After the traumatic hard drive crash incident, I started to notice the prevalence of technology all around me. I know what you're thinking - Nafisa, Captain Obvious, is stating what everyone already knows - technology practically controls our lives.
My brain took an interesting route when I was thinking about this. Okay, so technology controls our lives... what does that mean for our purchasing habits, for the environment? I couldn't help but wonder why we often buy new printers instead of simply having the ink refilled, why we buy new cellphones instead of repairing the old ones. As consumers, it can be a pretty obvious choice; we buy the brand new printer because it's somehow cheaper than getting the old one fixed.
At first glance, it seems like a win-win situation because buying a new machine is both cheaper AND quicker… But, once you take a closer look, you'll see that it’s actually producers and distributors benefiting at the expense of consumers and the environment. With a new purchase being clearly cheaper, the consumer doesn't really have a choice other than to reinvest his/her money regularly into a new product rather than getting the old one fixed.
And when we buy the new printer, or the new cellphone, what happens to the old one? Just like that, it becomes obsolete; we throw it out and forget about it. If we keep buying new things, and keep throwing out the old ones, the waste is bound to accumulate. These technological products must be carefully managed; they have special recycling procedures and can't just be thrown into your blue bin the way you do everything else. Awareness of such programs is, unfortunately, low and old products are not well managed. The environment is, consequently, getting destroyed by heaps of electronic waste as a result of our unbridled quest for innovation.
As consumers, we ignore the environmental effects of our purchases and we buy the new product because its cheaper. So, to the root of the problem, why is it so expensive to repair these products? Well, for starters, globalization! With most of production occurring abroad, most often in Asia, there aren’t many factories in Canada, for example. Consequently, when it comes to repairs, technicians in Canada rarely have the tools or spare parts necessary to fix the machine. Repairs are also lengthy because of the wait time for spare parts to be shipped from the Asian producing countries. The huge disparity in costs is also largely attributed to labour standards; when the product is initially made, it is produced in countries where the cost of labour is substantially lower. In contrast, repairs are generally done in the country of purchase, meaning that the cost of the service would be based on Canadian labour wages. The varying labour standards are reflected in the jump in prices for a new product and its repair.
Okay, so now that we’ve discussed the problem, it’s about time we start thinking about what we can do to mitigate it. Some electronic stores have added an Environmental Handling Fee (EHF), which is pretty much an imposed surcharge on electronics to pay for the eventual disposal of the products. Though I know consumers probably aren’t too happy about this extra $20 added to their bills, I do believe the EHF can encourage reuse and refurbishment, as well as environmentally sound recycling.
As consumers, we should:
- Make the effort to buy less polluting products
- Discard the used equipment in an appropriate manner
- Curb our appetite for novelty
This on it’s own isn’t enough, but it is definitely a good starting point to manage and reduce our carbon footprint. What do you think? What can be done to solve this problem? Or do think it isn't even a problem?

Very interesting. I have always thought about this problem but never really knew what to do about it!
ReplyDeleteI think the public is generally unaware of disposal issues affecting the world until it starts to affect us financially. In reality, the $20 is a minor hindrance but the general public usually feels like they are being duped. Is this eco-tax really worth it? Will my $20 actually be used to safely and sustainably dispose of my old cellphone? Once again education needs to take precedence. Manufacturers need to start outlining how and why a certain product needs to disposed of after its lifespan is completed. Furthermore, when in the market for a new product suppliers should also offer comparable products that last longer and are easier and cheaper to fix than purchasing a new product. The problem with that is that we live in a competitive consumer society and the chances of that changing is less than people eventually accepting concepts like the EHF.
ReplyDeleteIt's interesting that you emphasize education as an important factor in the success of recycling programs. I agree as well, but it seems the method used right now is "ignorance is bliss". The cost is listed on your receipt, but if you don't read through that receipt, you'll never know. In my opinion, for these programs to be truly successful means to empower people so that they are continuing these positive habits WILLINGLY after the fact. And, of course, empowerment needs education.
DeleteGreat article and an eye opener. I personally think that ignorance is a key factor with regards to the scenario discussed above. In addition to recycling, I wonder if there could be an incentive to donate specific used tech products which could be modified to be used by other sectors of the society therefore spreading technology and helping the environment.
ReplyDeleteIt's interesting that you mention the usefulness of incentives. I think these initiatives could initially benefit from being incentive-based but, at some point, it needs be natural and voluntary.
DeleteWith that, the recycling seems to me as a reactive, adaptive measure. This, don't get me wrong, is important.. BUT we need mitigation and proactive measures. Why does there need to be so much production of new products when the old ones are viable? How do we deal with that?
Great post Nafisa! I think the disposable economy applies not just to electronics (though I agree they are the most damaging,) but to all types of consumer goods. Fifty years ago, for example, a woman had one good cost that lasted a lifetime. Now we have several poorly made ones that last each season. I think it's just as much a product of our voracious appetites for things that are flashy and new as it is due to the decline of quality in products that are sold to us.
ReplyDeleteThis is an absolutely brilliant point. I didn't think to stretch it past technology but it is, after all, yet another aspect of consumerism and overconsumption.
DeleteWith that being said, I think the decline in quality doesn't necessary apply to technology; technology is constantly improving, and its doing so at a breakneck pace.
How true! Our fast-paced world means that new technologies are constantly replacing each other - good for the companies who sell them, but bad for the environment. As a consumer, it is so easy to toss away perfectly useful devices because we want the 'cooler, better, faster' version. We buy right into the marketing! I feel a twinge of guilt whenever I notice my e-waste gets out of hand, but I often still do it.
ReplyDeleteTo be honest, I'm not sure that the environmental handling levies are enough, or effective at all. If the point is to deter consumers from buying new products, it is not effective at all. And like Jovana commented, how do we know that this actually ensure proper disposal? A tactic that I often find works is incentive rather than levies. Maybe offer a return deposit for people who properly dispose of their electronics (add $20 on to the price of the item, offer them $10 for returning their items). It still doesn't solve a lot of the problems, such as the fact that we consume too many electronics to begin with. But, at least it would enncourage proper disposal- one step.
Jeannette, you really got me thinking! I think charging extra from the beginning, and then refunding some of that once the product is safely returned is a greattttt idea. You should go selling it to Future Shop ;).
DeleteTrue for some people, but for me it’s not! I hate throwing old stuff. I’d prefer keeping them where I could see them. Who knows? They might come in handy in the future! About the printer, I do prefer CIS printers; no resetting, easy ink refilling, and there’s a lesser chance of the nozzle getting clogged. The only problem left is the waste pad ink system. I do hope they’ll do something about it in the future.
ReplyDelete