When everything is a commodity it's hard to see how this will be useful.
When an appliance (fridge, cooker, washing machine) breaks, it's cheaper to replace. I cannot see how repairing a TV will ever be cheaper than just replacing it since they are so cheap brand new.
This also applies to smartphones, none of the popular models have replaceable batteries so in the trash they go and they become worthless, even if the hardware could keep up for 10 years often the software is outdated, inseceure and not worth using.
I'll be hard pressed to believe this will result in anything tangible. The real test is if they can convince Apple to make Louis' job easier, wouldn't that be nice.
If you can find me a new TV at that price, please let me know!
Yes, getting in a professional at £X per hour means it is probably not economical to repair a cheap washing machine. But if the parts and manuals are easily available, it suddenly becomes a lot quicker and easier to repair it yourself rather than replace.
The problem is you need to be highly skilled to do that repair. So many times I have ordered replacement parts and then either broken something like a plastic ribbon cable connector, or I have installed the new part and it still doesn't work.
I cannot emphasise enough how NOT highly skilled I am. That repair could have been done by anyone with a screwdriver and a steady hand. Take a look at the photos in my blog-post and tell me what was complicated.
OK, I don't have the skills to desolder and replace a busted capacitor. But most domestic equipment is pretty plug-and-play.
I am unable to use a multimeter to diagnose an issue. But lots of devices come with error codes and diagnostic manuals are online.
I'm not saying this particular repair was hard, but in general you have to get lucky for an easy repair. I have ordered replacement parts a few times and found that it still doesn't work and I just wasted my time as well as money on new parts. When a brand new device is not too expensive and will be an upgrade over the one you are trying to fix, the choice to buy becomes more compelling.
> The problem is you need to be highly skilled to do that repair.
You also need to be highly skilled to do a lot of automotive repairs, which is why there is a thriving market of third-party mechanics who will perform those repairs for a fraction of the cost of buying a new vehicle. The same can (and should, IMO) be true for electronics.
Highly skilled? I don't think so. You just have to be very careful, and pay attention to the right things (ESD, cut the power, short circuits, etc).
Secondly, the diagnostic needs to be correct. Multiple faillures is unlikely if there is no external cause (surge, flooding...) or cascading failures.
Both of the above points can be solved with good documentation. I've seen very good servicing manuals, this is part of the reason I prefer thinkpads these days (though they could always contain more details...). With good servicing instructions, I've been able to perform repairs in no time on things I didn't know much about.
I think your reply shows that you are already very skilled.
Other comments mentioned replacing a diode -- I know what a diode is conceptually, but I have no idea how does it look in the appliance, where would I buy a new one or how to replace it.
Being as clueless as I am, my only option is to call a proffessional. Sometimes it is worth it -- I had a fan on my MacBook replaced for ~700 SEK which is a fraction of the price, but sometimes it's not. Our 1 y/o kitchen oven bought from IKEA started malfunctioning, so we called one of the repair centers they subcontract repairs to. They sent us an invoice by accident even though the oven was covered by a warranty and I couldn't believe my eyes. The cost of the new oven was IIRC ~5000 SEK (~500 USD), but the repair was over 4500 SEK, 3k for the replacement part (!?!) and 1500 for the repairman to come and do their job. I didn't know the cost upfront and I guess they wouldn't have told me an estimate without looking at the oven, at which point I would have to pay the labour cost anyway..
So sadly, given the cost, I would have probably opted for just buying a new item if the faulty one is out of warranty..
Hmm, I am just confident in my ability to follow instructions. I am certainly highly skilled in electronics, but repairing stuff isn't necessarily limited to that.
With good instructions, I can set out to repair mechanical parts as well (replace parts of an engine for instance), high-voltage devices, masonry, or other stuff I have never done before.
A good manual can make the whole difference between a successful repair, dealing a finishing blow to a product, or endangering yourself/others.
Making repairs easier probably makes them cheaper as well (less skilled employees can attempt them, it takes less time and is much more enjoyable). I know I would charge less.
Of course, the product has to be designed to make repairs possible, otherwise it requires a whole other level of skill (unglue parts, precisely cut where you need to).
And lastly, you can only go as far as your equipment will allow you. Sometimes all you need is a (included) screwdriver, but not everyone has a milling machine handy (though that would be an interesting use-case for fablabs).
Spare parts are an example of monopoly pricing - the original manufacturer is usually the only source of parts for any given product, so they can charge what they want (usually as much as possible, such that it's only just worth it to do any given repair vs. replacing the whole thing)
If products can be repaired easily, even if it is not worth paying to repair it or one is not skilled enough to repair it, there might still be a market for broken down items as people with skills might buy them, fix them and use or resell them. It beats throwing stuff in the trash.
We had an old mixer-grinder which ran for a decade or so. After it broke down, I went to an official repair shop, and they quoted an amount which make buying a new one a better option. So we did - from different company. It turned out that the new one constantly gave us problems, but we stuck with it for years. And one day while cleaning up our home, we found the old mixer and gave it to our domestic help to keep if she could get it repaired.
She did get it repaired. For less than a DOLLAR! And it still runs better than the new-fangled mixer.
I've repaired all my appliances myself over the last 20+ years, to say it's cheaper to replace is just plain false, even today. Most faults are easy fixes like sensors or motors and even the higher end PCB replacements work out cheaper.
However! if you are not inclined to fix yourself then the costs to have someone else fix your appliances may not work out as cost effective.
That's fine. I'd rather give an old broken fridge for free to someone who'll actually fix it, than throw it away.
Like with old computer stuff. I go out of my way to find someone else who needs it, because 1) I hate the waste and environmental impact, and 2) in my poorer days I was the recipient of "old garbage computer stuff" as my only computer stuff.
I had an old shitty laptop with no battery, that I found an old motorcycle lead-acid battery I could hook up. With a couple of diodes I could even charge it through the laptop. I could never afford a real laptop, but this was a computer on the go for me.
A friend of mine couldn't afford batteries for his calculator, so he took a scrap power adapter and hooked it up to its battery terminals.
I'm fine with someone getting $50k of tooling and then being able to create a reuse market. Better to not need it, but it's also not realistic to have a law that mandates that all electronics must be repairable with a screwdriver and a pair of plyers.
> When an appliance (fridge, cooker, washing machine) breaks, it's cheaper to replace
In a lot of cases it's not, but people don't want to troubleshoot or 3rd part makes more money by replacing it.
I try to fix my suff not for economical reasons, but environmental. In many instances I also save time as well. A few examples:
- car service wanted to replace windshield wipers on my car. I took a piece of sandpaper and cleaned up wax and oxidised rubber. They could last an extra year.
- Microwave stopped working. I cleaned up the connector to the magnetron. I took me less time than buying a new one.
- Plumbing under the sink. Pretty sure the plumber would like to replace everything and charge me a lot, plus it would take a few hours to find a guy, book him and be at home at that time.
I think I save about 10h and over $500 per year. It's often fun to replace something.
I agree on the time thing, if you have the inclination it's often easier/faster to just fix something, rather than all the hassle of replacing it (not even counting the monetary saving)
I had my fridge repaired this summer. A repair person come with his car and tools at my home, spent 2 hours to find and fix the fridge and I think it costed me less then 20% of the fridge full price. It is a real waste to throw a good fridge engine because the doors is not closing properly or a pipe is leaking some gas.
I live in Romania so this might not apply to other places so your experience is localized not global, and with an expensive enough product (like a super expensive TV or laptop) I bet most people would want it fixed and spent the money on some other gadget.
This is a myth. It used to be that tools for SMD rework were expensive and inaccessible, but now you can get a good kit with a trinocular microscope for under $1000. It is still quite a bit, but reachable if you want to start small repair business in your community. I'd say bigger problem are high taxes and bureaucracy.
That's because this sort of legislation (in the UK and in the EU) is driven by superficial thinking and politics, not data-driven analysis and pragmatic considerations.
People go "why don't they just make things simpler to repair?" like it was an obvious solution to problems (real or perceived) whereas the reality is obviously much more complex.
Appliances are already quite durable and repairable. Making things 'more repairable' can increase cost and resources needed. Cost of labour and parts can quickly render repairs uneconomical even if they would be perfectly doable. Some devices are so integrated (e.g. TVs these days) that the very concept of 'repair' is almost meaningless. People do not necessarily want to repair a broken old device because there are better new ones available.
These are all competing considerations and the issue is therefore complex.
I would rather they focus on ease of recycling. The EU legislation has some measures on recycling but gets too much diverted by this "right to repair", IMHO.
> Making things 'more repairable' can increase cost and resources needed.
I don't think this is in dispute, is it?
The point is that manufacturers must now consider this cost in their calculations, rather than pass all the consequences on to the consumer without caring.
> People do not necessarily want to repair a broken old device
If the old device still has value, then both can happen - I can get a new device, and pass my old device on for repair and re-use.
> The point is that manufacturers must now consider this cost in their calculations, rather than pass all the consequences on to the consumer without caring.
If this was the goal, then simply taxing fossil fuels and other polluting sources would be the ideal and simple solution. How high would the taxes need to be? However high it takes to get pollution levels down to where they need to be. The actual cost of a new item would be properly reflected in the price, and therefore incentivize the purchasing of reusable and repairable items, which would incentivize manufacturers making reusable and repairable items.
Of course, that would bring the world’s economy to a half, as governments’ expectations and calculations are assumed on continuously increasing consumption.
I'm a bit lost. I don't see how this is relevant to the discussion at all.
Manufacturers already pay $ proportional to the amount of fossil fuels spent, and this doesn't cause them to consider future consequences on the consumer. They still think vendor lock-in and planned obsolescence are to their advantage.
Only because the true cost of fossil fuels and other pollution isn't reflected in the sale price to the end users, so it's often cheaper to buy new rather than repaired products.
If the true cost of pollution were pushed into the sale price for end users, end users would have to reduce their purchases of non repairable items, and consumers would then value repairability as a feature, incentivizing manufacturers to cater to that.
It's much easier to force the change this way than through figuring out the correct wording in legislation, which is bound to have loopholes and be subject to costly (time wise) legal conflicts.
The root of the issue is that things are so cheap, repairing them makes no sense, regardless of repair-ability. Manufacturers didn't one day decide to drop repair-ability. One did it, and found that they were not punished by consumers. In fact, they were probably rewarded by offering new "features". Then another manufacturer did it, then another, and so on. And obviously, it works. I just went to someone's house who was showing off their fancy new fridge with a see through door.
Of course, the very very root of the issue is humanity's excess consumption which is causing harm to the environment we live in, but as I wrote earlier, that faces insurmountable political headwinds.
Right to repair or upgrade may not make sense for all appliances, but for some it definitely does. For example, early 2010's Macbook Pro's remain perfectly usable when upgraded with SSD and more RAM, while more modern ones don't allow any upgrade whatsoever and will become obsolete much faster. For many electronic devices repairability is easy to implement, at least for a little extra cost, and is certainly more environmentally friendly than recycling them.
So, I think for many classes of products right to repair makes sense, and should be implemented even if it raises the cost of buying a new device, since the boost in second-hand options will eventually be good for people who don't have so much money.
Recycling is good too, but not as good using a device longer since not all can be recycled, and the process typically requires energy.
"Appliances are already quite durable and repairable."
Do you live in fanatsy land? they don't come with schematics, they don't come witj repair manuals, sale or replacement parts is pyrposefully restricted, firmware is locked, they are stuck together with glue and their mean time between failure is deacreasing. What else has to happen for you to accept the real world?
"I would rather they focus on ease of recycling."
Repair will always be easier than recycling because laws of physics. Plastic and electronics are basically unrecycleable, and extremely expensive to dispose of priperly?
When an appliance (fridge, cooker, washing machine) breaks, it's cheaper to replace. I cannot see how repairing a TV will ever be cheaper than just replacing it since they are so cheap brand new.
This also applies to smartphones, none of the popular models have replaceable batteries so in the trash they go and they become worthless, even if the hardware could keep up for 10 years often the software is outdated, inseceure and not worth using.
I'll be hard pressed to believe this will result in anything tangible. The real test is if they can convince Apple to make Louis' job easier, wouldn't that be nice.