepared falls and breaks a bone, develops heat exhaustion and/or heat stroke, or some other f***up due to being ill prepared. When I go that far out into the "boondocks", I don't take my old Civic hatchback with ~200k miles before the speedometer and odomoter died; I take my heavily modified 1986 Ford Bronco (351 CID/5.8L Windsor V8 with nearly everything that can be done to it while remaining naturally aspirated, 3 speed + "granny gear low" standard transmission so kinda a 4 speed but 1st/granny gear doesn't get used on anything like normal on or off road driving, 2 radiators + huge water pump, dual 25 gallon gas tanks + a 55 gallon drum I can swap out the back seat for if I need that much fuel onboard, Dana 60 front and rear axles, snorkel, no carpet, vinyl seats, a 6" custom suspension lift, 35" M/Ts with 1-4 spares depending on what I anticipate driving on + some A/Ts that I use for city driving when my POS civic is taken apart for repair or hauling heavy sh*t with my 450 lb-ft of torque @ 1800 RPM [gotta love getting t-boned by a drunk cardiovascular surgeon + suing the sh*t out of him in this overly-litigious society/pay for college and drop ~$20,000 into a $3,000 truck]).
That truck is supremely good at getting out of cellular range, and it sucks when sh*t hits the fan out in the sticks and I have to drive dozens of miles at high speed over rough terrain and thus tear up suspensions like a mofo to get ahold of 911 and an ambulance or a dust off (one dude broke his C7 vertebrae out there, had to get him helicoptered out) via my old Kaiser (kthx external antenna jack; I wonder if I can solder one onto Rhodium when my warranty expires) and 40" magnetic mount antenna. It'd be a lot easier to get ahold of EMS if I could build a hellacious amp and a large antenna that's collapsible/easily taken apart and reassembled to save space when not in use and I could drive to the tallest hill in visual range (if not one, check topo map for nearest), deploy that rig, aim it at the nearest tower, and make an 850MHz GSM phone call.
If it's possible, inb4 requires 1337 soldering/experience with radio equipment; I've built 1 HAM radio and repaired 8, fixed some CB's, and have hundreds of hours behind a soldering iron.
So yeah, if it's feasible to build such an inline amp please sound off.
This morning while searching ebay for reasonably priced solid gold toilets (or other things just as frivolous) I happened across a micro USB solar powered cell phone charger. It was priced at around $35, and while I had no real interest in buying something that probably doesn't work, it still made me wonder what if it did?
So lets assume my galaxy s3 is a 2100 MAh 3.8 volt battery, and it instantly charges to full when plugged in. This means it would consume roughly 8 watts every time you charge it from 0% to 100%. Lets not get overly technical and try to factor in the energy used by your charging cord.
Electricity in my state (New Jersey) costs roughly 21 cents per Kilo-Watt Hour (KWH). This basically means for every hour I use 1000 kilowats, I am charged another 21 cents on my electric bill.
This means if I charge my phone from empty to full exactly twice per day, I am roughly spending $1.23 per year to charge my phone. If the cost of electricity stays the same, it would take me 28 and a half years to break even on the cost of the solar charger.
how much would it cost you?
Since most of my charging is done at work.. cost me nothing.. Really though.. you are on to something... if only could mass market that and people would catch on then it would be great..
Well I think they'd have to really improve on solar energy technology before anything like this is realistic....I just saw the product as more of a novelty. Even if it does work its probably going to net you a couple percentage points an hour, nothing practical.
I just posted this on my facebook page and the response I got made me realize the smarter option would be to get solar panels for the house instead!
i think the purpose of a solar powered charger is for camping/hiking trips where electricity is not available and you can charge your ipod or phone
hollywoodo said:
i think the purpose of a solar powered charger is for camping/hiking trips where electricity is not available and you can charge your ipod or phone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm sure it has many prudent real world applications, I was just a little bored and thought this would be something a little fun to keep the juices flowing.
hollywoodo said:
i think the purpose of a solar powered charger is for camping/hiking trips where electricity is not available and you can charge your ipod or phone
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This. Or econuts.
Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2
i should mention that the concept is the same for hybrid cars. you pay a premium for them for gas savings that could take awhile to pay off (not including special maintainence, etc)
but maybe be part of something bigger... be green
You could use your car charger that uses your car battery/alternator to charge your phone if you are worried about using your home electricity! Just like one post said its more geared towards camping/hiking our any outdoor activity where electricity isn't present.
I gave a gift of a radio that takes alkaline batteries, but also has (replaceable) lithium batteries that can be charged via DC adaptor, built-in solar panel or hand crank. The solar panel allows for the radio to have battery power from the rechargeables without having to crank anything, especially if this radio is kept out during the day at a beach or campsite. It has a connector for charging devices such as mobile phones, which would essentially take much of the day for a low charge - but, that is most practical for when other sources of power are not going to be available for awhile.
While shopping for that radio, I came across solar chargers that are dedicated to supplying devices with power and are thin, flat products that often unfold and have greater surface area than a typical device with a (small) integrated solar panel. Some of these are expensive, but your ability to put a more substantial charge into a battery backup (for general use) or directly charging your phone without any sources of grid-based power is the primary purpose, I feel. A Brunton Explorer2 or similar is something I would go for in these cases and the issue is not comparing their economy to grid costs of the current day, but long-term ability to have off-grid or backup sources of charging power when you need it, I figure. Plus, incrementally going green isn't ever a bad idea: if I owned a solar charger, I'd keep my phone off the USB or wall charger most of the time.
- ooofest
hollywoodo said:
i should mention that the concept is the same for hybrid cars. you pay a premium for them for gas savings that could take awhile to pay off (not including special maintainence, etc)
but maybe be part of something bigger... be green
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I did some looking into this. It would take about 19 years for a Honda civic hybrid to pay for itself. Accounting for average miles driven across the US, maintenance of the car, and gas milage. I was bored
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2
Haro912 said:
I did some looking into this. It would take about 19 years for a Honda civic hybrid to pay for itself. Accounting for average miles driven across the US, maintenance of the car, and gas milage.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't think they're meant to pay for themselves, as they aren't alternative power sources - they are parallel hybrids meant to stretch the use of their gasoline engine.
Something like the Volt is a more serious version of that concept, being a serial hybrid whose wheels run almost exclusively off the electric motor.
Being "green" isn't always immediately the most economical choice in these relatively early days of people realizing it's beyond time to try and minimize the speed of global warming, etc. But, it's meant to be an incremental choice towards more responsible use of the dirty resources we know and love. IMHO.
- ooofest
ooofest said:
Don't think they're meant to pay for themselves, as they aren't alternative power sources - they are parallel hybrids meant to stretch the use of their gasoline engine.
Something like the Volt is a more serious version of that concept, being a serial hybrid whose wheels run almost exclusively off the electric motor.
Being "green" isn't always immediately the most economical choice in these relatively early days of people realizing it's beyond time to try and minimize the speed of global warming, etc. But, it's meant to be an incremental choice towards more responsible use of the dirty resources we know and love. IMHO.
- ooofest
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No no no no no! You're all wrong!. All of my home electronics run off of electricity and theres no smog or global warming in my house!
ooofest said:
Don't think they're meant to pay for themselves, as they aren't alternative power sources - they are parallel hybrids meant to stretch the use of their gasoline engine.
Something like the Volt is a more serious version of that concept, being a serial hybrid whose wheels run almost exclusively off the electric motor.
Being "green" isn't always immediately the most economical choice in these relatively early days of people realizing it's beyond time to try and minimize the speed of global warming, etc. But, it's meant to be an incremental choice towards more responsible use of the dirty resources we know and love. IMHO.
- ooofest
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You have to believe global warming exists in the first place. Just keep in mind there is as much evidence against it as there is for it.
I'm proud to keep my line up of V8 gas guzzlers and always will.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using xda app-developers app
nosympathy said:
You have to believe global warming exists in the first place. Just keep in mind there is as much evidence against it as there is for it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No.
There is no scientific balance of evidence on global warming for/against its reality, and peer-reviewed studies have overwhelmingly shown its existence in a rather cold and analytical manner since at least the 70s.
Sure, businesses that seek to run away from taking responsibilities of their own pollution creation - from manufacturing or as outputs of the products they offer - do fund a number of pseudo-scientific PR studies to attempt offering the appearance of a scientific debate to purposefully keep the public wondering and debating, but no counter-evidence exists on the existence of global warming as a general phenomena in the scientific community. None.
Science is all about testing and retesting, then testing assumptions again - global warming is an easy reality to measure. Causes are still being studies, but the big ones are generally well known, and ways to mitigate are still being researched and even tried.
The business PR effort to offer an appearance of global warming debate in the scientific community utilizes easily debunked, pseudo-science at every turn - usually from privately funded studies, but sometimes they gain like-minded adherents who simply run with the misleading interpretations of highly particular data sets as part of gaining a subculture of defiance against . . . something. The man, government, smart science, whatever your cultural bugaboo might be. This is trap that people such as Michael Crichton have fallen into.
The anti-climate science PR push is equivalent to those many years of tobacco product manufacturing and distribution companies funding misinformation about the effects of cigarette smoke on human health, influencing USA lawmakers and a portion of the public to take sides against rather simple scientific facts . . . until that dangerous farce finally ran its course.
There is no scientific "debate" against the reality of global warming, and your preference for V8s (which I grew out of decades ago) has no impact on climate science - only your perception of such, perhaps.
- ooofest
Spending that much time trying to prove a scientific point about global warming in a phone forum isn't gonna get ya very far surely won't repair the ozone layer.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using xda app-developers app
unique77 said:
Spending that much time trying to prove a scientific point about global warming in a phone forum isn't gonna get ya very far surely won't repair the ozone layer.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I spent a couple minutes, because this is easy - mostly time looking up a bookmark.
Wasn't a specific point - it's the whole point about global warming. Which relates to one use of solar chargers that the OP offered, btw. That, and I have a tendency to not let nonsense get a free pass.
Your point?
- ooofest
I didn't mean to start any fighting...this was meant to be a lighthearted thread.
Just remember we're all here to support one another. All our rage should be directed at Verizon.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using xda app-developers app
ooofest said:
I spent a couple minutes, because this is easy - mostly time looking up a bookmark.
Wasn't a specific point - it's the whole point about global warming. Which relates to one use of solar chargers that the OP offered, btw. That, and I have a tendency to not let nonsense get a free pass.
Your point?
- ooofest
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just want to let you know that someone I never met on a phone forum isn't going to make me suddenly decide I am wrong.
I just said not everyone agrees with you, and obviously you are insecure enough in your views to have to feel the need to even try and start a debate over it.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using xda app-developers app
nosympathy said:
I just want to let you know that someone I never met on a phone forum isn't going to make me suddenly decide I am wrong.
I just said not everyone agrees with you, and obviously you are insecure enough in your views to have to feel the need to even try and start a debate over it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Right, I'm calling out your anti-science view on a technology forum in a minor manner, which in a grass-is-blue and sky-is-green world makes me insecure, Mr. *hrr-hrr-hrr-I'm-hiding-behind-my-V8-vehicle-engine-purchases*. Lovely projection there, nosympathy - please try again, I'm all for private messages.
I'm not trying to convert you: you're simply wrong, dangerously so. I'd like others to see that your unsupported "opinion" (which is actually willful ignorance - for which you haven't offered a shred of evidence) - seems entirely counter to talking about actual science that can power or be otherwise useful in using our favorite pieces of techology . . . which were created, in essence, by people who studied one or more disciplines of science. Actual science, that is.
- ooofest
Interesting discussion. We can try to be civil to one another though...
That said, my 2 cents:
Recent data does support that global temperature is rising. The question that's hard to answer (and has been unproven to date) is whether this warming is man-made. Could man-made pollution be a factor? I think so. Is it THE factor? That's open for debate.
Hybrid cars: just food for thought - how are we getting rid of all those batteries?? I can't imagine those battery-acids are earth friendly.
....and no one is even discussing about the EMF generated by hybrid cars. EMF is ionizing radiation - ie. it has enough energy to break DNA (cancer risk, people!!). So if you driving a hydrid or a Volt/Leaf, you're sitting inside a pretty high EMF field. Personally, I can't take that chance with my little kids.
Solar panels. I think they're promising. Would love to get solar panels for my house. (1) too expensive. (2) efficiency sucks. Best panel is only about 20% efficient. Hopefully this will get better soon. Sunlight is free. Might as well figure out a way to use it!
Sent from a SYNERGIZED GalaxySIII
So I am keen to read opinions about the relatively high SAR value of the Alcatel Idol 3 and its possible negative
effect on the human head and body. I remember owning phones having significantly lower SAR values, such as the
Galaxy Nexus and the Galaxy Note II, clocking in around 0.2 W/Kg, instead of the idol 3's 1.42 W/Kg.
Should we be worried with every day use? The maximum allowed SAR value is set at 1.6 W/Kg. Below is the official report
of the Idol 3 regarding SAR ratings:
THIS MOBILE PHONE MEETS THE GOVERNMENT’S REQUIREMENTS FOR
EXPOSURE TO RADIO WAVES.
Your mobile phone is a radio transmitter and receiver. It is designed and manufactured
not to exceed the emission limits for exposure to radio-frequency (RF) energy. These
limits are part of comprehensive guidelines and establish permitted levels of RF
energy for the general population. The guidelines are based on standards that were
developed by independent scientific organizations through periodic and thorough
evaluation of scientific studies. These guidelines include a substantial safety margin
designed to ensure the safety of all persons, regardless of age and health.
The exposure standard for mobile phones employs a unit of measurement known
as the Specific Absorption Rate, or SAR. The SAR limit set by public authorities such
as the Federal Communications Commission of the US Government (FCC), or by
Industry Canada, is 1.6 W/kg averaged over 1 gram of body tissue. Tests for SAR are
conducted using standard operating positions with the mobile phone transmitting at
its highest certified power level in all tested frequency bands.
9 10
Although the SAR is determined at the highest certified power level, the actual SAR
level of the mobile phone while operating can be well below the maximum value. This
is because the mobile phone is designed to operate at multiple power levels so as to
use only the power required to reach the network. In general, the closer you are to
a wireless base station antenna, the lower the power output of the mobile phone.
Before a mobile phone model is available for sale to the public, compliance with
national regulations and standards must be shown.
The highest SAR value for this model mobile phone when tested is 1.39W/Kg for use
at the ear and 1.42W/Kg for use close to the body.
Source: http://support.bell.ca/_web/Guides/...tel-EN/Alcatel-OneTouch-Idol-3-User-Guide.pdf
SAR is a really useless measure.
http://www.electricsense.com/1133/cell-phone-sar-totally-misleading/
"even the FCC now casts doubt on the usefulness of comparing maximum SAR values for determining the potential health risks of cell phones."
flopticalcube said:
SAR is a really useless measure.
http://www.electricsense.com/1133/cell-phone-sar-totally-misleading/
"even the FCC now casts doubt on the usefulness of comparing maximum SAR values for determining the potential health risks of cell phones."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So it's basically about locations where there is bad reception and the cellphone trying hard to get a connection, increasing the SAR value. It's still
relatively high, the peaks. Anyone else input?
Peaks don't mean anything by themselves, its the average power put out over a long period of time that matters. Think marathon runner vs sprinter.
flopticalcube said:
Peaks don't mean anything by themselves, its the average power put out over a long period of time that matters. Think marathon runner vs sprinter.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess you're right. However, many people advise to wear/carry a cellphone (our Idol 3 in this case) away from the body. How does that even work for men? I've always carried my cellphone in my pocket. How dangerous are we talking??
make my day.
gideonMorrison said:
I guess you're right. However, many people advise to wear/carry a cellphone (our Idol 3 in this case) away from the body. How does that even work for men? I've always carried my cellphone in my pocket. How dangerous are we talking??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Put it this way, you are FAR more likely to be killed by reading a facebook post on your phone rather than paying attention to traffic than you are by the minimal radiation put out by the phone in your pocket.
DallasCZ said:
make my day.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Correct thread?
Put it this way, you are FAR more likely to be killed by reading a facebook post on your phone rather than paying attention to traffic than you are by the minimal radiation put out by the phone in your pocket.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I guess you're right, but I don't like tumors etc There's always a risk of course, just wondering how large that risk truly is...
nobody likes tumors and cancer and so on...but the thing is, that you more likely got cancer from stress and ubhealthy living style than from mobile device radiation (my opinion). But anyway if you want to avoid SAR radiation to your body buy a device with lowes SAR HERE Is link to one article in Czech (because iam from Czech republic) and if you use google translation you will notice, that lowest radiations has for example LG G3, so go for this device and you will be happy (more likely untill you got tumor from something else than SAR radiation ). I myself dont take this things so seriously because there are no proper research and no straight proven consequences between tumors, cancer and magnetic field radiation. It simply stands on more things than a device you use (genetic predisposition, living style, stress...). Thatswhy i put the post above
edit: just for the end..there was a research that prooves that when you ejaculate often (at least once a day), that lowers significantly the chance to get prostatic cancer. so turn of the computer and go for it.
DallasCZ said:
nobody likes tumors and cancer and so on...but the thing is, that you more likely got cancer from stress and ubhealthy living style than from mobile device radiation (my opinion). But anyway if you want to avoid SAR radiation to your body buy a device with lowes SAR HERE Is link to one article in Czech (because iam from Czech republic) and if you use google translation you will notice, that lowest radiations has for example LG G3, so go for this device and you will be happy (more likely untill you got tumor from something else than SAR radiation ). I myself dont take this things so seriously because there are no proper research and no straight proven consequences between tumors, cancer and magnetic field radiation. It simply stands on more things than a device you use (genetic predisposition, living style, stress...). Thatswhy i put the post above
edit: just for the end..there was a research that prooves that when you ejaculate often (at least once a day), that lowers significantly the chance to get prostatic cancer. so turn of the computer and go for it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Although your post made me chuckle a couple of times I do feel it could be a serious matter, as I think we all would prefer a SAR value as low as possible. I reckon we can safely use our i3's however.
gideonMorrison said:
Although your post made me chuckle a couple of times I do feel it could be a serious matter, as I think we all would prefer a SAR value as low as possible. I reckon we can safely use our i3's however.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would prefer to see a better way of rating a phone's total RF power output over a period of time. For all we know, the Idol 3 may be much safer than a Galaxy S6 over a typical day even if it does have a higher SAR peak. The likelihood is that both are amongst the least of your worries in life.
flopticalcube said:
I would prefer to see a better way of rating a phone's total RF power output over a period of time. For all we know, the Idol 3 may be much safer than a Galaxy S6 over a typical day even if it does have a higher SAR peak. The likelihood is that both are amongst the least of your worries in life.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well put and I agree. I will still be wearing the i3 5.5 in my pocket as I've always done. Is there an app for making my balls radiation-free?
gideonMorrison said:
Well put and I agree. I will still be wearing the i3 5.5 in my pocket as I've always done. Is there an app for making my balls radiation-free?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 xD
Smartphones (and to some extent laptops too) have evolved to be an end product in themselves, instead of being tools to communicate and get work done.
Until this (unfortunate) nature of smartphone changes, it is unlikely that the product transforms into the category of 'consumer durables' where people would simply buy it and then forget about buying a new one for years, until the existing one starts giving problems, even if that means more than 10 years of usage.
Hardware used on smartphones are maturing in terms of the experience they provide. Every year the newer iteration is marketed to be x% more efficient, y% more powerful, etc. All those improvements are seen only on paper.
My Samsung Galaxy Note 2 that I purchased in 2012 was giving me 4 to 5 hours of SOT (initially). My Samsung Galaxy S22 Ultra that I purchased almost 10 years later in 2022 is also giving me just about 4 to 5 hours of SOT. This despite the CPU, GPU and other components becoming more powerful, more power efficient with each passing year. Also, the new phones have significantly bigger batteries than before. One can argue that the quality of apps, games, display, etc. are significantly better than what they used to be 10 years back, and they come at the cost of drawing more power. Still, these do not even remotely explain the numeric gains reported by tech companies. Or in other words, the numbers reported are manipulated and would be true only in very specific conditions, which are far from real life usage.
While many users complained about batteries being non-removable, RAM and other components being non-replaceable/ repairable/ upgradeable, etc., the direction taken by manufacturers seem to suggest that the market doesn't care as much about these factors.
Miniaturization and sealing components to the motherboard that result in slightly smaller form factor are not only profitable for the OEMs, but also seem to be acceptable to the market. This actually comes at the cost of damaging the environment, a complete opposite of what OEMs claim.
Just as Type-C has become mandatory, should there be laws that make modularity/ repairability/ component replaceability a must for products? This will eventually transform this product into the 'consumer durables' category, which will not only save the environment, but also make lives much better and healthier.
I think this is unlikely to happen unless a new (life changing) product category is developed and people start perceiving smartphones (and laptops) as mere tools to communicate and get work done. Currently, the amount of time people spend on smartphones doing useless stuff is a criminal waste of time that can otherwise be spent in doing productive things, that will not only make their own lives better, but also contribute to improving the environment and the economy that would improve everyone's lives.