I’m not getting what would be so great about 3D printing solar panels at all—are you saying that 3D printing electronics will become as cheap as producing in bulk? That kind of seems unlikely to me.
Or are you using the words 3D printing to mean that producing things in general will become much much cheaper? If so what about the resources required or are they not as big a part of the cost as I think?
Oh, that was just one example. I didn’t mean anything very deep by saying solar panels. But yes, 3D printing will just get better and better. I mean, it is more cost effective, right now, to get a 3D printer and just print off some common household items than buying them. Like those little things you use to hold up toilet rolls. And as 3D printing gets better and better, and cheaper and cheaper, we will be able to make more things at home without needing to but them.
Sure, the feedstock will cost something for the near future, and so will the energy, but both those things will get cheaper and cheaper. Energy in the form of the energy internet, where we all effectively pool together the various forms of renewable energy we use to provide free energy, at much higher efficiencies than right now. The feedstock will eventually be free because automatons will be able to gather them. And they’ll be running of free electricity, and be constructed by… 3D printers and automatons. It’ll take a while to get there, but once we do, there won’t be any need for companies producing utilities or services. It’ll be self-sustaining.
And the resources required, right now, aren’t that much of an issue. Someone designed a 3D printed to run off thrown away plastic. Eventually, we’ll have enough stuff floating around that we can just make new things out of the old unwanted ones. Of course, that’s assuming we make things from all recyclable things.
Now, some people here have mentioned that we couldn’t just go wild with 3D printing and print a skyscraper for everyone (can’t think of another example right now), as it wouldn’t be sustainable. However, I am not advocating a situation where there is suddenly no form of governance about how much you should make. Rather, I am saying that capitalism is not necessarily it.
The alternate? The Commons. I’ve heard that the paper ‘the comedy of the commons’ is very good, so you might want to give that a read.
Also, I expect this to be a slow process. The book I was reading pegs the ‘eclipse of capitalism’ by about 2050, which I find reasonable. And in regards to copyright laws and things like that, many people are advocating for creative commons licences, which is growing as a movement. Eventually, we’ll live in a society where social capital is more important than material capital. But capitalism, in the materialistic sense, won’t be needed to govern it.
Ok, so a cheap, low end 3-D printer costs about $400-500. Feedstock costs about $30-40 per KG. Now, with one of these, you can make things like stands, casings, door handles, so on and so forth.
Lets assume that things like this would cost you about $200 dollars a year, including things that you would have to replace because they’re damaged. Now, if you use about a kg or two each year, and use hollow constructions, you could make a ‘return’ of about $120 each year, including the filament costs. That’s about 4 years before the 3D printer pays for itself.
You could also get something like the filbot: http://www.gizmag.com/filabot-plastic-recycling/25848/ for about $300 (not the one in the link), in which case you pretty much eliminate filament costs and you’d break even in roughly… 4 years. Still, its probably a good idea to get one if you’re going to be printing a lot of things and want to recycle some of you old stuff.
Now, of course, the technologies getting better and better each year, so you’d probably be wise and wait a few years before investing in one. However, it is still a reasonable purchase right now.
I will add one caveat, however. You probably won’t get things with as high a quality finish as if you bought them, but from a functional stand point, they’re fine.
Alright. So, personally (as I’m just one person, and fairly frugal by nature, with a pretty poor memory) I have bought several tissue box holders, a little soap box, two phone cases, a replacement for my satchel’s arm strap (which could have been easily repaired with a 3D printer), a couple of plastic door handles, several headphones which I replaced because the little bits at the end broke of (you know, the small ones) and I had to get, and would like to get, several other things replaced because of some small but important little bits that fell off.
This is off the top of my head, and I’m not even the home owner. If you included all the little bits and bobs over the past three years that my family and I have bought/replaced and would like to replace but its too damn expensive over the past three years, I think £400 is not too unreasonable, which is about $600.
with one of these, you can make things like stands, casings, door handles, so on and so forth.
You can?
Your toilet paper roll holder usually has a steel spring inside. The door handles need to have sufficient mechanical strength—both for the screws (or bolts) and for the cases when someone leans on them. Will 3D-printed out of the standard feedstock door handles be strong enough? I have my doubts. And how often do you change door handles in your house?
That’s about 4 years before the 3D printer pays for itself.
First, please estimate labor costs for all of that and price it in. Time is valuable. Second, will a “cheap, low-end 3-D printer” even last four years?
I don’t have problems with the idea that 3D printing is a very interesting technology which could impact things at some point in the future. What I have problems with is the claim that the time is now. I don’t think it is.
I have a 3D printer (Makerbot 2, not really low end, cost ~$2000), so let me correct a couple of misconceptions in this thread:
3D printed parts can be, and usually are, quite strong. The strength of a part is directional—the parts are much stronger in the direction parallel to the filament deposition than in the perpendicular direction. But door handles and the like are no problem at all. The parts can also be strong and very light, because printing the inside volume as a honeycomb mesh is possible (and is the default option at least on the printer driver I am using)
The labout input in actually making a part is minimal, surely less than a trip to the store to buy one. Currently, the labour-intensive part is finding or producing the right design—but once the design is made, it can in theory be available to anyone in the world to use. “Thingiverse” is an attempt to collate the various designs, unfortunately it is full of sub-mediocre stuff and not sufficiently easy to navigate around.
I have literally hundreds of 3D printed objects around me right now, most are models of industrial plants and boats. But I have also made a few everyday objects that I otherwise would have had trouble getting at all, including:
A control knob for my amplifier, the original was lost somewhere
A knob for window wiper control for my car
The little thing that you pull to open the door in the car
A hard-to-explain bracket that holds a milk shelf in my fridge
Now that i have made the models (and it was fun to do, so was there a labour “cost”?), these things above should be available on the ’net for anyone… I feel kinda bad for not doing that, but the problem is this: How do I identify say the fridge bracket, so that people can find it? OK, its a Fisher and Paykel 350 l fridge, model ABC-1234 or w/e, but then...? Now if the fridge maker provided the design on their web site, we’d be getting somewhere, and if 3D printers have sufficient penetration, perhaps they will one day.
I think that at the moment 3D printers (for home use) are toys. Certainly, cool toys and I’ve been tempted to get one a few times. But then I realize that while the magic of materializing physical objects out of bytes and some plastic filament is great, I just don’t need many (if any) small uneven pieces of plastic.
The claim that I objected to at the start of this sub-thread is that a 3D printer is now a cost-effective method of producing useful household objects. I didn’t think so and I still don’t think so. Saving money on a 50-cent bracket via buying a $1,000 printer doesn’t look particularly rational to me. Maybe things will change in a few years. We’ll see.
cool toys and I’ve been tempted to get one a few times
If you can use a 3D design program like Google Sketchup—do it! It is a cool toy, it is at least of minor practical use, and you might catch a wave to the future.
Saving money on a 50-cent bracket via buying a $1,000 printer doesn’t look particularly rational to me
Naturally. But throwing away a $1000 item for the lack of some stupid bracket that should cost 50 cents but can’t be had for any money AFAICT is not great either...
I agree—but I don’t find its output either cool or useful enough. When the 3D metal printers come down in price, I might reconsider. I find things like this considerably more appealing, but maybe that’s just me.
But throwing away a $1000 item for the lack of some stupid bracket that should cost 50 cents but can’t be had for any money AFAICT is not great either...
Eh, I meant more like phone stands and cases. Door handles as in the actual nob. Do people lean on door handles? Also, what kind of toiler paper holders do you use? I’ve never seen one with a spring inside. What sort of mechanism does it use?
And a low quality 3D printer is something that probably could last a few years. And if not now, then certainly in a few years time.
The thing is, 3D printing is only really getting its legs under it. In order to really revolutionise things it needs to have the proper infrastructure developing alongside it which is only happening now. Each industrial revolution not only had a new mode of production, but also a new form of energy and communication accompanying it. We have the communications medium, the internet, but the so called ‘energy internet’ and the ‘internet of things’ are just starting to emerge, and it will probably take a few decades before the whole ‘third industrial revolution’ is finished.
The thing is, 3D printing is only really getting its legs under it.
I agree. But the future is uncertain. 3D printing might revolutionize DIY manufacturing or it might not. I am aware that some people are pretty sure it will, but their arguments tend to lean in the “because we want it to happen” direction.
A simple welding setup will give me a much more useful DIY capability than a 3D printer at the moment. And I will be able to produce a variety of home items out of scrap steel quite cheaply. Still, home welding isn’t particularly popular.
I’m not getting what would be so great about 3D printing solar panels at all—are you saying that 3D printing electronics will become as cheap as producing in bulk? That kind of seems unlikely to me.
Or are you using the words 3D printing to mean that producing things in general will become much much cheaper? If so what about the resources required or are they not as big a part of the cost as I think?
Oh, that was just one example. I didn’t mean anything very deep by saying solar panels. But yes, 3D printing will just get better and better. I mean, it is more cost effective, right now, to get a 3D printer and just print off some common household items than buying them. Like those little things you use to hold up toilet rolls. And as 3D printing gets better and better, and cheaper and cheaper, we will be able to make more things at home without needing to but them.
Sure, the feedstock will cost something for the near future, and so will the energy, but both those things will get cheaper and cheaper. Energy in the form of the energy internet, where we all effectively pool together the various forms of renewable energy we use to provide free energy, at much higher efficiencies than right now. The feedstock will eventually be free because automatons will be able to gather them. And they’ll be running of free electricity, and be constructed by… 3D printers and automatons. It’ll take a while to get there, but once we do, there won’t be any need for companies producing utilities or services. It’ll be self-sustaining.
And the resources required, right now, aren’t that much of an issue. Someone designed a 3D printed to run off thrown away plastic. Eventually, we’ll have enough stuff floating around that we can just make new things out of the old unwanted ones. Of course, that’s assuming we make things from all recyclable things.
Now, some people here have mentioned that we couldn’t just go wild with 3D printing and print a skyscraper for everyone (can’t think of another example right now), as it wouldn’t be sustainable. However, I am not advocating a situation where there is suddenly no form of governance about how much you should make. Rather, I am saying that capitalism is not necessarily it.
The alternate? The Commons. I’ve heard that the paper ‘the comedy of the commons’ is very good, so you might want to give that a read.
Also, I expect this to be a slow process. The book I was reading pegs the ‘eclipse of capitalism’ by about 2050, which I find reasonable. And in regards to copyright laws and things like that, many people are advocating for creative commons licences, which is growing as a movement. Eventually, we’ll live in a society where social capital is more important than material capital. But capitalism, in the materialistic sense, won’t be needed to govern it.
I don’t believe this to be true. Can you provide some supporting data?
Ok, so a cheap, low end 3-D printer costs about $400-500. Feedstock costs about $30-40 per KG. Now, with one of these, you can make things like stands, casings, door handles, so on and so forth.
Lets assume that things like this would cost you about $200 dollars a year, including things that you would have to replace because they’re damaged. Now, if you use about a kg or two each year, and use hollow constructions, you could make a ‘return’ of about $120 each year, including the filament costs. That’s about 4 years before the 3D printer pays for itself.
You could also get something like the filbot: http://www.gizmag.com/filabot-plastic-recycling/25848/ for about $300 (not the one in the link), in which case you pretty much eliminate filament costs and you’d break even in roughly… 4 years. Still, its probably a good idea to get one if you’re going to be printing a lot of things and want to recycle some of you old stuff.
Now, of course, the technologies getting better and better each year, so you’d probably be wise and wait a few years before investing in one. However, it is still a reasonable purchase right now.
I will add one caveat, however. You probably won’t get things with as high a quality finish as if you bought them, but from a functional stand point, they’re fine.
Edit: Also, this: http://www.appropedia.org/Waste_plastic_extruder and this: http://reprap.org/wiki/Recyclebot make some decent points about sustainable development.
Who spends $200 dollar per year on door handles, stands and casings?
I meant things like that, on that sort of scale and complexity.
Could you list what things of that scale and complexity you brought in the three years and roughly what you payed for that?
In my own experience I don’t think I spent $600 dollar on that kind of stuff.
Alright. So, personally (as I’m just one person, and fairly frugal by nature, with a pretty poor memory) I have bought several tissue box holders, a little soap box, two phone cases, a replacement for my satchel’s arm strap (which could have been easily repaired with a 3D printer), a couple of plastic door handles, several headphones which I replaced because the little bits at the end broke of (you know, the small ones) and I had to get, and would like to get, several other things replaced because of some small but important little bits that fell off.
This is off the top of my head, and I’m not even the home owner. If you included all the little bits and bobs over the past three years that my family and I have bought/replaced and would like to replace but its too damn expensive over the past three years, I think £400 is not too unreasonable, which is about $600.
You can?
Your toilet paper roll holder usually has a steel spring inside. The door handles need to have sufficient mechanical strength—both for the screws (or bolts) and for the cases when someone leans on them. Will 3D-printed out of the standard feedstock door handles be strong enough? I have my doubts. And how often do you change door handles in your house?
First, please estimate labor costs for all of that and price it in. Time is valuable. Second, will a “cheap, low-end 3-D printer” even last four years?
I don’t have problems with the idea that 3D printing is a very interesting technology which could impact things at some point in the future. What I have problems with is the claim that the time is now. I don’t think it is.
I have a 3D printer (Makerbot 2, not really low end, cost ~$2000), so let me correct a couple of misconceptions in this thread:
3D printed parts can be, and usually are, quite strong. The strength of a part is directional—the parts are much stronger in the direction parallel to the filament deposition than in the perpendicular direction. But door handles and the like are no problem at all. The parts can also be strong and very light, because printing the inside volume as a honeycomb mesh is possible (and is the default option at least on the printer driver I am using)
The labout input in actually making a part is minimal, surely less than a trip to the store to buy one. Currently, the labour-intensive part is finding or producing the right design—but once the design is made, it can in theory be available to anyone in the world to use. “Thingiverse” is an attempt to collate the various designs, unfortunately it is full of sub-mediocre stuff and not sufficiently easy to navigate around.
I have literally hundreds of 3D printed objects around me right now, most are models of industrial plants and boats. But I have also made a few everyday objects that I otherwise would have had trouble getting at all, including:
A control knob for my amplifier, the original was lost somewhere
A knob for window wiper control for my car
The little thing that you pull to open the door in the car
A hard-to-explain bracket that holds a milk shelf in my fridge
Now that i have made the models (and it was fun to do, so was there a labour “cost”?), these things above should be available on the ’net for anyone… I feel kinda bad for not doing that, but the problem is this: How do I identify say the fridge bracket, so that people can find it? OK, its a Fisher and Paykel 350 l fridge, model ABC-1234 or w/e, but then...? Now if the fridge maker provided the design on their web site, we’d be getting somewhere, and if 3D printers have sufficient penetration, perhaps they will one day.
I think that at the moment 3D printers (for home use) are toys. Certainly, cool toys and I’ve been tempted to get one a few times. But then I realize that while the magic of materializing physical objects out of bytes and some plastic filament is great, I just don’t need many (if any) small uneven pieces of plastic.
The claim that I objected to at the start of this sub-thread is that a 3D printer is now a cost-effective method of producing useful household objects. I didn’t think so and I still don’t think so. Saving money on a 50-cent bracket via buying a $1,000 printer doesn’t look particularly rational to me. Maybe things will change in a few years. We’ll see.
If you can use a 3D design program like Google Sketchup—do it! It is a cool toy, it is at least of minor practical use, and you might catch a wave to the future.
Naturally. But throwing away a $1000 item for the lack of some stupid bracket that should cost 50 cents but can’t be had for any money AFAICT is not great either...
I agree—but I don’t find its output either cool or useful enough. When the 3D metal printers come down in price, I might reconsider. I find things like this considerably more appealing, but maybe that’s just me.
Never had this happen to me, ever :-P
Eh, I meant more like phone stands and cases. Door handles as in the actual nob. Do people lean on door handles? Also, what kind of toiler paper holders do you use? I’ve never seen one with a spring inside. What sort of mechanism does it use?
And a low quality 3D printer is something that probably could last a few years. And if not now, then certainly in a few years time.
The thing is, 3D printing is only really getting its legs under it. In order to really revolutionise things it needs to have the proper infrastructure developing alongside it which is only happening now. Each industrial revolution not only had a new mode of production, but also a new form of energy and communication accompanying it. We have the communications medium, the internet, but the so called ‘energy internet’ and the ‘internet of things’ are just starting to emerge, and it will probably take a few decades before the whole ‘third industrial revolution’ is finished.
By the way, I didn’t just make that up, Here’s an article from the economist briefly covering the idea: http://www.economist.com/node/21553017
I agree. But the future is uncertain. 3D printing might revolutionize DIY manufacturing or it might not. I am aware that some people are pretty sure it will, but their arguments tend to lean in the “because we want it to happen” direction.
A simple welding setup will give me a much more useful DIY capability than a 3D printer at the moment. And I will be able to produce a variety of home items out of scrap steel quite cheaply. Still, home welding isn’t particularly popular.
How many 3D printed objects do you have in your household?