4 ms·

While it's good the author has gained a better understanding of nuclear waste, I feel that they're almost repeating their mistakes in their discussion of renewa

While it's good the author has gained a better understanding of nuclear waste, I feel that they're almost repeating their mistakes in their discussion of renewable waste. I'm fairly sure that everything they listed - solar panels, turbines, batteries - can be recycled; the question generally is whether its cost-effective to do so. (Another important question is probably on whether we want to spend the money on developing recycling methods for these types of things in the first place). I'm increasingly of the opinion that if we want effective recycling solutions for stuff like this, one of the biggest steps we could take is strong right-to-repair laws. There should be a push for designing things in such a way that they are easy to disassemble, part out, and replace pieces of. Not only does this make things easier to fix and extend their lifespan, but it also would make them easier to disassemble for recycling/waste purposes. Requiring manufacturers to release documentation (design, components, most common failure modes, common repairs) on their products at some point after they no longer manufacture them is probably a harder sell but would be pretty nice - trawling old forums to figure out how to repair my 12-year-old subwoofer is a pain and unreliable, and having manufacturers responsible for hosting that information would make it more consistently available.

strbean 4y ago
Right to Repair is incredibly important, but also feels incredibly insufficient in this context. What we really need is Obligation to Repair, or something of that nature. Producers of goods need to be accountable for the lifecycle of those goods.
- bborud 4y ago
  I don't agree. If we move to goalposts too far down the field the political resistance will guarantee that we accomplish less. We have to focus on making repairing stuff possible and economically feasible first. And I think it will need to happen somewhat gradually so the industry can learn how to design things that can be repaired. We also need to build a robust repair industry. With training for repair personnel as well as the supply chain and logistics side. Make repairs attractive, and cheap enough and we might not need to bring up a wall of legislation that makes market access too hard for new entrants. This could quickly develop into a game where only companies with really deep pockets are even able to produce anything. (I work for a startup. We occasionally have to make hardware. Enabling people to repair the stuff we make is something we're happy to do. But if we had to be accountable for the entire lifecycle, that would be another thing. What happens if we go tits up?)
  - strbean 4y ago
    Totally agree from a practicality standpoint. In regards to undue burden on companies: > I work for a startup. We occasionally have to make hardware. > What happens if we go tits up? I think if you go tits up, it's the same situation as when a business goes bankrupt and leaves behind a contaminated site. But goods produced by small businesses and startups are marginal compared to those produced by big businesses. There should be strong incentives for businesses to manage the end of life for their goods, so they will attempt to recover those goods and see that they are recycled. That will also incentivize them to design products that can be recycled, and as profitably as possible.
- f4c39012 4y ago
  And further, the seller of a product should be responsible for the disposal of waste from that product (subtracting the recyclable parts). For example, supermarkets would be less inclined to wrap _everything_ in plastic if they were on the hook for the disposal of tonnes of wrap arriving at their stores every day and the disposal part of a products lifecycle would have to be taken account of in its costing - if the waste isn't free to the person who makes it, the waste will be minimised in the design
troupe 4y ago
Saying that a turbine can theoretically be recycled, but at such a high cost that people simple bury them in a field is pretty much the same as saying they can't be recycled.
- natmaka 4y ago
  In some nations (France being one) recycling is mandatory (save extreme-case exceptions), by law. French ahead: https://factuel.afp.com/le-socle-des-eoliennes-resteront-dans-le-sol-apres-leur-demantelement-la-loi-francaise-prevoit-le https://factuel.afp.com/le-socle-des-eoliennes-resteront-dan...
depr 4y ago
Turbine blades at least can't really be recycled, just search for "turbine blade landfill".
- TacoSteemers 4y ago
  FYI, there are recent improvements. "Vestas unveils circularity solution to end landfill for turbine blades" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34716743 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34716743
shortcake27 4y ago
> trawling old forums to figure out how to repair my 12-year-old subwoofer is a pain and unreliable A few years ago I had the same experience. It cost me $30 and 10 minutes to replace the subwoofer speaker in my 20 year old Mission home theatre, but finding the right speaker was quite difficult. I trawled forums and ended up ordering a speaker from a German manufacturer that had all sorts of speakers for specialised applications. Most people would have just thrown out the entire setup and bought a new one, expensive and wasteful. Yet it was so trivial to fix with the right knowledge. And it sounded great, better than most setups I hear today. It makes me wonder whether home theatres bought today will still be functioning in the 2040s. It seems unlikely as soundbars are all the rage these days which communicate over bluetooth/hdmi protocols that get superseded every few years, forcing you to constantly upgrade. Makes me appreciate the “dumb” aspect of that old setup I had.
bborud 4y ago
> one of the biggest steps we could take is strong right-to-repair laws I could not agree more. Thank you for bringing this up. I think part of why this doesn't turn up more often when green parties try to get elected is that it isn't sexy enough. It is much more fun to imagine building new and shiny stuff or have an opportunity to strongly signal values. But something as boring as laws that would require all manufacturers to design for repairability and banning any manufacturer who even looks like they are trying to limit who can repair stuff, is too boring. I agree: this would be a very good place to start.

strbean 4y ago

Right to Repair is incredibly important, but also feels incredibly insufficient in this context. What we really need is Obligation to Repair, or something of that nature. Producers of goods need to be accountable for the lifecycle of those goods.

bborud 4y ago
I don't agree. If we move to goalposts too far down the field the political resistance will guarantee that we accomplish less. We have to focus on making repairing stuff possible and economically feasible first. And I think it will need to happen somewhat gradually so the industry can learn how to design things that can be repaired. We also need to build a robust repair industry. With training for repair personnel as well as the supply chain and logistics side. Make repairs attractive, and cheap enough and we might not need to bring up a wall of legislation that makes market access too hard for new entrants. This could quickly develop into a game where only companies with really deep pockets are even able to produce anything. (I work for a startup. We occasionally have to make hardware. Enabling people to repair the stuff we make is something we're happy to do. But if we had to be accountable for the entire lifecycle, that would be another thing. What happens if we go tits up?)
- strbean 4y ago
  Totally agree from a practicality standpoint. In regards to undue burden on companies: > I work for a startup. We occasionally have to make hardware. > What happens if we go tits up? I think if you go tits up, it's the same situation as when a business goes bankrupt and leaves behind a contaminated site. But goods produced by small businesses and startups are marginal compared to those produced by big businesses. There should be strong incentives for businesses to manage the end of life for their goods, so they will attempt to recover those goods and see that they are recycled. That will also incentivize them to design products that can be recycled, and as profitably as possible.
f4c39012 4y ago
And further, the seller of a product should be responsible for the disposal of waste from that product (subtracting the recyclable parts). For example, supermarkets would be less inclined to wrap _everything_ in plastic if they were on the hook for the disposal of tonnes of wrap arriving at their stores every day and the disposal part of a products lifecycle would have to be taken account of in its costing - if the waste isn't free to the person who makes it, the waste will be minimised in the design

troupe 4y ago

Saying that a turbine can theoretically be recycled, but at such a high cost that people simple bury them in a field is pretty much the same as saying they can't be recycled.

natmaka 4y ago
In some nations (France being one) recycling is mandatory (save extreme-case exceptions), by law. French ahead: https://factuel.afp.com/le-socle-des-eoliennes-resteront-dans-le-sol-apres-leur-demantelement-la-loi-francaise-prevoit-le https://factuel.afp.com/le-socle-des-eoliennes-resteront-dan...

depr 4y ago

Turbine blades at least can't really be recycled, just search for "turbine blade landfill".

TacoSteemers 4y ago
FYI, there are recent improvements. "Vestas unveils circularity solution to end landfill for turbine blades" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34716743 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34716743

shortcake27 4y ago

> trawling old forums to figure out how to repair my 12-year-old subwoofer is a pain and unreliable A few years ago I had the same experience. It cost me $30 and 10 minutes to replace the subwoofer speaker in my 20 year old Mission home theatre, but finding the right speaker was quite difficult. I trawled forums and ended up ordering a speaker from a German manufacturer that had all sorts of speakers for specialised applications. Most people would have just thrown out the entire setup and bought a new one, expensive and wasteful. Yet it was so trivial to fix with the right knowledge. And it sounded great, better than most setups I hear today. It makes me wonder whether home theatres bought today will still be functioning in the 2040s. It seems unlikely as soundbars are all the rage these days which communicate over bluetooth/hdmi protocols that get superseded every few years, forcing you to constantly upgrade. Makes me appreciate the “dumb” aspect of that old setup I had.

bborud 4y ago

> one of the biggest steps we could take is strong right-to-repair laws I could not agree more. Thank you for bringing this up. I think part of why this doesn't turn up more often when green parties try to get elected is that it isn't sexy enough. It is much more fun to imagine building new and shiny stuff or have an opportunity to strongly signal values. But something as boring as laws that would require all manufacturers to design for repairability and banning any manufacturer who even looks like they are trying to limit who can repair stuff, is too boring. I agree: this would be a very good place to start.