Planned obsolescence and unplanned responsibility

In this NYT commentary, the author wants us to ask three questions before we buy the shiny new electronic gadget introduced in the marketplace:

“How long will this last?,” “How will I get it fixed when it breaks?” and “How will I recycle this when I need a new device?”

When I read that, I had two immediate thoughts. 

First, how many NYT readers will care enough to think about those questions and act on them, and how does this number compare to the billions of humans who don't read the NYT?

Second, I have routinely posed these questions in my classes; consider the following paragraph from my blog post in June 2015:

I routinely force students to think about where their old smartphones end up when they upgrade to the latest gadget.  I have assigned essays, like this one, which then provide the context for them to pause for a few minutes and think about the resource consumption.  I practice--at least try to--what I teach.  Thus, I have a difficult time getting rid of my old smartphone even when it serves all my purposes. Last December, when I was taking photographs of the high school classmates who had come to the niece's wedding, one friend laughingly said "ever since the first time I reconnected with Sriram, he has been using the same camera."  Yes, it has been the same camera too for a few years now.  Just because it is old I should dump it?  I don't operate that way.

Maybe if I had been asking other kinds of questions, and teaching sexy subjects, I would not have been laid off, eh!

The NYT commentary notes:

This year, the French government began requiring tech manufacturers to list an “indice de réparabilité,” a repairability score, on product pages for items like the iPhone and MacBook. If a device can be repaired, then its life can be extended, saving consumers money and the planet the burden of so many trashed gadgets.

As much as I like the idea, I think the reality is that this is not going to make much of a difference when gadgets are sold by the billions every year.  Sure, a few customers might tinker with their smartphones, or a few businesses might spring up in countries like India.  But, for most people, the cost of fixing the cranky smartphone might outweigh the benefits of a shiny new one.

I wish the writer had at least mentioned one important phrase: Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR.)  Hold producers and other entities involved in the product chain,  responsibile for end-of-life product management instead of trying to work the the general public  I checked my own blog to see when I first mentioned EPR in my writing.  It was in February 2012.

Some day, sooner than later, we will hold producers like Apple responsible.  Soon, I hope.