Sustainable alternatives for dog waste disposal.

1. Plastic Dog Bags at the Dog Park
Kelly Kokaisel | MCAD | Sp ‘10
DESIGN ALTERNATIVES

2. CURRENT DESIGN SITUATION
I would like to see a redesign of doggie bags at dog parks. I have a
very small yard and a rather large dog, a Standard Poodle named
Ophelia. She, like many other dogs in the area, needs to be
exercised for 30-60 minutes a day and needs a large space in which
she can run and burn off her energy so I take her to the local dog
park by my house. I enjoy being there almost as much her, but there
is one aspect I do not enjoy; the amount of plastic bags being used to
collect dog waste. A dog owners know, when a dog runs around they
tend to work up their system, so that means that pretty much every
dog ‘goes’ every time it goes to the park. That’s a lot of poo. So
much poo, in fact, that there is always a garbage can full of dog poo
ridden plastic bags (that stinks to high heaven, may I add). There has
got to be a better way to dispose of the waste without using so much
plastic.

3. CURRENT DESIGN SITUATION
 Design buyers are dog owners who take their dogs to public locations. Here, they have a need to curb
their dog.
 The design users include the dog owners, but also the park owners (the city, generally) as well. The
park owners have a need to keep the park free of pet waste. The park owners also have to meet this
need as cheaply as possible.
 The current design is to reuse plastic shopping or newspaper bags.
 The current process is to reuse plastic bags for pet waste cleanup and then throw it all into the trash
bin at the dog park.
 The plastic is created from oil, transported, processed, and manufactured into bags which are then
transported to the store or newspaper company using them. Here the design buyer obtains the bag
for its primary purpose and brings it home for later use at the dog park for its secondary use. Here it
is disposed of into the trash bin.
 This trash then goes to the landfill, where it will sit for hundreds to thousands of years.
 Although this design process reuses the bag, it has a very high impact due to the processing of oil
and disposal into the landfill.

4. ALTERNATIVE #1: ON-SITE COMPOST
One design alternative would be to compost the waste on site. Industrial ‘pooper scoopers’
could be provided, or at least signs could be posted urging people to bring their own to
clean up their pet’s waste with, avoiding the use of plastic bags all together. To avoid
smell, pits or containers could be
 Design buyers are same as current design.
 The design users are same as current design, but this design brings in more interaction
from the city, while also providing them with a greater service, and a free product—
compost.
 This design uses a scooper that is most likely made of plastic, but has a much longer
lifecycle, reducing the amount of plastic going into the landfill. On site, a product
something like a golf ball cleaner at a golf course could be provided to allow cleaning for
transportation of the scooper back home. Rainwater could be collected for use in the
scooper cleaner. This scooper cleaner could then be a self sustaining product. Soap
could be donated by the users from leftovers in bottles.
 The waste would be gathered with the tool and put into the compost pit to decay. The
pit would have multiple layers or chambers that allow the decomposed material to sink
to the bottom to be easily retrieved for use by the city.
 The plastic is created from oil, transported, processed, and manufactured into pooper
scoopers. The scoopers are transported to the store where the design buyer purchases
the item and brings it home. Here it can remain useful for at least a year or more,
depending on quality.
 The scoopers could be made for easy disassembly and recycling out of a type of plastic,
or it could be made of a resin from corn, for example, that could be composted itself.
This design uses the principle of locality to reduce transportation cost, and lightness by
eliminating the need for a bag

5. ALTERNATIVE #2: COMPOSTABLE BAGS
A second design alternative would be to provide compostable bags, or at
least regulate the use of compostable bags.
 Design buyers are same as current design.
 The design users are same as current design, and meets the needs
just the same. The pet owner may have to put a little more effort into
obtaining compostable bags instead of plastic ones.
 This design uses a bag made of corn or other renewable,
compostable material. The rest of the materials remain the same,
offering little barrier to change.
 The waste would be gathered with the bag the same way it is
currently and disposed of in the trash. An on-site compost container
could also be used with this design.
 The plastic is created from corn or other renewable, compostable
material, transported and processed into bags, and bought by the pet
owner or city for use at the park. The bag will decompose into the
ground along with the waste, fertilizing the earth.
 These bags could be disposed of in the trash as they are now. This
requires very little effort from the design buyer. This design reduces
what we take from the earth, and reduce the impact of what we put
back into the earth.

6. ALTERNATIVE #3: CREATE A SERVICE
A third design alternative would be to create a service that provided kiosks that
provided plastic bags that were either recycled or reused and also provides a
depository for the waste. They would then come pick it up deliver it to their
facility where they would separate the plastic from the waste, turn the waste
into compost and recycle the bags into new bags. This design would be
easiest on the user but require money from the city so park use fees would
likely be required to maintain this design.
 Design buyers are same as current design.
 The design users are same as current design, and meets the needs just the
same. The pet owner would have to put no effort in themselves, making this
a probable successful solution.
 This design uses a bag made of corn or other renewable, compostable, or
recycled material, a small kiosk station somewhat similar to the pet clean up
stations at pet stores, and a disposal receptacle (could be a standard trash
can, but made with recyclable or compostable materials).
 The waste would be gathered with the bag the same way it is currently and
disposed of in the trash receptacle.
 The plastic is created from corn or other renewable, compostable material,
transported and processed into bags, and bought to the park by the service.
The dirty bags would then be brought by the vendor to the processing plant
where it would be separated into bags and waste and either recycled or
composted, respectively.
 This is a closed loop system for the bags and reduces inputs, outputs, and
transportation impacts.

7. ALTERNATIVE #4: EDUCATE THE USER
A fourth design alternative would be to not create a new product, but a service that would
educate users on the impacts of their actions. This could be as simple as volunteers on
location handing out (recycled) flyers and talking with people about their decisions and
actions relating to their pet waste clean up, and those impacts on the planet. Or it
could be as involved as kiosks on location that give the owner something to do while
they are there and educated themselves so that they can make better decisions.
 Design buyers are same as current design.
 The design users are same as current design, and meets the needs just the same. The
user would also be fulfilling needs to learn and understand their impacts. This would
stimulate a sense of community and give a sense of satisfaction to the user for taking
their design decisions into their own hands.
 This design uses a design alternative of the users choice. The kiosk would describe the
alternatives to using traditional plastic bags, the impacts or not, and the benefits of
doing so.
 The kiosk would be set up by a contract vendor to the city and maintained by them. The
city would pay the vendor for the service and a fee would be charged for use of the
park.
 The lifecycle would be any of the cycles described earlier, depending on the choice of
the user. This variety encourages growth and new development in ideas among users
as they talk about and fine tune their disposal decisions.
 The kiosks could be repurposed for other kiosk needs if they were to be removed from
the location.