entheogen
featured projects
©2024 entheogen designweaving weeds
Weaving Weeds
Weaving Weeds is a biofabrication research project conducted with the aid of a Virginia Tech Institute for Creativity, Arts, and Technology (ICAT) grant and faculty sponsor Dr. Shaun Rosier.
researchers
Braden Perryman, MFA Creative Technologies (BFA Studio Art, BA Sociology, BA Ancient History)
Chelsea Brighton-Smith, Masters in Landscape Architecture (BS Environmental Horticulture)
Ben Hornyak, MFA Creative Technologies (BFA Studio Art: Sculpture)
Lois Nguyen, PhD Science and Technology Studies (MS STS, BS Landscape Architecture)
Thomas-Mark Peterson, Masters in Architecture (BS Biology)
Maggie Webb, PhD Engineering Education / MS Civil Engineering (BS Mechanical Engineering)
abstract
molds were designed using traditional 3D drafting techniques in rhino in addition to parametric grasshopper script, and then exported, sliced, and FDM 3D printed using PLA. careful attention was paid to the minimum ‘resolution’ of the root structures, as well as to avoid drafting overhangs into the formwork - the result: molds that can be reused near-infinitely with proper preparation and cleaning. the mold patterns we chose were inspired by patterns found in nature - from honeycombs, to the cracking of dried mud in the sun, to voronoi cell-division patterns based on delaunay triangulation.
the molds were then lined with a fine meshing material and filled over top with germinated wheat berries. over the course of three weeks, the germinated wheat berries were kept moist and in direct sunlight, where their root structures gradually filled in the negative space of the positive mold. the roots entangled with(in) each other, networking to create a durable, fabric-like material that held its shape and maintained its integrity. the root/shoot assembly was then removed from the molds, turned upside down, and kept in a cool, dark, dry place for another three weeks.
molds designed by Thomas-Mark Peterson and Braden Perryman
our innovation statement, written by Lois Nguyen:
Developing biomaterials is essential for reducing the environmental impact of industries related to building materials, packaging, and textiles. It is also critical that sustainable biomaterials as an emerging technology do not replicate the extractivist logics of the industries it seeks to replace (Kimmerer 2013). Extractivist logics pervade the development of plant-derived biomaterials dependent on growing monocultural crops. Harvesting and transforming the dead tissue of plants into bioplastics, fibers, and structural materials presents encounters between humans and nonhumans that require ethical concern (Barua 2016). Out of this, a demand emerges to develop sustainable biomaterials and instrumental relations that build more livable worlds that challenge the vertical hierarchy of human and nonhuman beings (Tsing 2017; Haraway 2008).
While taking biomaterials' material, technical, and ethical dimensions seriously, we propose developing a biomaterial that starts with the sensing intelligence of plant roots and ends with a durable structural material that preserves and supports plant life (Pollan 2013). Accepting this challenge to have ethical concern for the plant life we extract value from is what sparks innovation, echoing ecofeminist Val Plumwood: “Instrumental outlooks distort our sensitivity to and knowledge of nature, blocking humility, wonder and openness in approaching the more-than-human, and producing narrow types of understanding and classification that reduce nature to raw materials for human projects” (Plumwood 2002:196).
Virginia Tech currently supports the development of sustainable biomaterials across the university: in the College of Architecture, Arts, and Design, students work on creating a mycelium spawn bank for building material research. The BioDesign Research Group researches bamboo building systems that act as carbon sinks. Given our interdisciplinary background in Architecture, Landscape Architecture, Creative Technologies, Engineering Education, and Science and Technology Studies, we approach biofabrication as a technical, social, ecological, and creative endeavor. We envision making a sustainable biomaterial that pushes the speciesist boundaries of biofabrication. This project is an experiment in cultivating a multi-species praxis to make art that generates conversation about environmental responsibility (van Dooren, Kirksey, and Münster 2016).
Inspired by the sustainable forestry technique of coppicing, we propose testing a theory of plant roots as an ongoing source of biomaterial, achievable through sustainable harvesting dependent on continuous care for plants as living organisms. By focusing on care and moving beyond classification, we move towards a relationship to invasive plants that goes beyond extermination. Our attention to roots is based in part on novelty. Compared to plant tissue from the above-ground body of plants, roots have remained understudied as a source of biomaterial. Regarding botanical research, the morphological dimensions of roots as “physical bodies” require further investigation (Potocka and Szymanowska-Pułka 2018). Attention to roots is also a philosophical commitment to understanding plants as active agents in the environment. Because the mobile, sensing root structures of plants are primarily subterranean and unseen, there is a misconception of plants as passive, fixed beings available for extraction (Elkin 2022; Pouteau 2018). Our project is open to the possibilities of learning from and working with plants’ root structures to build novel, adaptive, and regenerative materials.
References
Barua, Maan. 2016. “Encounter.” Environmental Humanities 7(1):265–70.
van Dooren, Thom, Eben Kirksey, and Ursula Münster. 2016. “Multispecies Studies: Cultivating Arts of
Attentiveness.” Environmental Humanities 8(1):1–23.
Elkin, Rosetta S. 2022. Plant Life: The Entangled Politics of Afforestation. Minneapolis, United States:
University of Minnesota Press.
Haraway, Donna Jeanne. 2008. When Species Meet. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Kimmerer, Robin Wall. 2013. Braiding Sweetgrass. First edition. Minneapolis, Minnesota: Milkweed Editions.
Plumwood, Val. 2002. “Ecological Ethics From Rights to Recognition: Multiple Spheres of Justice for Humans,
Animals and Nature.” Pp. 188–212 in Global Ethics and Environment, edited by N. Low. New York:
Routledge.
Pollan, Michael. 2013. “The Intelligent Plant.” The New Yorker, December 15.
Potocka, Izabela, and Joanna Szymanowska-Pułka. 2018. “Morphological Responses of Plant Roots to
Mechanical Stress.” Annals of Botany 122(5):711–23.
Pouteau, Sylvie. 2018. “Plants as Open Beings: From Aesthetics to Plant–Human Ethics.” in Plant Ethics.
Routledge.
Tsing, Anna Lowenhaupt. 2017. “A Threat to Holocene Resurgence Is a Threat to Livability.” Pp. 51–65 in The
Anthropology of Sustainability, edited by M. Brightman and J. Lewis. New York: Palgrave Macmillan
US.
Methodology / Findings
Our first endeavor was the creation of molds that would test the minimum resolution and dexterity of the root material. We initially tried CNC milling molds out of wood, but quickly realized that no amount of treating the milled surfaces of these molds (with polyurethane and various waxes and sealants) would fully prevent the molds from rotting; and the grassroots were apt to grow into the wood grain as it rotted. We also tried casting molds out of soy wax, typically used to create candles, due to its water resistance and impermeability for the grassroots. However, this wax was exceedingly difficult to work with; it requires a double-boiler to be melted down and poured safely, presented a significant safety hazard pouring molten wax for larger molds, and was apt to fracture if mishandled, or melt if left in a particularly intense patch of sunlight, particularly as the weather began to heat up in the spring. Next, we tried pressing molds into clay, but we did not have access to a kiln large enough to properly fire these clay slabs, instead relying on exposure to intense sunlight, extended periods of baking in kitchen ovens, and low-temperature firings over fires made in our at-home fire pits to dry them out. Because we were unable to achieve a high-cone firing (high-cone firing turns the silicate in clay into glass, which is extremely water resistant), our clay molds eventually turned back into liquid ‘slip’ and melted as we watered the grassroots every day.
After much trial and error we decided that 3D printing molds from PLA was the most efficient way to produce such formwork. This phase of the project involved constant iteration and prototyping, with considerable time spent designing molds parametrically in Rhino+Grasshopper and printing on both printers in Virginia Tech’s Creativity and Innovation District, as well as printers owned by project team members. Once designed, 12” x 12” x 3: mold positives took approximately 24 hours to print (depending on the resolution settings and complexity of the forms). We optimized the print files to avoid overhangs and the use of support material, minimizing printing time and material waste to <1% of the total mass of completed prints. PLA was an ideal material for this experimentation due to its durability, high melting point, and resistance to water and mold. Due to PLA’s durability, these molds can be re-used many times if meticulously cleaned and prepared between castings.
Figuring out the growth habits and preferences of the species of wheatgrass was an ongoing process; by the end of the project, we found that the organism reaches its root maturity in three weeks of growth. Wheatgrass prefers to be watered every day in well-draining molds, as the roots quickly develop mold blooms if kept in sitting water, which does not seem to affect the health of the organism but presents a hazard to human handlers. Optimal growth occurs in as full sunlight as possible – however, we found that keeping our growing dishes outside resulted in significant infestation by fungus gnats and other insects that hastened molding and rotting as they began eating the wheat berries; additionally, our molds would frequently be raided by chipmunks, squirrels, deer, and birds searching for an easy snack. This necessitated performing most of the growing inside near a large south-facing window. Ideally, large-scale growing would occur in greenhouses that are sealed to keep insect infestations at a minimum.
Grassroots grow swiftly, ‘casting’ or filling the negative space of the mold fully within three weeks. The organism continues to grow healthily for several weeks after this period, but at three weeks the optimal amount of root growth to fill the mold has occurred. Once the organisms are removed from the molds, they should immediately stop receiving water and/or sunlight, or their root structures will continue to grow ‘out’ of the desired formwork / patterning.
The minimum resolution of the roots is about 1/16th of an inch. Greater depth, of course, corresponds with greater visibility of that element of the design – text and designs cast with ‘deeper’ relief have a higher contrast and readability than shallower-cast text. Drying shrinkage of about 10% of the initial volume should be considered when designing snugly fit casts such as packaging material.
Whereas the fresh material has a bit of ‘play’ and ‘give’ to it, this material characteristic diminishes as the material dries. The material becomes more rigid and tough once it dries but must be treated with wax, oil, or plasticizers to maintain its springiness and increase its water resistance, or in time it will crunch and crumble when bent, folded, or pulled. Once dried, the material is no longer at risk of molding over (unless it sits in damp conditions for an extended period), however, during the growth phase, casting formwork would have to be drained after each watering to prevent mold blooms from occurring. Mold outbreaks contaminated half of our samples, and while they did not hamper the growth or health of the grassroots and grass organism, they made these samples unfit for human contact applications, as some people have severe mold allergies.
Commercial applications of this material are limited under the value incentives offered by our current economic system. Other materials are more durable, faster to manufacture, and better able to achieve high degrees of resolution in terms of holding inscribed images, patterns, or forms. However, were our economic system to prioritize minimizing negative environmental impacts of materials rather than efficiency and durability, this material is exceptional in that it is entirely biodegradable and carbon negative in that this material sequesters carbon through its growth. This material could be suitable for everything from table place mats to window drapes to lampshades; though probably not ‘wearable’ clothing items due to its stiffness and scratchiness once it is dry, unless embedded in or laminated between layers of flexible bio-resins such as agar-agar.
This material could also be used to replace Styrofoam packaging as it is extremely lightweight, compressible, and moldable. The added benefit of being able to ‘cast’ imagery such as text and logos into its surface is another interesting facet that is geared towards packaging applications. However, a much simpler and more cost-effective replacement for Styrofoam and synthetic packaging material is shredded, recycled paper pulp material that is heat-pressed into desired forms.