I feel I have learnt a lot during the last 11 weeks. I was interested in this course as, despite being passionate about environmentalism, and as mentioned at the start of the 11 weeks, I had never stopped to think about my own artistic practices or the industry I am aiming for in much detail. 

My objective for this course was to investigate how each week’s theme connected with animation and its industry, and my own personal approaches to animation. 

I learnt a lot about how the industry operates and the main causes of its carbon emissions. I had never imagined that a single film could produce so much CO2, even though I was aware of what goes into a production. 

Going forward from here, I am sure I will be more conscious about my choices of materials – I will continue to use as many recycled goods as possible. Although, due to my research of the university’s sustainability efforts, I will continue my work knowing that I shouldn’t worry as much about having to buy new supplies, as the ECA shop has trustworthy eco-friendly practices. I am relieved to know that the University is putting much effort into becoming as sustainable as possible, and proud to be studying at the most environmentally friendly university in the UK. 

I found my most interesting read to be “Cradle to Cradle” and found McDonoughs sentiments on “be less bad” (“As long as human beings are regarded as “bad”, zero is a good goal. But to be less bad is to accept things as they are, to believe that poorly designed, dishonorable, destructive systems are the best humans can do. This is the ultimate failure of the “be less bad” approach: a failure of the imagination. From our perspective, this is a depressing vision of our species’ roles in the world. What about an entirely different model? What would it mean to be 100 percent good?”) particularly poignant. Going into this course, I sported the opposite mindset, I was a little pessimistic. I thought that with the state of the planet that “less bad” was the best I could do, but Cradle to Cradle, and this course, has helped me change my mind. Through research of new topics to me, I have found a renewed hope in myself and my future in the film industry.

Bibliography

Jul 11, 2025

I feel very conflicted about the future of animation – on one hand we have a stylistic boom and flourishing industry, and on the other we have the rise of AI. This week I would like to talk about AI now that it has infiltrated the design industry and its impact on the environment. 

The new future Design faces was not even fathomable 5-10 years ago, we are having to navigate a new world that now has Artificial Intelligence. Some people may argue that AI is useful to designers, but I am staunchly against the use of generative AI for anything. AI means, for me and my design peers, that our jobs are becoming replaceable as entry level jobs, and even higher up positions, are being replaced by generative AI.

Many high profile animation companies, including Disney, are researching and implementing the use of AI in their films. Whilst some companies are using these tools to aid the production process responsibly, such as spell-checking scripts and speeding up rendering, advancements in AI technology have made it possible to generate entire animated films, scripts, concepts, and a whole lot more. Even Art Education Institutes, such as SAE Institute, are very transparent about using AI to replace human work. While this is morally disreputable from an artistic perspective, this surge of AI usage is largely damaging the environment and will only get worse as more companies continue to develop their AI technology.

This paper investigates water consumption used by AI model Chat GPT. AI models are ran by massive server farms that use tonnes of electricity (It is predicted that by 2027 AI farms will be using the same amount of electricity as the entirety of The Netherlands), which needs massive amounts of water to run. The paper discusses consequences of this water usage, including but not limited to water scarcity, decline in habitats and biodiversity, and dirtier water sources. It states: “According to a report, Chat GPT consumes approximately 500 ml of fresh, clean water every twenty to fifty questions.” With its 100 million monthly users and estimates of 2.5 billion prompts per day, Chat GPT is estimated to use 39.16 million gallons daily. Bear in mind this is only water usage for just one AI model only focusing on one source of pollution, this should put in scale the amount of environmental damage all AI usage causes. 

I can’t be too pessimistic about the future of art however, as there are signs AI is beginning to cannibalize itself, and people are becoming more aware of its disadvantages as the novelty wears off. The future of design is forever changed, but hopefully soon that the reins will be pulled in.

Bibiography

Jul 10, 2025

This week’s theme was about how ecological design should be used to prevent further damage to the environment. Ecological Design is defined by Sim Van der Ryn as “any form of design that minimises environmentally destructive impacts by integrating itself with living processes” 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Regarding this, I decided that I would like to research more into ‘green film making’, as mentioned in my annotated bibliography. As mentioned then, green filmmaking is when the “process of filmmaking is conducted with a view to minimising environmental impact”.

According to a Time Magazine article, an average blockbuster produces 3370 tonnes of CO2, which is equal to that produced by 656 homes per year. There is an increased need to implement more sustainable methods of film-making as since the pandemic the amount of total productions per year has risen steadily, meaning more lighting, more generators, more travel miles. Whilst the film industry isn’t the most wasteful in comparison to others, it is damaging enough to warrant a major change.  

The United Kingdom has been making a strong effort towards green filmmaking since the 2010s, with many programs and initiatives developed by major film and television institutes in order to educate the wider industry and reduce emissions and waste. For example, Green Screen evaluates productions, provides a carbon estimate and works to reduce it, and BAFTA Albert offers tools and training towards a sustainable production. 

I think that animation lends itself more to green film making than perhaps live action, animation already produces less of a footprint due to reduced need for transportation and resources, and it is easier to implement eco-friendly practices. Digital tools can replace physical waste, renewable electricity can be used to run all of the equipment as films are mostly produced in one studio, and any necessary physical items like designs, props, sets can be more readily made from recycled materials than larger, live action sets.

However, there is much more to consider during any given stage of a film production, many of which have little to do with the film itself. Transportation of people and goods, office heating and insulation, choice of equipment, food and drink for staff, the list goes on. During my research on green filmmaking, I have noticed that large studios and institutions have put a lot of effort into creating initiatives to educate others about green filmmaking, and setting a baseline for eco-friendly practices. As Van der Ryn states, “[Ecological Design] suggests that sustainability is a cultural process rather than an expert one, and that we should all acquire a basic competence in the shaping of our world”. If everyone in production can be educated on their green responsibilities, then I think we would find it a lot easier to design with the environment in mind.  

Bibliography

Jul 9, 2025

Continuing on from last week’s theme of stop-motion puppets, this week I would like to highlight how recycled materials can be used to make a puppet, and how they can be used to enhance the design. 

During the second year of our animation course; our lecturer provided us with a bunch of old materials found around the studios such as plastic cups, pipe cleaners, scraps of wood and old plasticine. We had an hour to make a sculpted character and almost everyone found that the rigidity of the objects meant that our designs were forced out of our comfort zones, to much success.

I feel this relates to this week’s reading, Vibrancy of Matter by Jane Bennet. Bennet promotes the concept of ‘vital materialism’ and ‘vibrant matter’ – the idea that all matter is interconnected and important in its own right, everything is alive, active and influences one another. As part of this, Bennet introduces “distributive agency”, the theory that humans are more ‘passive’ in our agency than we think, that objects have the power to control our actions and circumstances. I find this relates to our puppet experiment, as we were limited to our materials, yet the materials commanded the way we developed our designs. 

3D printing is a relatively new, invaluable asset to stop motion. The ability to 3D print means that puppet parts can be produced very quickly and in mass, and can be reproduced exactly the same if a replacement is needed. Laika, for example, use 3D printing to give their puppets more versatility; Coraline – who was polymer clay, had 200,000 expressions, whereas characters from Laika’s 2014 film The Boxtrolls have 1.4 million expressions.

3D printing is sustainable from the angle of waste reduction and energy efficiency, however 3D printed objects are made from plastic filament, which is often sourced from fossil fuels. Luckily, there is a rise in bioplastic (plastic made from plant material) filament and filament made from recycled plastics. According to sustainable filament producers Filamentive, PLA (polylactic acid – a plastic made from plants) is the most popular filament choice by customers as it is both cheap and sustainable. PLA is also commonly chosen by animators for this exact reason, as a lot of printing needs to be done. I will criticize both PLA and recycled plastic filaments for not being easily recyclable, but their usage is highly beneficial over unsustainably produced plastics.

Bibliography 

• Cartoon Brew. (2014). How Laika Pushed 3D Printing to New Heights with ‘The Boxtrolls’. [online] Available at: https://www.cartoonbrew.com/feature-film/how-laika-pushed-3d-printing-to-new-heights-with-the-boxtrolls-101512.html.

Image credits

• Permission granted by Magnus Baird and Max Hogg to use their models

Jul 8, 2025

New Materialism is the idea that instead of viewing materials from a human-centred point of view, we should consider how materials impact us and the world around us. It is the shifting of our views from passive separation of self from stuff, to considering the connection between ourselves and objects and how materials shape the world around us. It promotes appreciation of non-human matter and better choices towards materials. 

This is an important concept in animation. Every second of animation is entirely reliant on what materials were used to produce it. While this is true for all animation- as the style of the end result depends on the possibilities and limits of its medium – this is especially true for traditional animation techniques. Each frame of traditional animation must be made by hand using physical materials, the choice and qualities of which strongly affects the outcome.

In Cradle to Cradle, Braungart states that “Everything else is designed for you to throw away when you are finished with it. But where is ‘away’? Of course, ‘away’ does not really exist. ‘Away’ has gone away”, and in The New Materialism by Simms and Potts, it is stated that “We should move to [a society] in which value is created with more of a ‘closed-loop’ of material loop in which we repair, reduce, reuse [and] recycle.”

Unfortunately for stop-motion animators, this remains true as the nature of the puppets is that they break consistently throughout filming and have to be frequently replaced. 

Materials chosen to build puppets have to be thought about in depth, as the material chosen heavily affects the outcome of the animation. The average puppet is made from a metal or plastic armature, clay, resin and fabric as these are the easiest and cheapest to acquire and possess all the desirable qualities to animate. However, puppets are also often made of materials such as wood, paper or any material you could feasibly animate with. Each material chosen will give a different movement and stylistic result, for example clay is very malleable, can be used for drastic movements and often fingerprints leave visible textures, compared to 3D printed puppets which will be stiffer but instead offer much higher detail and consistency. There is a sense of new materialism mindset between selection of these materials, as the material has the power in this scenario. 

However any material chosen will frequently break upon use due to repetitive movements. It is very difficult to build a puppet that is sturdy and durable enough to not break, whilst using materials that are lightweight and malleable enough to animate with. Whilst a break is almost guaranteed to happen, there are ways to reduce this and prevent it entirely for smaller scale films or personal projects. The obvious answer is to source a higher quality material of choice, which will result in better longevity, will look better on screen, and the puppet will have more range of movement. Sometimes though, this isn’t possible, so it’s good to invest in a puppet maintenance kit so that damage can be reduced. It is important to acknowledge that sometimes in order to reduce environmental damage, you have to “consume” more. In this case, making sure you have a set of good quality materials in order to fix your puppets, such as glues, paints, and clays, can prevent more wastage than buying and using said products will cause.

List of Basic Materials Needed for Stop-Motion

Jul 7, 2025

Victory, J. (2015). Green Shoots: Environmental Sustainability and Contemporary Film Production. Studies in Arts and Humanities, [online] 1(1), pp.54–68. doi:https://doi.org/10.18193/sah.v1i1.6.

Jonathan Victorys paper explores the concept of the newly arising “green filmmaking.” Victory describes this as when the “process of filmmaking is conducted with a view to minimising environmental impact”. Different aspects of filmmaking are explored in relation with the environment, their impact and production of pollution are investigated with suggestions on how this could be altered for a greener future. Specifically, Victory highlights the use of generators, lighting and other electrical heavy equipment commonly used on set and in post-production. Upon examining these factors, Victory elaborates on how to realistically fund and promote his solutions offered. Victory provides some valuable insights into how ‘green filmmaking’ might be implemented worldwide and skillfully compares his research with existing film institutes environmental work. 

Walsh, E. M., & Cordero, E. (2019). Youth science expertise, environmental identity, and agency in climate action filmmaking. Environmental Education Research, 25(5), 656–677. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504622.2019.1569206

This paper, written by Elizabeth M. Walsh and Eugene Cordero, discusses work done by The Green Ninja Film Academy: an interdisciplinary curriculum development project that aims to educate children about environmentalism through creative filmmaking. Their studies show that children are more likely to be interested in and engage further with environmental studies if presented through the lens of an imaginative activity. The relationship between education and efforts towards climate change is introduced, with expansion on successful techniques used to engage students. The paper suggests that approaching environmental learning through filmmaking is highly promising, especially for children who have no prior indication of interest. Walsh and Cordero found that through creative learning and filmmaking, their students have reported elevated levels of understanding and knowledge about the climate than standard classroom learning methods. 

Gündüz Özdemirci, E. (2016). Greening the Screen: An Environmental Challenge. Humanities, 5(2), p.35. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/h5020035.

I find Gündüz Özdemirci’s paper to be an excellent source of information regarding environmental practices within the film industry. Özdemirci’s focus with this article is giving well researched facts about how the film industry impacts the climate, presenting reports on how specific British film and television institutions are practicing sustainability, concluded with proposed solutions. According to Özdemirci, “the energy consumption and greenhouse emissions of the motion picture industry also come close to the aerospace and apparel industries”. I think this source is of great use to me as it provides important information and statistics relevant to my research in animation. It is important that as well as animation, I am also researching the general media industry as that is what animation is a part of, and this paper is comprised of reliable figures. 

Jul 6, 2025

‘Stories of stuff’ is a common theme through animation. ‘Stuff’ is an important aspect in creating and designing characters, props, backgrounds and any other mise en scene; every choice made must be made intentionally, carefully considering what sort of ‘stuff’ is used. It is no surprise, then, that a lot of animated media becomes about the stuff itself. 

This week I will be looking into Pixar’s Wall-E (Stanton, 2008), its depiction of stuff, and the film’s effect on its viewers.

Wall-E’s entire plot revolves around overconsumerism. It is set on a future Earth where humans have had to flee due to their own pollution and live on a huge corporate spaceship. There is a strong contrast between the stuff on Earth and the stuff in space – the Earth has become vast wastelands of discarded items and rubbish, however the humans did not learn from their overconsumerism and now reside in a monopolistic society run by company ‘Buy n Large’, where they do nothing but sit and buy things. Whilst these two futures are presented as separate, it was a reflection of Earth in 2008 and even more so now. First world countries are consuming at unfathomable rates, whilst developing countries are used as land to dispose of the consequential waste in, images of which evoke Wall-Es earth.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As Nicole Starosielski states in her paper on Environmental Animation, “With its ability to contort the space and time of representation, animation can more easily visualize imagined environmental change”. Through the suspension of disbelief, animation can dramaticise and exaggerate potential futures that otherwise might be hard to envision for children and adults alike. Wall-E presents a very amplified version of overconsumerism, but through its sci-fi lens there remains a truth that we can acknowledge. There exists places on Earth comparable to how the Earth is presented in Wall-E – for example, how many developing countries, such as Kenya or Ghana, are flooded with donated fast fashion. (This blog goes into further detail on this).

I find films like Wall-E to be important, as evidence shows that Environmental Animation does have an impact on how children come to view environmental practices, and in the case of Wall-E, consumerism. This study found that after viewing Wall-E, children seem to be able to better associate humans with environmental damage and grasp the concept of overconsumption than before the viewing: for younger children humans equalled positive change, and for older children humans equalled pollution.

Therefore I find animated media about the environment very important if we are to help the planet, it encourages children (and adults) to learn and make connections about how to treat the environment, and in the case of Wall-E to reduce and recycle. 

Bibliography

Jul 5, 2025

In the past few years, I, and many others, have noticed a decrease in quality from major blockbuster animations. There has been a trend of remaking animated classics into live action using subpar CGI and animated media is often sequels or uninspired and poorly received original stories. This isn’t to say all recent animated media is bad, Sony and Dreamworks especially have produced many fantastic and groundbreaking animations during the past few years. But, unfortunately, for every Into the Spider-verse or Guillermo del Toro’s Pinocchio, there are many many more mass produced films. 

 

 

 

 

This week I have taken inspiration from discussions of capitalism and pursuit of profit during class. I feel that in the past decade, the film industry has taken a creative hit from major companies choosing profit over originality, and I take this quite seriously as someone going into this line of work. 

Companies such as Disney have realised that remaking their classic films as live-action is highly profitable, with some releases making over $1 billion. This also goes for studios that produce countless sequels, live action or animated, of franchises proven to do well, the capitalise of pre-existing fanbases instead of taking creative (and financial) risks. Therefore, there is a distinct lack of original cinema, and opportunities for creatives. I find live action remakes of animated work, most notably the Disney remakes, so offensive not just for the lack of creativity, but for the fact that live action films tend to produce much more co2 than the average animated film. Live action has a lot of factors, such as transportation, electricity used for sets and lighting, and physical waste generation that isn’t necessary for animation. Also, the fact that these films are often CGI heavy so the pollution caused by animation is added on top of this. 

This current production of film is distinctly capitalist. It is well known that major companies outsource their post production to countries where minimum wage is a lot lower and labour laws aren’t enforced, and underpay and overwork their own workers. Capitalist exploitation like this is heavily linked to climate change in that the cheaper the work, the less sustainable equipment used will be and exploited workers are much less likely to be able to consider sustainability as they will be overloaded and fatigued. It has been found that rich countries often outsource emission heavy work to developing countries to reduce their own emissions for reports, but in doing so they are creating so much more pollution as poorer countries don’t have as strict environmental policies, and international transport of goods becomes necessary. 

I don’t feel as if I could personally do anything to help this, aside from not working for these companies. My suggestion would be to increase focus on smaller, independent studios as they often have more creative output and stronger environmental policies. Take “Everything, Everywhere All At Once” for example. The CGI department for this film consisted of only 6 people, which means the carbon footprint of this film’s special effects will have been miniscule compared to its contemporary blockbusters. Not to mention the film won many, many awards, so are these massive studios really necessary?  

Bibilography

Image Credits

 

Jul 4, 2025

Last week I established that all types of animation have their environmental issues on an industrial scale, and this week I would like to investigate my own relationship with the environment and design work.

I claimed that “the animation industries’ most biggest offence is its usage of unsustainable energy resources.” To elaborate on this-  whilst the act of animation does produce waste/use resources, the biggest source of damage from the industry is the rendering and post production of the animations. At this point of the process, carbon emissions are at their highest as rendering uses up a lot of electricity. The average animation post-production produces around 5.5 tonnes of CO2 emissions per hour, according to the BAFTAS 2016 report. Compared to live-action productions 9.2 tonnes per hour, I thought animation was doing decently, but as William McDonough said, ‘Being “Less Bad” is No Good’.

As these emissions don’t apply to me just yet, I thought it would be better for me to think about the impacts of my own work, on a student scale. I think that the start of my process is relatively harmless, I use my sketchbooks for pre-production designs and storyboards, with no paper waste.

I then move to digital to expand upon these designs, animate and edit. My personal process doesn’t use rendering, and my post-production is usually quite a small task. I think the animation itself for me is my most consumptive part, as it is the longest section of the process. I mostly animate in our studios on the ECA campus and use electricity there.

The University of Edinburgh has a Climate Change Strategy, the goal of which is to be carbon by 2040. This is still quite far into the future, but I feel more confident using the university’s electricity than in other places where I can’t be sure how it is sourced. As of 2016, the University claimed that “renewable energy will represent the largest single source of electricity growth over the next five years, becoming  the dominant energy source by the time our undergraduates reach middle age.” and that by 2025 they will have reduced their emissions by 50%. I can feel confident about using my department’s resources knowing this, as some of our equipment is electricity heavy. As for other work, such as building sets and models, I am sure to use as much recycled material as possible, usually from The Free Use Hub, but sometimes make new purchases from the ECA store. Again, I feel confident purchasing from here as in 2022 they won a Changemaker Award for their efforts towards sustainability.

I do worry about how joining the industry might affect my personal footprint, but a lot of studios are actively working on their sustainability – for example Aardman have strict sustainability goals, Kajawood are investigating recycling their waste heat into their central heating system, and Pixar uses renewable energy to run their studios.

Bibliography

Jul 3, 2025

The theme of this week’s lecture was about how we as designers interact with the environment, how our designs have a role in nature and how nature should be a consideration in our work. Key things to consider as a designer include minimizing environmental impact, making sure to use sustainable materials and the lifecycle/reusability/recyclability of a product. As a digital animator I was perplexed by how I could incorporate these principles into my practice. I understand and incorporate ecological design into other aspects of my life and hobbies but have never stopped to consider how my own craft of choice might fare. It’s difficult to rethink such a digitally based design field with the environment in mind. I think that most people would find that the solution would be to cut out digital steps and to replace them with pen and paper when applicable, to cut down on electricity and water usage. A lot of large studios use a hybrid approach to designing; pen and paper is often used during the initial design process for character designs and storyboards, which can then be scanned in and altered digitally. I do this during my work process as well – my initial thoughts and designs are brought to life in my sketchbooks then transferred to digital to develop further.

However, whilst digital methods use a lot of electricity, therefore produce large amounts of CO2, fully traditional methods also produce a lot of physical waste that often can’t be disposed of sustainably, and materials used require a lot of electricity and CO2 production to be produced in the first place. Digital, 3D, stopmotion, papercraft, whatever your choice of animation, all of them will produce unwanted waste in the form of physical, unrecyclable pollutants, gasses, water pollution, or most likely all of the above. There isn’t a specific type of animation that is better or worse for the environment, the technology used to make any animation is the largest polluter. I feel that the animation industries’ biggest offence is its usage of unsustainable energy resources. I believe the industry’s issue goes way beyond animation itself and its most prolific environmental damage is rather caused by capitalism, consumerism and materialism. There is not much I can do about this as a student, but I will be looking deeper into this in the coming weeks. Next week is a continuation of our relationship with the environment theme. I would like to find out what I can do to minimize damage in my own designs, and how these practices could be adopted by larger studios. 

Bibliography

Jul 2, 2025

Animation isn’t often the industry that most people think of when talking about environmental design, but like all industries it is responsible for a significant amount of pollution. Most of this pollution comes from electricity usage, studios use tons of electricity every hour to run their equipment, producing CO2 and waste water. However, in comparison to other industries, I would argue that the animation industry is one of the more sustainable out there, with its largest companies to its independent animators striving to reduce their impact. I will be researching this point further down the line of this course.  

 

 

 

 

This week was our introductory lecture to the course, so I figure I should introduce myself. I am an animation student at Edinburgh College of Art, working mostly in 2D Digital. I am passionate about environmental issues, specifically through the lens of fashion. I feel very strongly about fast fashion and waste materials, and have been acquiring my clothing second hand since I was a child, through the likes of charity shops and eBay. I am mindful about environmentally friendly practices in different aspects of my life, but I have never really stopped to think in detail about how the industry I want to go into or my own personal practices in animation affect this. I am passionate about the DIY ethos and strongly anti-consumerism – if there’s something I really want then I can make it myself with what I have. This goes for clothing, but also my art and animation practices. I’m a huge fan of The Free Use Hub at Edinburgh College of Art and have recycled a huge amount of materials from there to use for tasks such as building sets and making prints. However, I have never considered what I can do to make my digital practices more sustainable besides making sure things are unplugged when not being used. Perhaps I will discover more about this over the next few months. 

During this course I would like to discuss and further explore the medium of animation, how it can be used to educate and raise awareness about environmental issues, and the
environmental impact of the industry, both good and bad. I will be looking into
specific films and animations and how they depict the topic of environmentalism, whilst researching into sustainable film-making and other such topics that may spark my interest during this course. I hope to discover more about this, through lectures, readings and questioning my own choices. 

Image Credits

Jul 1, 2025