Domestic Food and SustainableDesign: A Study of UniversityStudent Cooking and its ImpactsAdrian Clear, Mike Hazas, Janine ...
Outline• Home cooking & sustainable HCI• What design goals?• Method• Findings and design implications• Scope of impacts• K...
Why cooking?Literature Wider Sustainability HCIFoodSystems &ChoiceDiet change & foodproduction(27% GHG in UK)e.g. Berners-...
Study design• 31 students, 4 flats, 21 days• Interviews• Sensing
BedroomBedroomBedroomBedroomKitchen BedroomPhysical SensingSocket-level power“Hobcam:” motion-triggered cameraWhole-house,...
30-second stop-motion video ofsample of Hobcam images [omitted]
Cooking sessionannotation
Cooking sessionannotationOne cook, single portion
Cooking sessionannotationComponents usedBack-rightBack-left
Cooking sessionannotationFoods observedJarred saucePasta
Cooking sessionannotation... and quantities(160g)(100g)Foods observedJarred saucePasta
Cooking sessionannotationCooking methodBoilingHeating
Cooking sessionannotationCooking methodHeatingBoiling(no lid)(no lid)Use of lid?
Cooking sessionannotationChanges incontrol position
Findings
Other foodRelative ImpactsCooking Energy Emissions (22%)WasteOtherdevicesIndirect Emissions (78%)
Design AreasDiet ChangeTechnique & Method
Technique andmethodPhoto: reutC (via Flickr)
Frying vs. grilling33m 30s170g9m 50s113g0.118 kWh 0.965 kWhAverage 1.2 kWh/kg Average 6.7 kWh/kg
Pasta vs. Pasta41 mins16 mins7 mins
Pizza vs. Pizza27 minutes...53minutesbeforecookingOven switched on85 minutes36 minutes later......oven switched offPizza r...
Design Board: ApplianceGoal Possible ApplicationsEncourage moreefficient methods &techniquesCooking-specificenergy feedbackS...
DietHigh ImpactLow ImpactJarred sauceChickenChicken nuggetsBaconSausagesCheeseChips OnionsBreadPasta
A convenient diet“typical studentfood”“all those kind ofreally easy things”020406080jarredsaucechickenpastavegetablessausa...
MealsJarredsauceChickenChicken nuggetsBaconSausagesCheeseChips OnionsBreadPasta
Chicken, pasta, andsauce00.511.52Chicken Pasta Sauce CookerTotal: 3.57 Kg CO2e
Grilled potatoes00.1250.250.3750.5Potatoes CookerTotal: 0.62 Kg CO2e
Design Board: Sustainable DietsGoal Possible ApplicationsMake indirect emissionsmore explicit to “cooks”Help keep infreque...
OrganizationCooking &EatingTeachingSportEmploymentSocialising
“Simple” & “Easy” =• Short cooking time (< 20mins) (~70%)• Single cooker component (69%)• Few “ingredients”• Repetitive• S...
Social cooking“we keep saying we’regoing to cook togetherbut something alwaysgets in the way”“one person would goout or on...
“Whateverʼs in thecupboard”“I like vegetables andsalads and stuff like thatbut when I buy it it justall goes off...”“um, r...
Design Board: OrganizationGoal Possible ApplicationsEncourage moreshared cookingSocial media appsCollective inventoryassis...
InterdependenciesCooking EnergyDiet ChangeTechniqueSharingIndirect Emissions
InterdependenciesCooking EnergyA Different DietTechnique & MethodSharingIndirect Emissions
Summary• An innovative method• Account of relative impacts of real-life studentcooking• Frames design goals for sustainabl...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Domestic Food and Sustainable Design, CHI 2013, Paris

5,461 views

Published on

A presentation of our CHI 2013 paper, "Domestic Food and Sustainable Design: A Study of University Student Cooking and its Impacts," which we delivered in Paris.

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
5,461
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1,374
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
8
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Domestic Food and Sustainable Design, CHI 2013, Paris

  1. 1. Domestic Food and SustainableDesign: A Study of UniversityStudent Cooking and its ImpactsAdrian Clear, Mike Hazas, Janine Morley, AdrianFriday, and Oliver BatesLancaster University
  2. 2. Outline• Home cooking & sustainable HCI• What design goals?• Method• Findings and design implications• Scope of impacts• Key role of cookingPhoto: gundamwing4132 (via Flickr )
  3. 3. Why cooking?Literature Wider Sustainability HCIFoodSystems &ChoiceDiet change & foodproduction(27% GHG in UK)e.g. Berners-Lee et al (2012)Carlsson-Kanyama et al (2005)Nudging in supermarketsSustainable urban foodculturese.g. Choi et al (2010)Kalnikaite et al (2011)CookingDirect energy useOberascher et al (2011)Oliveira et al (2012)Wood & Newborough (2003)Augmented meal planning& cooking:nutrition, socialitye.g. Grimes & Harper (2008)Bonanni et al (2005)sustainability?Kirman et al (2010)
  4. 4. Study design• 31 students, 4 flats, 21 days• Interviews• Sensing
  5. 5. BedroomBedroomBedroomBedroomKitchen BedroomPhysical SensingSocket-level power“Hobcam:” motion-triggered cameraWhole-house, aggregate power
  6. 6. 30-second stop-motion video ofsample of Hobcam images [omitted]
  7. 7. Cooking sessionannotation
  8. 8. Cooking sessionannotationOne cook, single portion
  9. 9. Cooking sessionannotationComponents usedBack-rightBack-left
  10. 10. Cooking sessionannotationFoods observedJarred saucePasta
  11. 11. Cooking sessionannotation... and quantities(160g)(100g)Foods observedJarred saucePasta
  12. 12. Cooking sessionannotationCooking methodBoilingHeating
  13. 13. Cooking sessionannotationCooking methodHeatingBoiling(no lid)(no lid)Use of lid?
  14. 14. Cooking sessionannotationChanges incontrol position
  15. 15. Findings
  16. 16. Other foodRelative ImpactsCooking Energy Emissions (22%)WasteOtherdevicesIndirect Emissions (78%)
  17. 17. Design AreasDiet ChangeTechnique & Method
  18. 18. Technique andmethodPhoto: reutC (via Flickr)
  19. 19. Frying vs. grilling33m 30s170g9m 50s113g0.118 kWh 0.965 kWhAverage 1.2 kWh/kg Average 6.7 kWh/kg
  20. 20. Pasta vs. Pasta41 mins16 mins7 mins
  21. 21. Pizza vs. Pizza27 minutes...53minutesbeforecookingOven switched on85 minutes36 minutes later......oven switched offPizza ready55 minutes
  22. 22. Design Board: ApplianceGoal Possible ApplicationsEncourage moreefficient methods &techniquesCooking-specificenergy feedbackSpecialised appliancesMitigate timing“errors” and“forgetfulness”Better interactiondesignSmarter cookersScope: 10-20% cooking energy; 2-4% overall GHG
  23. 23. DietHigh ImpactLow ImpactJarred sauceChickenChicken nuggetsBaconSausagesCheeseChips OnionsBreadPasta
  24. 24. A convenient diet“typical studentfood”“all those kind ofreally easy things”020406080jarredsaucechickenpastavegetablessausageschipspizzabreadbakedbeansricepotatoestortellinibaconfrozenveg.tinnedtomatoeseggnoodlesmincebeefsteakreadymealfishsoup6170878841432192173381540228 29271098 107EmbodiedGhgemissions(kgCO2e)0102030405060708090jarredsaucechickenpastavegetablessausageschipspizzabreadbakedbeansricepotatoestortellinibaconfrozenveg.tinnedtomatoeseggnoodlesmincebeefsteakreadymealfish6169876641432088173281541218 29271098 10EmbodiedGhGemissions(kgCO2e)• Repeated moderate- to high-impact foods
  25. 25. MealsJarredsauceChickenChicken nuggetsBaconSausagesCheeseChips OnionsBreadPasta
  26. 26. Chicken, pasta, andsauce00.511.52Chicken Pasta Sauce CookerTotal: 3.57 Kg CO2e
  27. 27. Grilled potatoes00.1250.250.3750.5Potatoes CookerTotal: 0.62 Kg CO2e
  28. 28. Design Board: Sustainable DietsGoal Possible ApplicationsMake indirect emissionsmore explicit to “cooks”Help keep infrequent high-impact foods “special”Meal tracking andfeedbackMake alternative mealseasierInteractive mealplannersRecipe generationOn-the-spot adviceScope: 20-30% indirect emissions; 17-24% overall GHG
  29. 29. OrganizationCooking &EatingTeachingSportEmploymentSocialising
  30. 30. “Simple” & “Easy” =• Short cooking time (< 20mins) (~70%)• Single cooker component (69%)• Few “ingredients”• Repetitive• Single portion• Cooking for oneself (90%)
  31. 31. Social cooking“we keep saying we’regoing to cook togetherbut something alwaysgets in the way”“one person would goout or one personwould not want whatwe wanted”
  32. 32. “Whateverʼs in thecupboard”“I like vegetables andsalads and stuff like thatbut when I buy it it justall goes off...”“um, risottos, stuff, pastaand sauce whatever, umshepherds pie ...whateveringredients we have”
  33. 33. Design Board: OrganizationGoal Possible ApplicationsEncourage moreshared cookingSocial media appsCollective inventoryassistantsFlatmate allocationHelp manage (andchange) whats in thecupboard & freezerMeal and shoppingsupportScope: less clear, some direct & indirect emissions
  34. 34. InterdependenciesCooking EnergyDiet ChangeTechniqueSharingIndirect Emissions
  35. 35. InterdependenciesCooking EnergyA Different DietTechnique & MethodSharingIndirect Emissions
  36. 36. Summary• An innovative method• Account of relative impacts of real-life studentcooking• Frames design goals for sustainable cooking• Highlights key role of cooking in sustainable foodtransitionsWorkshop on Green food technology at Ubicomp 2013Submissions due: 31st Mayhttp://www.scc.lancs.ac.uk/greenfoodtechworkshop/

×