I'm sick of living in a disposable world. A world where it is more expensive to repair equipment that malfunctions than it is to throw it away and buy a newer version.
Most recently it was the Brother DCP-115 multi-function printer. The black ink stopped working - probably due to a blockage in the ink tube or print head. It would cost a minimum of $50 to even have it looked at - and probably over $100 to get it fixed. Instead, its cheaper and easier to have a new one delivered to our house. So we have a new DCP-145 for $107 including delivery. I expect this one will go in a couple of years too!
Before that it was the camera. We had a Casio that got sat on and cracked so we go a new Casio. Around a year later (Just about when the Warranty had expired, of course), it started to have problems taking photos. Some images did not come out. Probably a loose connection with the CCD I thought. But again - it wasn't worth fixing. For $325 we have a new, waterproof and shock proof Panasonic Lumix camera.
The same thing has happened in past with Apple Powerbooks and IBM & Compaq Laptops
Some people don't have a problem with this. I do.
Consumer growth may demand we buy and chuck - but why can't we build things to last? When are we going to take into account the true cost of these products - things that are externalised like pollution and the destruction of cultures where our crap is sent to be broken down and 'recycled'.
For my part, I think I'll start writing to companies (Casio, Apple, Lenovo, HP) to see what they say. Maybe I should donate 10% of the cost to the "The Story of Stuff" (which is a wonderfully clear analysis of this problem)
A good start would be for these organisations to have eWaste recycling programs in Australia, like they have to have in Europe and, increasingly, in the US.. We should have legislation that demands tech companies own their crap and take back products that fail - maybe this will encourage them to build them better in the first place, or at least take into account some of the otherwise externalized costs.
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
I totally agree with you on this one!
ReplyDeleteHP, Epson, Canon all sell printers at a loss on the actual device and ship them with 1/3 full ink cartridges so you will have yo spend money right away on new ink. This is where they make the money. More and more I see clients buying inkjet after inkjet. as soon as the ink is gone it's cheaper for them to buy a new printer than it is to replace the ink.
I tend to collect these "old" inkjets from clients, carry them home and them spend my evening taking them apart until I am left with the print head and a few boards and a bunch of cables. All the metal and plastic can be recycled in our blue bins that the city collects and takes to the recycler. I am only left with a small pile of junk that I take to an electronic recycler.
One day (soon I hope) this will stop and companies will create products that last or consumers will get sick of this and demand better products that won't just turn to junk in under 18 months.
Until then I will be waging my one man war on this by convincing my clients not to buy and dispose of so much stuff and every night i will be disassembling printers and the such so at least some of it gets recycled.