I want one. . The blood lamp might not look that bloody - butturt wait until you have to turn it on To activate this low; you need to odd o drop of blood. Desig I want one The blood lamp might not look that bloody - butturt wait until you have to turn it on To activate this low; need odd o drop of Desig
Upload
Login or register
Hide Comments
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (81)
[ 81 comments ]
> hey anon, wanna give your opinion?
asd
#16 - Lepain
Reply +122 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
#35 to #16 - anon id: c76575b5
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
Thank you .... 70+ pages from front page and this is the first time I actually laughed
#18 - eatinyojello
Reply +43 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
desc of blood lamp
What if power came at a cost to the individual?

The average American consumes 3383kwh of energy per year. That’s equivalent to leaving the light on in 4 rooms for a whole year. The simple flick of a switch allows us to power appliances and gadgets 24/7 without a thought to where it comes from and the cost to the environment.

For the lamp to work one breaks the top off, dissolves the powder, and uses their own blood to power a simple light. By creating a lamp that can only be used once, the user must consider when light is needed the most, forcing them to rethink how wasteful they are with energy, and how precious it is.
#32 to #18 - anon id: b92fa3bf
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
Cunt

[url deleted]
User avatar #33 to #32 - nathii
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
Silly black man

http://www. miket.co. uk/blood_lamp. html
#43 to #18 - donutcaptin
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
Why? we've worked forever for the convenience of these electric products, and we shouldn't have to bleed to use technology produced 200 years ago (that we pay for). but in all honesty we should cut our self once for every 2x4 in our house to get vengeance for the "cost" to the environment. i can't wait to get 20 lashes to drive my car to work.
#20 to #18 - drmouse
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
I could figure that out from the text in the picture...
User avatar #31 to #20 - noket
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
well, if you read the comments here, you'll notice that many people didn't understand it..
#48 to #31 - donutcaptin
Reply -4 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
LOL.    
>thinks we dont understand content   
>actually cant understand why these libs are cutting themselves for light
LOL.
>thinks we dont understand content
>actually cant understand why these libs are cutting themselves for light
User avatar #70 to #48 - hisnameisjake
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/19/2013) [-]
because its cool?
User avatar #51 to #48 - noket
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
wat
#53 to #51 - donutcaptin
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
"well, if you read the comments here (id be a part of those comments) , you'll notice that many people didn't understand it (bad pronoun usage which leads us to assume that 'it means the content').."
"well, if you read the comments here (id be a part of those comments) , you'll notice that many people didn't understand it (bad pronoun usage which leads us to assume that 'it means the content').."


User avatar #56 to #53 - noket
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
since i was replying to him, it's pretty obvious that i was talking about the content.. and anyway sorry mr syntax, i'm not english.. and second i meant ALL the comments, not just these comments here.. and not YOUR comments
User avatar #57 to #56 - noket
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
and third: what does libs mean? i can't find a translation for that word even on urbandictionary
User avatar #59 to #57 - donutcaptin
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
liberal
User avatar #60 to #56 - donutcaptin
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
which would still include me
>implying i dont understand it
User avatar #64 to #61 - donutcaptin
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
i dont get it... i cant believe i just read all that. what are you trying to say....where is this going? or are we just posting links now? You need to login to view this link
#47 to #18 - thatguynobodylikes **User deleted account**
+4 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #28 - gorillabutts
Reply +36 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
So what you're saying is that emos now power lights?
User avatar #42 - electrickwalrus
Reply +7 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
drink it..
User avatar #46 to #42 - marking
Reply +28 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
Are you ******* serious? Inject it.
#68 to #46 - animepsycchosecond
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(04/19/2013) [-]
I know were this is going
User avatar #36 - pheonixinstinct
Reply +22 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
I'm not turning on that bloody light!
#41 - harrytheheadcrab
Reply +9 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
This image has expired
What if this you shot it up?
Assuming it's nonlethal.
#44 to #41 - ponybroski
Reply +21 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
like this
#65 to #44 - SevenForOhNoe
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/19/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#52 - Jctomlinson
Reply +15 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
That is the most metal source of light I've ever heard of. \m/
User avatar #1 - Mortspear
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
How would this prove how much energy we waste?
User avatar #2 to #1 - teranin [OP]
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
because we could generate enough energy to light a room with a few drops of blood...
User avatar #12 to #2 - wheresthefudge
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
Pretty sure that the energy isn't coming from the blood itself. If we could do that, we wouldn't need coal plants, windfarms, or solar stuff.

I'd hazard a guess that the blood is acting as a connection between two wires, completing the circuit to the light.
User avatar #13 to #12 - teranin [OP]
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
it's a chemical reaction. The light is full of luminol which reacts with blood and generates light and energy.
User avatar #14 to #13 - wheresthefudge
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
I suppose that could work. Although, it seems more wasteful than just having a normal light. I mean, the process for making luminol doesn't have an awesome yeild, and the byproducts are useful for little else than throwing away. Not to mention that it looks like you'd have to make a whole new lamp every time you used up the luminol in one. Glass melts at around 3000 degrees C which would burn up quite a bit of fuel.

Also, not sure but I don't think luminol is bright enough to really light up anything.
#15 to #14 - halfevil **User deleted account**
0 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #22 to #15 - wheresthefudge
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
I thought it was drawing attention to the idea of wasted energy by making the wasting of that energy have a more personal cost.

If this is indeed the case, it seems like standard artsy crap.
User avatar #30 to #22 - noket
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
the point is that you'll use this lamp only when you need light very very badly..
User avatar #3 to #2 - Mortspear
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
I like the idea of pulling a switch up rather than cutting my finger to drop some blood into a bulb. May be just me.
User avatar #7 to #3 - iamkagji
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
You could use pigs blood. The point here is that we don't efficiently use energy, not how convenient the method in the display is.
User avatar #8 to #7 - Mortspear
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
Didn't put that much of deep thought into it. Thanks for the extra insight.
User avatar #9 to #8 - iamkagji
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
No prob.
User avatar #4 to #3 - twi
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
I bet you like to kiss girls under lights that you switch on too, fagget
User avatar #5 to #4 - Mortspear
Reply -3 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
Was that even an insult..?
#10 to #5 - taintedangel
Reply +13 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
I believe he referenced this.
#58 to #10 - buttholee
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
User avatar #11 to #10 - Mortspear
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
Haha, can't say I've ever seen that before. Got a good laugh though, thanks!
#6 to #5 - twi
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
This image has expired
#19 to #1 - anon id: 65618b3c
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
because every time we'd need to light the room, it'd cost our own blood which we'll remember losing

as opposed to mindlessly flicking a light switch on
User avatar #62 to #1 - awesomedug
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
by not using energy to turn it on
User avatar #27 - maskedguardianmkii
Reply +11 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
So what you're saying is, someone invented a light source that women could power forever with their used tampons.
User avatar #63 - Loppytaffy
Reply +10 123456789123345869
(04/18/2013) [-]
But women lose blood every month without any effort, they can use these lamps like it's nothing!