This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

'Right to repair' gathers force

I'd be interested to canvas other members views on this. My view is "about time" - not for consumers to mend appliances themselves, but for appliances to be designed and manufactured for long service lives. My perspective comes from experience in three different manufacturing industries where longevity was a given, our products were expected to be serviceable for 20 years, and in practice typically lasted considerably more - 30, 40, 50 years. I get very frustrated if a piece of domestic equipment fails in an unserviceable way after, say, 5 years - recently happened with our gas cooker (which was actually pretty naff from day one). Then of course there's the electronic equipment that fails just after the warranty expires - I'd suggest that's completely unacceptable from a resource point of view. We know a huge amount now about design for reliability and design for serviceability, from an ethical point of view shouldn't we be applying this more?


I'm glad to see this article also considers the question of whether we should be encouraged to replace perfectly serviceable equipment in the name of energy efficiency. As it states, this all depends whether the energy expended in producing the equipment and disposing of the old equipment could actually exceeds the potential saving - which I suspect it often does.  


Cheers, Andy
Parents

  • It would be interesting if consumer product manufacturers had to produce MTBF figures for their products (I'm thinking white goods and similar here), perhaps on a simple banded scale like energy efficiency. I may be wrong, but I have a feeling that they would find huge consumer pressure towards those with the better figures.



    My worry then is that manufacturers would be driven to produce equipment that has a higher MTBF, but is impossible to repair.  If you replace connectors with soldered or crimped joins, and screws with glue, rivets or spot welds, then you avoid all the risks of things working loose and failing.  But the equipment would be much more difficult to repair.  This already seems to be the case with many smart phones, which are expensive yet disposable.


    Perhaps we also need the MTTR (mean time to repair) as well.
Reply

  • It would be interesting if consumer product manufacturers had to produce MTBF figures for their products (I'm thinking white goods and similar here), perhaps on a simple banded scale like energy efficiency. I may be wrong, but I have a feeling that they would find huge consumer pressure towards those with the better figures.



    My worry then is that manufacturers would be driven to produce equipment that has a higher MTBF, but is impossible to repair.  If you replace connectors with soldered or crimped joins, and screws with glue, rivets or spot welds, then you avoid all the risks of things working loose and failing.  But the equipment would be much more difficult to repair.  This already seems to be the case with many smart phones, which are expensive yet disposable.


    Perhaps we also need the MTTR (mean time to repair) as well.
Children
No Data