5 ms·

This is going to be a hot take here, but honestly I'm not that concerned about e-waste, in the grand scheme of things. What about cars, air conditioners, dishw

This is going to be a hot take here, but honestly I'm not that concerned about e-waste, in the grand scheme of things. What about cars, air conditioners, dishwashers, fridges, furniture, clothing? What about when we throw all of those out? The amount of e-waste I've gotten rid of over my life is miniscule both in terms of weight and volume in comparison to the things I've listed. I think we confuse environmental impact with cost. Just because a phone and a fridge both cost $1,000 doesn't mean they're equivalently bad to throw out. A device like a Car Thing is nothing compared to, say, an air conditioner. Even if it was half the price. It's like when people want to make sure Apple will take their AirPods back for recycling, but have no problem with tossing single-use AA batteries in the trash. They seem to be mistakenly measuring by purchase price rather than actual environmental impact. I mean, I definitely think it's important to recycle e-waste. But I just don't understand when people don't seem to care when their old air conditioner gets taken away but care about old phones, when one AC probably contains more materials than all the cell phones they will ever buy in their lifetime.

flerchin 2y ago
Over the past 10 years I've recycled all of my large appliances. My (texas) city comes and picks them up at no charge, and I don't feel that's an unusual situation.
- Rinzler89 2y ago
  >My (texas) city comes and picks them up at no charge, and I don't feel that's an unusual situation. That IS pretty unusual, and in a positive way. I live in one of EU's richest socialist countries (Austria) and here YOU have bare the cost of transporting your old fridge or washing machine to the city's recycling depot, which is a huge expense for your average joe as that means owning or renting a car plus renting a trailer plus having a gym-bro with a strong back and equipment to lift the damn thing from your place and carry it downstairs (many older buildings don't have elevators). And once you get to the recycling center on your own dime, you have to pay 6 Euros on top if you're a resident of the city, or 33 Euros if not. Your only "free" workaround is buying a new fridge or washing machine from a retailer who also has a promo on picking up your old one for free with the delivery of the replacement. So many people just dump them in the basement of the apartment building or on the side of the road. #environment #green But hey, at least we've banned nuclear energy in the constitution because it's bad for the environment. Isn't it ironic where one of US's most conservative states with low taxes, does things better than one of EU's most socialist "green" states where taxes are through the roof? I think it's similar in other EU countries like the Netherlands.
  - tzs 2y ago
    I'd have thought that most people getting rid of a an old fridge or washing machine are replacing it with a new fridge or washing machine. The same vehicle and trailer and gym-bro that is bringing the new machine can then be used to haul away the old one. That's how it typically works in the US. The appliance dealer offers delivery and for an extra charge will haul away the old unit.
    - Rinzler89 2y ago
      Not all retailers here offer e-waste takeaway with their delivery though. Online ones like Amazon or small discounters do not AFAIk. Only the big brick and mortar ones do since they have their own delivery vehicles and employees.
      - sokoloff 2y ago
        Most appliance stores use an outsource provider for appliance deliveries. (A few local furniture stores have their own vehicles and employees, and Home Depot made the switch last-year to in-house appliance delivery, but most appliances are delivered/setup by a 3PL/4PL provider.)
  - Cthulhu_ 2y ago
    In the Netherlands, when you buy a new appliance you pay a few euros extra "recycling fee"; the company delivering the new appliance will take the old one back for recycling, and / or the money goes into a fund for recycling the product you just bought. (I just read up on it, it used to be a separate charge, it's now baked into the price, probably because people were balking about it)
    - Rinzler89 2y ago
      >the company delivering the new appliance will take the old one back for recycling Do all shops offer this in NL?
      - 2y ago
- sahila 2y ago
  I'm a bit skeptical about them actually being recycled though. How many of the appliances are recyclable? What parts of them are vs what ends up in the dump? Everything I've heard - and admittedly I haven't looked too deep - is that recycling is mostly a sham and mostly just ends up as waste either here or shipped overseas for someone else to deal with.
  - meatmanek 2y ago
    I would expect appliances to be fairly recyclable. They're mostly made of metal, which can be sold for scrap. Parts can be stripped out and sold to appliance repair shops. Plus, appliances with refrigerants need special handling to prevent the release of the refrigerants to the atmosphere -- better to have one organization handling that than leaving citizens to their own devices.
  - ssl-3 2y ago
    Plastic and glass recycling is often a sham, because both things are usually of little value -- sometimes, even of negative value. A pile of plastic is mostly just a liability, with a strong likelihood of it ultimately being dumped or landfilled somewhere in the world. But metal recycling is real. Unlike plastic and glass, metal has positive value. There is an entire profitable industry that exists to recycle metal -- including appliances. We've been recycling metals for as long as we have mined their ores from the Earth. A pile of washing machines is an asset. It has real value. It doesn't get landfilled or dumped -- it gets sold.
    - sahila 2y ago
      Good to know, appreciate the context.
Cthulhu_ 2y ago
It's not an either/or though. Anyway, all / most of the ones you mentioned have good reuse, repair and recycling systems in place.
paulmd 2y ago
yes. it's been obvious for a long time that "but the e-waste" is almost universally deployed as an argumentary "get out of jail free" card that is intended to be impossible to argue against, even when there isn't actually an improvement in the energy/waste lifecycle or when the improvement is overall trivial. it's funny that the tech community of all places have embraced greenwashing so heavily, particularly when most of those same individuals constantly decry greenwashing themselves/think they're on the right side of the issue, but there also clearly is an intentionally bad-faith thing where it's used to shut down debate because "you don't hate the planet, do you!?". you see it constantly in anything surrounding apple, for example. wireless charging is bad, because using 2.5w more for the 1 hour a day your phone is actively charging is literally killing the planet. meanwhile if you sit on the cord wrong once a year and have to have amazon send a truck out with an extra cable, you have undoubtedly exceeded the pollution by orders of magnitude. same for batteries etc, if your crappy amazon battery needs one extra replacement over the life of the phone, you have undoubtedly vastly exceeded the e-waste and pollution savings of right to repair. Let alone the impact of the extremely short software lifecycles - those android phones are basically disposable and unsupported the day they launch, and apple devices actually have supremely good lifecycles given their long support, the thriving secondhand market (long life) vs disposable phones that get rapidly cycled through, the parts lifecycle/support, and the refurb/recycling lifecycle etc. But right-to-repair is a fashion statement and people will die on the hill that sending out five amazon trucks of parts for a phone that's unsupported in 6 months and in the trash after 3 years is saving the planet. AI is bad because e-waste and energy, regardless of whatever value it delivers. Over the next century we will probably save GW of energy due to increased efficiency in basically everything (doubtlessly introducing another jevon's paradox of course, but that's not the fault of the tech, that's a generic complaint against any efficiency improvement). Introducing AI into end-user devices is bad because users might feel compelled to upgrade, which is bad. Training smaller models that don't use so much energy in the long-run is bad, because it uses energy now. Upgrading your graphics card is bad because e-waste - even though you sell it to someone else who continues to use it, and even though the guy with a mattress on the floor and a killer gaming rig that he upgrades yearly has way lower emissions than a family who takes one vacation a year to florida (even driving etc). On and on. people just want a foolproof "your product is bad" that can't be argued against, and e-waste/pollution is a great card to play, especially when it's selectively applied and you refuse to admit any of the foibles of the products you prefer. also, people still don't want to admit that rossman's right to repair isn't quite the same thing as the platonic right-to-repair. rossman's interests fundamentally lie with keeping rossman group turning a profit, which isn't quite the same thing as users being able to repair their own devices by themselves etc. people don't like apple selling parts straight to end-users because "repair shops can't turn a profit at those prices" and yeah, having a multinational conglomerate renowed for its supply chain deploying low-cost labor to perform factory-line repairs on a limited selection of devices is going to be cheaper than artisianal craftsman repair, that's just the economics of it etc. Nobody has accused them of having different prices internally/externally, repair shops just can't afford to compete at the same prices that apple charges itself. Right to repair doesn't guarantee the right of repair shops to turn a profit in the face of a well-oiled OEM repair shop operation/pipeline, but actually it's a good thing to have that brick-and-mortar repair pipeline etc, that's what you want, if you want to keep devices running longer etc. Market competitiveness is not the same thing as e-waste lifecycle, and OEMs subsidizing the repairs/running them at-cost is actually a good thing for pollution/e-waste even if indies can't compete at fair market rates. You just can't actively charge yourself less than the fair market price for the item, but even if you did, keeping devices running is the goal, right? These are contradictory goals, market competitiveness is not the same thing as keeping e-waste out of landfills, and if you really care about the latter it probably will require subsidies on repairs, or taxes on new devices, to overcome the economics of mass-production vs individual-repair. Same for component-level repair. Obviously that is a thing rossman would like to offer as a business service, but is it a necessary aspect of phone repair given the ready availability of assemblies? If you want to drive down costs, bringing boards (via B2B/wholesale trucking) to a central place and reworking them en-masse is going to be a very efficient way to do it, you’ll even recapture some of those economies of scale vs 1-off artisanal repair. And cost of repair is obviously a major factor in whether people decide to repair vs landfill a broken device. But that’s bad because rossman doesn’t get paid as much if you just swap a PCB - it probably should be an option but it realistically isn’t ever going to be the default, to have an artisan unsolder a bga and put on a new cpu or memory or whatever, and there are strong social arguments (cost) for doing it the other way. It certainly isn’t some showstopper to overall repairability (nobody is resoldering a BGA at home anyway), just not favorable to rossman’s bottom line. also, right to use third-party parts is not really a right-to repair issue. that is personal preference, but there's also safety (muggings/theft) and resale considerations etc. Certainly there are good reasons to explore flexibility/solutions but again, this isn't a right-to-repair issue when there are reasonably at-cost repairs available and a ready supply of first-party parts etc... if phones aren't going into landfills that solves the problem, right? it's a personal preference about the market economics/principles of a device you own (one I generally agree with, with the caveat there's countervailing concerns too). but that gets wedged into an e-waste issue too! hell even apple making the tools available is a conspiracy to some people - "apple renting you the OEM replacement tools (which are completely optional and in no way required or forced, you can use an amazon spudger if you want too, and which they will outright sell you if you want to keep them because you're an indie repair shop or whatever) for the cost of shipping is bad because the pelican cases are too big and heavy" is a serious topic of discussion for some people. and before you think that's a strawman... someone defended the idea a couple weeks ago on here lol. like there's just no winning with a bunch of these people lol. the whole e-waste/right-to-repair has just turned into a massive greenwashing/circlejerk and again, it's these same people who are so concerned about airpods and apple self-service who are so adamantly opposed to "greenwashing" in principle, yet they're basically engaging in a contemporary greenwashing movement themselves backing leaders with fixation on greenwashing their own business requirements as being movement goals etc. In practice minimizing e-waste/pollution lifecycle basically boils down to keeping devices in service longer and ensuring less unnecessary road-trips over the lifespan of the device. The easiest ways to get there are good parts lifetime, good software support lifetime, accessibility of brick-and-mortar/retail repair service, a thriving secondhand market/value retention to encourage resale, etc. Everything else is optional, and you actually don't need much beyond the apple store/self-service model to accomplish those actual needs. like, taking my old trade-in iphone and refurbing it and selling it to someone in africa or india is what you want, right? how did that become a bad thing/complaint for the greenwashing movement? shouldn't that actually be required, if the phone has a reasonable degree of serviceability why shouldn't it be mandated that trade-ins be refurbed and get another lifecycle? Also, the actual nuclear-hot take: even lightning was not really a big deal given how long it'd been in service. Having one specific, long-running cable that is deliberately aimed at being significantly cheaper than USB-C (which it was, until very recently) is really not a big deal and probably the phase-out of lightning pushed a large number of extra trucks on the road, extra cable sales to replace the old ones, new usb-c PD chargers sold, etc. I definitely feel the user-convenience argument, I am very happy to unify everything I can onto USB-C these days, but there was a very real additional pollution cost incurred from the changeover itself, that need not have been incurred. Cables wear and break, especially phone cables that get heavily used etc, and having 3 types of cables instead of 2 (usb-c and micro-b) was not the end of the world. Now micro-B really does need to die though, I am entirely tired of that shit to a degree that I didn't care about with lightning. Reversibility has been here for 15 years now, get with the program, and the durability of the sockets is still awful (although better than mini-B, which also refuses to die). Like a lot of green movements it just sort of is a mishmash of contradictory and often self-defeating goals, pushed by lifestyle advocates and profiteers who stand to gain by selling associated services etc. I do support the overall goal it just doesn’t feel like the current discourse has anything to do with that, it’s just people attaching their lifestyle choices/political choices to a convenient/favorable wagon. And you can easily tell this by how hostile people get over it all. It was never about the e-waste, it was about “apple bad”. And that always is the first and most powerful beat in every single one of these “right to repair” discussions. Name a single rossman video that isn't at least 30% anti-apple screed by weight lol. Like are there really no other vendors with glued batteries or unrepairable mainboards or no service manuals given to third parties? I think there obviously are... but the Samsung stuff just goes in the trash instead of sending it to a Rossman type place, so you're seeing survival bias at best, outright personal bias at worst. It's an easy, popular, large target that drives massive amounts of clicks given the wild amount of apple-hate that still exists to this day etc. They aren't your friend more than any other corp... but they actually do have a pretty green lifecycle compared to a parade of disposable android phones or $300 craptops. And people just cannot possibly bring themselves to admit that apple stepped in the right direction for a change (see also: privacy). Doesn't make them perfect, but neither are any of the alternatives, and apple generally does better in these areas (e-waste/sustainability/lifecycle and privacy). At the end of the day people are just so credulous about a pitch that inevitably concludes with the pitcher attempting to sell you something - not just rossman but framework, fairphone, etc. And people are just so sanctimonious about it all, like they just want to dump all over everyone because they bought into a youtube personality who needs to keep doing component-level repairs to stay in business or w/e. And again, I guess what else is new with the greenwashing movement, but these are people that think of themselves as ostensibly being virulently opposed to greenwashing etc. Again, I guess what else is new.
trainsarebetter 2y ago
this makes me think of what’s in the waste itself. Is a big pile of steel worse than a few box’s of rare earth elements and toxins?
chazeon 2y ago
It wasn’t uncommon to buy second hand AC and sell them after use in the NYC. In fact, I barely heard anyone buy new ACs. I guess not everyone has no problem throw those appliances out.
- crazygringo 2y ago
  Sure there's a good market for secondhand AC's but AC's also break at some point. Also newer AC's can be vastly more energy-efficient, which is something to keep in mind when you can easily spend more on electricity over the course of a single summer than on the unit itself.
2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago
Buildings too. We should be building for repairability.
monknomo 2y ago
imo, the appliances breaking is also a choice and one that is a real shame. No one actually wants to buy new refrigerators or dishwashers, and the improvements in that space have all be pretty marginal. Fast fashion is shame too - clothes ought to last a bit as well. And cardboard/particle board furniture that services .5-1.5 moves is also basically bad. Cars have been steadily increasing in durability and reliability for decades
- Cthulhu_ 2y ago
  If anything, newer refrigerators and dishwashers are worse than they used to be, because they have to conform to increasingly strict energy usage laws. The new dishwasher we have now is shit, reuses water between cycles, uses some weird system for drying, etc. Basically we use more energy to pre-wash or post-wash stuff now.
  - crazygringo 2y ago
    At least with dishwashers, part of the reason is actually that home dishwasher detergents are no longer allowed to have phosphates. And for a lot of people the no-phosphates thing happened around the same time they got an energy-efficient dishwasher. And then they blamed the bad dishwasher performance on the energy efficiency, when it's actually that home dishwasher detergent is far less effective now. Except restaurants still get to use dishwasher detergent with phosphates, which is why their dishes continue to be sparkling clean. (And I don't know about your dishwasher, but the last two I've had default to energy-efficient, but it's a single button press to put them on hi-temp mode.)
    - fragmede 2y ago
      Fascinating. Time to go buy dishwashing liquid from my local restaurant supply store instead of the grocery store then.
      - crazygringo 2y ago
        It won't work -- putting aside the phosphates, it's a totally different formulation, because restaurant dishwashing machines run for 2-4 minutes, rather than 30-60. On the other hand, if you searched online, I'm sure you would be able to find the exact type of phosphate that was removed from dishwasher detergent, where to order it independently, and in what proportion it could be mixed together with modern dishwasher detergent powder, to restore the sparkly clean dishes you might have grown up with. You would also want to research the legality of such, as well as whether it would actually have any environmental impact or not where you live.

flerchin 2y ago

Over the past 10 years I've recycled all of my large appliances. My (texas) city comes and picks them up at no charge, and I don't feel that's an unusual situation.

Rinzler89 2y ago
>My (texas) city comes and picks them up at no charge, and I don't feel that's an unusual situation. That IS pretty unusual, and in a positive way. I live in one of EU's richest socialist countries (Austria) and here YOU have bare the cost of transporting your old fridge or washing machine to the city's recycling depot, which is a huge expense for your average joe as that means owning or renting a car plus renting a trailer plus having a gym-bro with a strong back and equipment to lift the damn thing from your place and carry it downstairs (many older buildings don't have elevators). And once you get to the recycling center on your own dime, you have to pay 6 Euros on top if you're a resident of the city, or 33 Euros if not. Your only "free" workaround is buying a new fridge or washing machine from a retailer who also has a promo on picking up your old one for free with the delivery of the replacement. So many people just dump them in the basement of the apartment building or on the side of the road. #environment #green But hey, at least we've banned nuclear energy in the constitution because it's bad for the environment. Isn't it ironic where one of US's most conservative states with low taxes, does things better than one of EU's most socialist "green" states where taxes are through the roof? I think it's similar in other EU countries like the Netherlands.
- tzs 2y ago
  I'd have thought that most people getting rid of a an old fridge or washing machine are replacing it with a new fridge or washing machine. The same vehicle and trailer and gym-bro that is bringing the new machine can then be used to haul away the old one. That's how it typically works in the US. The appliance dealer offers delivery and for an extra charge will haul away the old unit.
  - Rinzler89 2y ago
    Not all retailers here offer e-waste takeaway with their delivery though. Online ones like Amazon or small discounters do not AFAIk. Only the big brick and mortar ones do since they have their own delivery vehicles and employees.
    - sokoloff 2y ago
      Most appliance stores use an outsource provider for appliance deliveries. (A few local furniture stores have their own vehicles and employees, and Home Depot made the switch last-year to in-house appliance delivery, but most appliances are delivered/setup by a 3PL/4PL provider.)
- Cthulhu_ 2y ago
  In the Netherlands, when you buy a new appliance you pay a few euros extra "recycling fee"; the company delivering the new appliance will take the old one back for recycling, and / or the money goes into a fund for recycling the product you just bought. (I just read up on it, it used to be a separate charge, it's now baked into the price, probably because people were balking about it)
  - Rinzler89 2y ago
    >the company delivering the new appliance will take the old one back for recycling Do all shops offer this in NL?
    - 2y ago
sahila 2y ago
I'm a bit skeptical about them actually being recycled though. How many of the appliances are recyclable? What parts of them are vs what ends up in the dump? Everything I've heard - and admittedly I haven't looked too deep - is that recycling is mostly a sham and mostly just ends up as waste either here or shipped overseas for someone else to deal with.
- meatmanek 2y ago
  I would expect appliances to be fairly recyclable. They're mostly made of metal, which can be sold for scrap. Parts can be stripped out and sold to appliance repair shops. Plus, appliances with refrigerants need special handling to prevent the release of the refrigerants to the atmosphere -- better to have one organization handling that than leaving citizens to their own devices.
- ssl-3 2y ago
  Plastic and glass recycling is often a sham, because both things are usually of little value -- sometimes, even of negative value. A pile of plastic is mostly just a liability, with a strong likelihood of it ultimately being dumped or landfilled somewhere in the world. But metal recycling is real. Unlike plastic and glass, metal has positive value. There is an entire profitable industry that exists to recycle metal -- including appliances. We've been recycling metals for as long as we have mined their ores from the Earth. A pile of washing machines is an asset. It has real value. It doesn't get landfilled or dumped -- it gets sold.
  - sahila 2y ago
    Good to know, appreciate the context.

Cthulhu_ 2y ago

It's not an either/or though. Anyway, all / most of the ones you mentioned have good reuse, repair and recycling systems in place.

paulmd 2y ago

yes. it's been obvious for a long time that "but the e-waste" is almost universally deployed as an argumentary "get out of jail free" card that is intended to be impossible to argue against, even when there isn't actually an improvement in the energy/waste lifecycle or when the improvement is overall trivial. it's funny that the tech community of all places have embraced greenwashing so heavily, particularly when most of those same individuals constantly decry greenwashing themselves/think they're on the right side of the issue, but there also clearly is an intentionally bad-faith thing where it's used to shut down debate because "you don't hate the planet, do you!?". you see it constantly in anything surrounding apple, for example. wireless charging is bad, because using 2.5w more for the 1 hour a day your phone is actively charging is literally killing the planet. meanwhile if you sit on the cord wrong once a year and have to have amazon send a truck out with an extra cable, you have undoubtedly exceeded the pollution by orders of magnitude. same for batteries etc, if your crappy amazon battery needs one extra replacement over the life of the phone, you have undoubtedly vastly exceeded the e-waste and pollution savings of right to repair. Let alone the impact of the extremely short software lifecycles - those android phones are basically disposable and unsupported the day they launch, and apple devices actually have supremely good lifecycles given their long support, the thriving secondhand market (long life) vs disposable phones that get rapidly cycled through, the parts lifecycle/support, and the refurb/recycling lifecycle etc. But right-to-repair is a fashion statement and people will die on the hill that sending out five amazon trucks of parts for a phone that's unsupported in 6 months and in the trash after 3 years is saving the planet. AI is bad because e-waste and energy, regardless of whatever value it delivers. Over the next century we will probably save GW of energy due to increased efficiency in basically everything (doubtlessly introducing another jevon's paradox of course, but that's not the fault of the tech, that's a generic complaint against any efficiency improvement). Introducing AI into end-user devices is bad because users might feel compelled to upgrade, which is bad. Training smaller models that don't use so much energy in the long-run is bad, because it uses energy now. Upgrading your graphics card is bad because e-waste - even though you sell it to someone else who continues to use it, and even though the guy with a mattress on the floor and a killer gaming rig that he upgrades yearly has way lower emissions than a family who takes one vacation a year to florida (even driving etc). On and on. people just want a foolproof "your product is bad" that can't be argued against, and e-waste/pollution is a great card to play, especially when it's selectively applied and you refuse to admit any of the foibles of the products you prefer. also, people still don't want to admit that rossman's right to repair isn't quite the same thing as the platonic right-to-repair. rossman's interests fundamentally lie with keeping rossman group turning a profit, which isn't quite the same thing as users being able to repair their own devices by themselves etc. people don't like apple selling parts straight to end-users because "repair shops can't turn a profit at those prices" and yeah, having a multinational conglomerate renowed for its supply chain deploying low-cost labor to perform factory-line repairs on a limited selection of devices is going to be cheaper than artisianal craftsman repair, that's just the economics of it etc. Nobody has accused them of having different prices internally/externally, repair shops just can't afford to compete at the same prices that apple charges itself. Right to repair doesn't guarantee the right of repair shops to turn a profit in the face of a well-oiled OEM repair shop operation/pipeline, but actually it's a good thing to have that brick-and-mortar repair pipeline etc, that's what you want, if you want to keep devices running longer etc. Market competitiveness is not the same thing as e-waste lifecycle, and OEMs subsidizing the repairs/running them at-cost is actually a good thing for pollution/e-waste even if indies can't compete at fair market rates. You just can't actively charge yourself less than the fair market price for the item, but even if you did, keeping devices running is the goal, right? These are contradictory goals, market competitiveness is not the same thing as keeping e-waste out of landfills, and if you really care about the latter it probably will require subsidies on repairs, or taxes on new devices, to overcome the economics of mass-production vs individual-repair. Same for component-level repair. Obviously that is a thing rossman would like to offer as a business service, but is it a necessary aspect of phone repair given the ready availability of assemblies? If you want to drive down costs, bringing boards (via B2B/wholesale trucking) to a central place and reworking them en-masse is going to be a very efficient way to do it, you’ll even recapture some of those economies of scale vs 1-off artisanal repair. And cost of repair is obviously a major factor in whether people decide to repair vs landfill a broken device. But that’s bad because rossman doesn’t get paid as much if you just swap a PCB - it probably should be an option but it realistically isn’t ever going to be the default, to have an artisan unsolder a bga and put on a new cpu or memory or whatever, and there are strong social arguments (cost) for doing it the other way. It certainly isn’t some showstopper to overall repairability (nobody is resoldering a BGA at home anyway), just not favorable to rossman’s bottom line. also, right to use third-party parts is not really a right-to repair issue. that is personal preference, but there's also safety (muggings/theft) and resale considerations etc. Certainly there are good reasons to explore flexibility/solutions but again, this isn't a right-to-repair issue when there are reasonably at-cost repairs available and a ready supply of first-party parts etc... if phones aren't going into landfills that solves the problem, right? it's a personal preference about the market economics/principles of a device you own (one I generally agree with, with the caveat there's countervailing concerns too). but that gets wedged into an e-waste issue too! hell even apple making the tools available is a conspiracy to some people - "apple renting you the OEM replacement tools (which are completely optional and in no way required or forced, you can use an amazon spudger if you want too, and which they will outright sell you if you want to keep them because you're an indie repair shop or whatever) for the cost of shipping is bad because the pelican cases are too big and heavy" is a serious topic of discussion for some people. and before you think that's a strawman... someone defended the idea a couple weeks ago on here lol. like there's just no winning with a bunch of these people lol. the whole e-waste/right-to-repair has just turned into a massive greenwashing/circlejerk and again, it's these same people who are so concerned about airpods and apple self-service who are so adamantly opposed to "greenwashing" in principle, yet they're basically engaging in a contemporary greenwashing movement themselves backing leaders with fixation on greenwashing their own business requirements as being movement goals etc. In practice minimizing e-waste/pollution lifecycle basically boils down to keeping devices in service longer and ensuring less unnecessary road-trips over the lifespan of the device. The easiest ways to get there are good parts lifetime, good software support lifetime, accessibility of brick-and-mortar/retail repair service, a thriving secondhand market/value retention to encourage resale, etc. Everything else is optional, and you actually don't need much beyond the apple store/self-service model to accomplish those actual needs. like, taking my old trade-in iphone and refurbing it and selling it to someone in africa or india is what you want, right? how did that become a bad thing/complaint for the greenwashing movement? shouldn't that actually be required, if the phone has a reasonable degree of serviceability why shouldn't it be mandated that trade-ins be refurbed and get another lifecycle? Also, the actual nuclear-hot take: even lightning was not really a big deal given how long it'd been in service. Having one specific, long-running cable that is deliberately aimed at being significantly cheaper than USB-C (which it was, until very recently) is really not a big deal and probably the phase-out of lightning pushed a large number of extra trucks on the road, extra cable sales to replace the old ones, new usb-c PD chargers sold, etc. I definitely feel the user-convenience argument, I am very happy to unify everything I can onto USB-C these days, but there was a very real additional pollution cost incurred from the changeover itself, that need not have been incurred. Cables wear and break, especially phone cables that get heavily used etc, and having 3 types of cables instead of 2 (usb-c and micro-b) was not the end of the world. Now micro-B really does need to die though, I am entirely tired of that shit to a degree that I didn't care about with lightning. Reversibility has been here for 15 years now, get with the program, and the durability of the sockets is still awful (although better than mini-B, which also refuses to die). Like a lot of green movements it just sort of is a mishmash of contradictory and often self-defeating goals, pushed by lifestyle advocates and profiteers who stand to gain by selling associated services etc. I do support the overall goal it just doesn’t feel like the current discourse has anything to do with that, it’s just people attaching their lifestyle choices/political choices to a convenient/favorable wagon. And you can easily tell this by how hostile people get over it all. It was never about the e-waste, it was about “apple bad”. And that always is the first and most powerful beat in every single one of these “right to repair” discussions. Name a single rossman video that isn't at least 30% anti-apple screed by weight lol. Like are there really no other vendors with glued batteries or unrepairable mainboards or no service manuals given to third parties? I think there obviously are... but the Samsung stuff just goes in the trash instead of sending it to a Rossman type place, so you're seeing survival bias at best, outright personal bias at worst. It's an easy, popular, large target that drives massive amounts of clicks given the wild amount of apple-hate that still exists to this day etc. They aren't your friend more than any other corp... but they actually do have a pretty green lifecycle compared to a parade of disposable android phones or $300 craptops. And people just cannot possibly bring themselves to admit that apple stepped in the right direction for a change (see also: privacy). Doesn't make them perfect, but neither are any of the alternatives, and apple generally does better in these areas (e-waste/sustainability/lifecycle and privacy). At the end of the day people are just so credulous about a pitch that inevitably concludes with the pitcher attempting to sell you something - not just rossman but framework, fairphone, etc. And people are just so sanctimonious about it all, like they just want to dump all over everyone because they bought into a youtube personality who needs to keep doing component-level repairs to stay in business or w/e. And again, I guess what else is new with the greenwashing movement, but these are people that think of themselves as ostensibly being virulently opposed to greenwashing etc. Again, I guess what else is new.

trainsarebetter 2y ago

this makes me think of what’s in the waste itself. Is a big pile of steel worse than a few box’s of rare earth elements and toxins?

chazeon 2y ago

It wasn’t uncommon to buy second hand AC and sell them after use in the NYC. In fact, I barely heard anyone buy new ACs. I guess not everyone has no problem throw those appliances out.

crazygringo 2y ago
Sure there's a good market for secondhand AC's but AC's also break at some point. Also newer AC's can be vastly more energy-efficient, which is something to keep in mind when you can easily spend more on electricity over the course of a single summer than on the unit itself.

2OEH8eoCRo0 2y ago

Buildings too. We should be building for repairability.

monknomo 2y ago

imo, the appliances breaking is also a choice and one that is a real shame. No one actually wants to buy new refrigerators or dishwashers, and the improvements in that space have all be pretty marginal. Fast fashion is shame too - clothes ought to last a bit as well. And cardboard/particle board furniture that services .5-1.5 moves is also basically bad. Cars have been steadily increasing in durability and reliability for decades

Cthulhu_ 2y ago
If anything, newer refrigerators and dishwashers are worse than they used to be, because they have to conform to increasingly strict energy usage laws. The new dishwasher we have now is shit, reuses water between cycles, uses some weird system for drying, etc. Basically we use more energy to pre-wash or post-wash stuff now.
- crazygringo 2y ago
  At least with dishwashers, part of the reason is actually that home dishwasher detergents are no longer allowed to have phosphates. And for a lot of people the no-phosphates thing happened around the same time they got an energy-efficient dishwasher. And then they blamed the bad dishwasher performance on the energy efficiency, when it's actually that home dishwasher detergent is far less effective now. Except restaurants still get to use dishwasher detergent with phosphates, which is why their dishes continue to be sparkling clean. (And I don't know about your dishwasher, but the last two I've had default to energy-efficient, but it's a single button press to put them on hi-temp mode.)
  - fragmede 2y ago
    Fascinating. Time to go buy dishwashing liquid from my local restaurant supply store instead of the grocery store then.
    - crazygringo 2y ago
      It won't work -- putting aside the phosphates, it's a totally different formulation, because restaurant dishwashing machines run for 2-4 minutes, rather than 30-60. On the other hand, if you searched online, I'm sure you would be able to find the exact type of phosphate that was removed from dishwasher detergent, where to order it independently, and in what proportion it could be mixed together with modern dishwasher detergent powder, to restore the sparkly clean dishes you might have grown up with. You would also want to research the legality of such, as well as whether it would actually have any environmental impact or not where you live.