Lamp that runs on human blood

Discuss

56 Responses to “Lamp that runs on human blood”

  1. mdh says:

    So you’re saying that if you were forced to use such a lamp, you’d be more irritated about the fact that it’s a one-time thing, than the fact that you’d have to injure yourself to use it?

    To be crystal clear, yes. It offends me that something made to illuminate energy waste wastes so much energy in the process. The bleeding part, since you asked me, yes, one drop of my blood is totally irrelevant to me. I give pints and pints away for free.

  2. Brainspore says:

    By creating a lamp that can only be used once, the user must consider when light is needed the most…

    Giant spider attacks perhaps?

  3. Anonymous says:

    The blood is just a catalyst to the reaction, not an energy source. Potassium ferricyanide works just as well, if not better.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminol

  4. IamInnocent says:

    That object is a poetic statement. It is a different mean to express a common idea, nothing else. No one has to cut oneself or actually use this so impractical lighting device. Reading the directions fulfill is enough to ‘get it’.
    As for the expenditure of energy in the making, if it carries the message home then the net balance is positive.

  5. peterbruells says:

    @reginald That’s why art and engineers quite often don’t mix. You are supposed to think about the deep meaning of the metaphor, not shooting it down by considering solutions.

  6. Anonymous says:

    Calm down everyone! This is a piece of art, kindof an eye-roll inducing one, but not meant as a usable product.

  7. fireinwinter says:

    Single-use masochism glowstick?

    Worst lamp ever. :(

    Actually, that’s pretty bright for just adding a drop of blood and some tablet. Chemistry always amazes.

  8. Beelzebuddy says:

    I wonder how toxic the chemicals involved are. I wonder how toxic the production of those chemicals is.

    Not at all. Just because something uses the word “chemical” doesn’t mean it destroys the environment and kicks puppies. The most dangerous part of this art piece is the jagged glass.

    It IS smug as all hell though, and is a perfect example of the kind of art I particularly dislike. Its ham-handed moral lesson would be entirely undermined were it ever actually used, and it’s communicated so terribly that the artist needs to directly tell us what we’re supposed to be feeling when we see it. Condescending, hypocritical, inscrutable; the classic trifecta of shitty art.

  9. Moriarty says:

    This would drive home the cost of energy, if we generated energy with human blood.

  10. nomnomdom says:

    This is such an awesome idea! This would make an amazing single use sharps container. Want!

    How exactly are you supposed to dispose of the solution? According to the MDS, you can’t just pour it down the drain.

    Also, does anyone know where you can get Luminol tablets cheaply? The cheapest I can find them online is $6 per pair of tablets.

  11. Anonymous says:

    This reminds me of the movie Blood Car. I’m sure a puppy could provide enough energy.

  12. Anonymous says:

    No Blood for Oil!

  13. Anonymous says:

    What chemicals are they using?

  14. kc0bbq says:

    @40 – If it is Luminol it is made from pretty nasty stuff like hydrazine. Plus, we don’t know what the solvent is in the lamp, it doesn’t dissolve in water.

    On the plus side, feces activate luminol, too. Unintended consequences if I don’t need to use blood, and just taking a dump on it makes it work.

  15. danlalan says:

    hemophobia is rampant

  16. BurntHombre says:

    This is nothing. I made a lamp that runs on the chum of a thousand puppies. You have to think really hard before you use my lamp. But you don’t really even have to use it — just thinking about using the puppy chum lamp is enough to raise awareness about energy waste.

  17. Evil Jim says:

    Cool! If I keep feeding it blood does it stay lit longer? Is there anyone who would like to assist me in testing this theory?

  18. peterbruells says:

    Well, I guess you’ll just have to keep a score of fertile women around…

  19. Anonymous says:

    So, why can’t this lamp run on the blood from a rock, which is what my local power company asks for.

  20. fantasmaglow says:

    Would menstrual blood work? I certainly have enough unused blood per month to power a building full of those.

  21. reznicek111 says:

    @44 – Yes, I’m sure it would!

    @40 – Somehow, “poo lamp” just doesn’t have the same impact.

  22. AirPillo says:

    Thank god the picture doesn’t actually show any blood. I hate fainting on my keyboard. (physiological condition, not psychological… I think).

  23. Moriarty says:

    How exactly are you supposed to dispose of the solution? According to the MDS, you can’t just pour it down the drain.

    To keep the metaphor going, after use you’re supposed to wear it on a chain around your neck for the rest of your life.

  24. SednaBoo says:

    I’m guessing that this ‘lamp’ works with the use of luminol (like on those forensic shows). That doesn’t give off light, it just fluoresces, and needs UV to be visible.

    Even if it doesn’t need the UV lamp to provide visible light, the energy would most likely be from ATP in the mysterious tablet, and not anything in the blood.

  25. Anonymous says:

    This is a form of bioluminescence using the protein luciferin and firefly luciferase, an enzyme. The luciferin emits light when provided with energy at the molecular level, usually ATP, that is liberated from white blood and red blood cells. It would work just as well using an homogenate of celery or other fresh veggies.

    A thoroughly wasteful product. The enzyme/protein could be reused.

    streakr

  26. dculberson says:

    The artist isn’t suggesting that people buy this and use it to illuminate their house. Jeez, people, do you look at the Mona Lisa and say, “What a waste of resources! You can’t even change the image on it!”

  27. Anonymous says:

    Glow looks like fluorescein, and I would guess so since it probably reacts with the iron in your blood.

  28. urederra says:

    It seems that the forthcoming Copenhagen meeting about global warming and other sci-fi stories is making people be stupid in more creative ways. Since the poles are not melting (artic has about 1 million square kilometers more ice than two years ago and antarctic has as much ice as ever) Hurricanes are not more frequent than ever and sea levels rise is not accelerating, they have to find other ways to scare us.

    They could have used a glass cap, so you can open and close the lamp as needed. But this is not about saving energy and recycling, it is about scaremongering.

  29. Adam Fields says:

    “Potion of Illumination, Health -1 (Cursed).”

  30. reginald says:

    I can’t see why it wouldn’t work just as well with someone else’s blood?

  31. dagfooyo says:

    This is utterly beautiful, both physically and conceptually. Reminds me of the Star of Earendil – a light for when all other lights have gone out.

  32. JJR1971 says:

    This could have interesting military applications…in a ghoulish kind of way.

  33. mdh says:

    Seems to me it takes a fair bit of energy to melt that glass and make the chemical tablet.

    Too clever by half.

  34. Anonymous says:

    Interesting, but a little bit icky for some. I guess the people who faint at the sight of blood WON’T be buying this little gadget! I might buy one from DubLi for the funnies, though.

  35. Lt DirtyFreq says:

    I would assume the “waste” evaporates while it’s in use….. also I’m diabetic (have been for 20 years) so I have to poke myself 3-5 times a day so this would just be fun to have. I wonder how long something like this could last & how much it could be? I want one. Great for emergencies or good for a party. ^_^

  36. Yamara says:

    It makes me think that the sun remains “on” pretty consistently, and there may be something to all that.

  37. Anonymous says:

    Elbereth!

  38. kc0bbq says:

    @47 – I don’t think luminol stays lit too long after exposed to the triggering catalyst. Poking around wikipedia I see a duration of 30 seconds in a dark room.

    Wikipedia also says it is triggered by horseradish. I think that’s taking trivial knowledge to a whole new level. Situationally useful knowledge if anyone were to take up serial killing as a hobby, I guess.

    Without any context the lamp is neat. The propaganda I could do without. In and of itself it has caused me to read up on Luminol, so there has been a positive effect. It’s just that the original intent makes my eyes roll.

  39. Anonymous says:

    Soylent Light – how 21st century!

  40. Anonymous says:

    Dagfooyo – “a light for when all other lights have gone out.” That is so much better than all the B.S. about energy conservation. Why did the artist have to ruin it by trying to make it socially “relevant”, when it is a beautiful and compelling object that yeilds interpretations like yours?

  41. semiotix says:

    I understand the objections that people have about the bigger message, but I’m just in love with the idea of art that causes actual physical pain and suffering.

    Any “artist” can be “edgy”–this guy’s giving us ACTUAL SHARP EDGES. Rock on.

  42. Zergonapal says:

    You would also get a better light from a candle made from fat too.

  43. TheDakota says:

    …What happens when that chemical solution is injected into a living mamal?

  44. Anonymous says:

    I don’t understand why people come up with statement pieces like this that are entirely unfeasible. This item exists purely to make a point, but the sheer ridiculousness of the item ruins the delivery and muddles the point into oblivion.

    It’s not simply a matter of shocking people, or making them see something they typically refuse to look at. If you tell people the polar ice caps are melting, if you show them time lapse pictures of the arctic melting, if you drive it home with photos of polar bear corpses washed up on barren shore, you shock and bother people, but you typically don’t get any other sort of response, much less action.

    These kinds of tactics only demoralize people. They aren’t workable solutions to immense problems, they’re giant signboards screaming about the impending doom these immense problems are bringing. They tell people things are wrong, but don’t tell them that things can be made right. They tell people they need to take action, but fail to suggest what action can possibly be taken.

    People don’t want to think about powers beyond their control. People have a hard enough time coping with their immediate surroundings and situations, they often don’t have the strength or will to devote further time and energy to even bigger problems. They think to themselves, on some level, if they can’t even balance their checkbooks or their relationships properly, what the hell can they do to save the planet?

    If you want people to change, it’s not enough to tell them there’s a problem. They need guidance as well. And building gimmick lamps to make an artistic statement does jack all to help.

    ~D. Walker

  45. Tenn says:

    Disposable items don’t usually drive home the energy-savings shtick too well.

    But I have a blood fetish, so if I could create the chemical from scratch I’d probably do so.

  46. Anonymous says:

    Wow. You guys are so easily disturbed by the intent or message (zomG!) of what appears to be a neat artistic idea. I’d make a guess that he’s a glass artist and not a copy writer. It’s neat, it’s art, and it’s a physical representation of an irony, but it’s not a rescue dog that’s going to find missing children.

    Plus, I think the artist understands you’re not supposed to be cutting yourself to make light. Relax.


    (OK, so my other personality wants to respond to my own comment. no point in leaving 2 separate ones)

    No man, YOU’RE the one that’s “disturbed”. We expressing our opinions. Maybe you should RELAX!

    :p~ /spittle!

  47. Bray_beast says:

    Adam Fields is right. Plus it shines just like Sting.

  48. Alex_M says:

    Oh how clever. Or not.

    It’s not exactly the energy expenditure that’s annoying people. It’s the being forced to cut yourself, causing pain, to extract some blood.

    If you wanted to teach someone how precious energy is with a flashlight, give them a shake flashlight.

    That’s reality, whereas this is more like a energy-conservation version of the monster story your parents used to scare you with because they couldn’t be bothered to explain the negative consequences of your actions.

  49. Tenn says:

    IOW, if it was reusable, you’d have no issue with using it?

    Well, then you’re weird.

    This is addressed to MDH, but I did state that explicitly in my post.

  50. kc0bbq says:

    It’s the smugness that annoys me.

    I wonder how toxic the chemicals involved are. I wonder how toxic the production of those chemicals is.

    It’s not the hypocrisy, it’s using the hypocrisy to talk down to everyone.

  51. efergus3 says:

    As if we didn’t have enough problems with vampires, now this. WHOOPS, did I say that aloud?

  52. mdh says:

    alex m – it is EXACTLY the energy expenditure of the making of this product that I find annoying, in line with what Tenn said. I’m sorry your parents were lazy, I’m also sorry to say it shows.

  53. Alex_M says:

    MDH: Not everything everyone says is about you, sometimes people are just commenting on the story.

    So you’re saying that if you were forced to use such a lamp, you’d be more irritated about the fact that it’s a one-time thing, than the fact that you’d have to injure yourself to use it?

    IOW, if it was reusable, you’d have no issue with using it?

    Well, then you’re weird.

  54. Moriarty says:

    Jeez, people, do you look at the Mona Lisa and say, “What a waste of resources! You can’t even change the image on it!”

    What lesson was Leonardo trying to convey with the Mona Lisa?

  55. mdh says:

    alex m – you commented on what was “annoying so many people”, and in so doing spoke directly against what the previous commenters (3 of us) had said annoyed us – then proceeded to say what you thought was actually annoying.

    Where else are these ‘annoyed people’ other than in the 4 comments prior to yours? Am I not one of them?

    weird, yes, but weird with pretty good reading comprehension and a greater talent than yours for being insulting.

    and as for your question, i think i covered it up there at #1.

Leave a Reply