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
  • Andy,

    Just to put another spin on this discussion, looking at it from a manufacturers perspective (not that I am one) they are in quite a difficult position. If they were to make an item that was good for say 20 or 30 years then they will only ever get a single customer once or twice buying their product. There are only a finite amount of potential customers/buyers in the market for their goods. Companies listed on the stock market are always looking for year on year growth. Having an extremely reliable and long lived product does not necessarily match the share holders desire for ever increasing dividends.

    Technology is always advancing and although the latest widget seems to be the best thing today, in a very short period of time it will be eclipsed by the next best ever widget. The consumer is then left with the choice of brand loyalty and perhaps losing out on some super new functionality or to trade in/dispose of their current product and getting up to date. Making a product that would last 20-30 years in this instance would not make a lot of sense so maybe making it easier to mass produce (but not repairable) would suit the manufacturers and share holders better.


    I do remember the good old days of being able to work on your car and do involved repairs. I have rebuilt a Ford Pinto engine for a Capri I had, changed out the dashboard for a sportier version and incorporated new wiring and generally did all my own servicing. Now everything is all tied back to an ECU that you would need a laptop/interface cable and software to diagnose and reset most faults.  As another contributor said, in 50 years our natural resources may be so depleted that we have to look to longevity of products and make them repairable but until we get to that place I imagine the current trend of easy to break and hard to fix will be the manufacturers way.


    David Howard MIET (new member and my first posting)
Reply
  • Andy,

    Just to put another spin on this discussion, looking at it from a manufacturers perspective (not that I am one) they are in quite a difficult position. If they were to make an item that was good for say 20 or 30 years then they will only ever get a single customer once or twice buying their product. There are only a finite amount of potential customers/buyers in the market for their goods. Companies listed on the stock market are always looking for year on year growth. Having an extremely reliable and long lived product does not necessarily match the share holders desire for ever increasing dividends.

    Technology is always advancing and although the latest widget seems to be the best thing today, in a very short period of time it will be eclipsed by the next best ever widget. The consumer is then left with the choice of brand loyalty and perhaps losing out on some super new functionality or to trade in/dispose of their current product and getting up to date. Making a product that would last 20-30 years in this instance would not make a lot of sense so maybe making it easier to mass produce (but not repairable) would suit the manufacturers and share holders better.


    I do remember the good old days of being able to work on your car and do involved repairs. I have rebuilt a Ford Pinto engine for a Capri I had, changed out the dashboard for a sportier version and incorporated new wiring and generally did all my own servicing. Now everything is all tied back to an ECU that you would need a laptop/interface cable and software to diagnose and reset most faults.  As another contributor said, in 50 years our natural resources may be so depleted that we have to look to longevity of products and make them repairable but until we get to that place I imagine the current trend of easy to break and hard to fix will be the manufacturers way.


    David Howard MIET (new member and my first posting)
Children
No Data