5 ms·

From an environmental problem there is an interesting perspective on lending appliances. Let's look at washing machines: (or any other appliance) If you buy a

From an environmental problem there is an interesting perspective on lending appliances. Let's look at washing machines: (or any other appliance) If you buy a washing machine there is limited incentive for the manufacturer to make it repairable or easy to dismantle and recycle the parts. Also for the owners there are incentives to run it as long as they can, while new, resource (energy, water, ...) efficient replacements will come out. If you turn this around and make it a rental system where you buy 1000 runs or so the producer for one is incentived to make sure they have as little service cases as possible, so the machine has to be robust enough for that. And then when taking it back they have an interest to recycle the parts as good as they can since it's suddenly their problem and people get new or refurbished machines regularly which reduces resource usage. Switching to such a model ain't easy, but interesting to me nonetheless.

userabchn 5y ago
goodpoint 5y ago
True, but it could very well be the opposite: financial incentives can encourage churning through equipment even faster. Another problem: the Global South is a huge user of second hard stuff (car, phones, everything). "smart" devices kill the second hand market on purpose, to prevent reuse, leading to way more consumption and pollution. Never trust market forces to solve environmental problems.
nokeya 5y ago
… and sooner or later these 1000 runs will shrinkflate to 900, then 800 runs for the same price…
Sankozi 5y ago
I recently thought about the same thing. The problem with rental system is user now has less incentive to treat rented item well. But overall I think it still leads to less production and less resource usage.
tapas73 5y ago
but if production and rental businesses get separated, we are back to square one.
- johannes1234321 5y ago
  A rental company buying tons of machines and which has to calculate disposal costs has a different negotiating power over a number of individuals buying.
  - goodpoint 5y ago
    Also a big rental company can put pressure on the OEM.
bipson 5y ago
Hm, I think this reasoning is not always true. The manufacturer could make a cost/benefit-analysis, concluding that building a machine that lasts approx. these 1000 runs but no longer, and paying for recycling afterwards is cheaper than building something that lasts and is recyclable. Also, replacing it every ~200 cycles with just another cheaply built throwaway-machine could also become a viable business model. Why should the manufacturer care, if it becomes cheaper? You could also make the manufacturer pay for recycling anyway - which is the case in the EU for several device classes IIRC, no need for a rental model to establish that. For some devices this means that the manufacturer has to take it back when you are done with it. The problem of course is that this is directly paid for by the customer - and by itself does not change anything. But my argument is that it wouldn't for the rental model either.
- Gravityloss 5y ago
  The machine could send back diagnostic information, and then maintenance or replacement could be scheduled with the "owner". For example the lint filter could have a sensor and owner could be punished if they didn't clean that :) Machines wear unevenly and maintenance could prolong the lifespan considerably.
  - soco 5y ago
    Why going full orwell punishing, when it could simply beep some sense into the owner??? Really folks, sometimes the software industry wants to offer the most weird solutions... (and sometimes they even get implemented)
    - Gravityloss 5y ago
      If you own the machine and have rented it to someone, with a promise that it's working and being maintained, yet the renter doesn't clean the lint filter even when the machine beeps, you have to send a maintenance guy to clean that, costing money.
beaconstudios 5y ago
we could just pass regulations to make products repairable.
- selfhoster11 5y ago
  This is the answer, IMO. Trying to rely on the "invisible hand of the market" (aka people's greed) to do anything specific is an exercise in pain, in every possible way.
- johannes1234321 5y ago
  Making it repairable.means that the old inefficient machine works longer, while mire efficient technology exists. (And yes, right to repair is important as well, no doubt!)
  - beaconstudios 5y ago
    Good! If people want to replace their older machine, they can do so with the latest tech, which by law is also repairable.

userabchn 5y ago

goodpoint 5y ago

True, but it could very well be the opposite: financial incentives can encourage churning through equipment even faster. Another problem: the Global South is a huge user of second hard stuff (car, phones, everything). "smart" devices kill the second hand market on purpose, to prevent reuse, leading to way more consumption and pollution. Never trust market forces to solve environmental problems.

nokeya 5y ago

… and sooner or later these 1000 runs will shrinkflate to 900, then 800 runs for the same price…

Sankozi 5y ago

I recently thought about the same thing. The problem with rental system is user now has less incentive to treat rented item well. But overall I think it still leads to less production and less resource usage.

tapas73 5y ago

but if production and rental businesses get separated, we are back to square one.

johannes1234321 5y ago
A rental company buying tons of machines and which has to calculate disposal costs has a different negotiating power over a number of individuals buying.
- goodpoint 5y ago
  Also a big rental company can put pressure on the OEM.

bipson 5y ago

Hm, I think this reasoning is not always true. The manufacturer could make a cost/benefit-analysis, concluding that building a machine that lasts approx. these 1000 runs but no longer, and paying for recycling afterwards is cheaper than building something that lasts and is recyclable. Also, replacing it every ~200 cycles with just another cheaply built throwaway-machine could also become a viable business model. Why should the manufacturer care, if it becomes cheaper? You could also make the manufacturer pay for recycling anyway - which is the case in the EU for several device classes IIRC, no need for a rental model to establish that. For some devices this means that the manufacturer has to take it back when you are done with it. The problem of course is that this is directly paid for by the customer - and by itself does not change anything. But my argument is that it wouldn't for the rental model either.

Gravityloss 5y ago
The machine could send back diagnostic information, and then maintenance or replacement could be scheduled with the "owner". For example the lint filter could have a sensor and owner could be punished if they didn't clean that :) Machines wear unevenly and maintenance could prolong the lifespan considerably.
- soco 5y ago
  Why going full orwell punishing, when it could simply beep some sense into the owner??? Really folks, sometimes the software industry wants to offer the most weird solutions... (and sometimes they even get implemented)
  - Gravityloss 5y ago
    If you own the machine and have rented it to someone, with a promise that it's working and being maintained, yet the renter doesn't clean the lint filter even when the machine beeps, you have to send a maintenance guy to clean that, costing money.

beaconstudios 5y ago

we could just pass regulations to make products repairable.

selfhoster11 5y ago
This is the answer, IMO. Trying to rely on the "invisible hand of the market" (aka people's greed) to do anything specific is an exercise in pain, in every possible way.
johannes1234321 5y ago
Making it repairable.means that the old inefficient machine works longer, while mire efficient technology exists. (And yes, right to repair is important as well, no doubt!)
- beaconstudios 5y ago
  Good! If people want to replace their older machine, they can do so with the latest tech, which by law is also repairable.