Green design and Sustainable design an ilusion?

I read an article in Fast Company, where the designer Gadi Amit, among other design considerations, states that the movements of Green Design and Sustainable Design are somehow moving in the wrong direction. In reading the article I remembered an important aspect of sustainability in terms of products or objects, the question of the life cycle. That is, a product can not be described as "green" or sustainable to simply because the production is done using clean and renewable energy, or using certain techniques more "environmentally friendly". To verify these statements you should consider the whole cycle, which ranges from raw materials, transport and distribution, logistics, production, etc.. It is more correct to say that there are environmental concerns in the production process than to say it is "100% green." And all of these issues involve a cycle. If the consumer is increasingly informed and increasingly seeking information about products and companies, the latter increasingly feel compelled to communicate what they do, promoting transparency. But back a little to Amit's question, he says, for example, in the technology sector we can not properly speak of sustainability if it is promoted and encouraged, to an ever increasing rate, switching to new devices - be they mp3, mp4 , mobile phones and others - without worry about what to do with the devices "outdated." Here the word is outdated funny, because objects do not cease to operate or to be "fit for purpose", just came out in a short space of time, two or three models above it. To what extent can we think of sustainability policies and initiatives of most technology companies producing this kind of material, if the concern is only with the production, not what they do with the surplus of technology incalculable "outdated." What to do with it? Can we face the so-called concerns with the design greener products, the concern is just the way? Another issue that raises Amit, and even more interesting is the emotional issue. At least I have not read anything where to apply to the emotional issue of sustainability. Gadi Amit says that objects that are "loveable" is sustainable, that is, objects that have or can have an emotional connection are sustainable, because, he says, because people tend to stay with them instead of throwing them away sometime later. Now this statement really goes against the principles of sustainability, and makes sense. The emotion may be quite another variable to a sustainable process or sustainability. Is not the technology market is entering a cycle too materialistic, encouraging waste, or worse, ignoring the rubbish at the current rate tends to increase. Obviously we have to take into account the rules of market competition, and competition is very aggressive, but still can not design to have these issues into account. Quite apart from recycling, or the simple information of where to put the Eco-point specific object, the design can not also promote this discussion, and to instill in their creative processes and production of both the emotional issue as a factor for promotion of not wasting, beyond the promotion of not wasting itself.

The Obvious Revolution