Dichotomy of sustainability and consumerism
Discussion
I'm struggling with with the opposing forces of us buying more and more disposable items with the concepts of sustainability.
It seems that products are increasingly disposable yet we're told we're heading to both a climate and resource crisis.
How do these forces level out and why are things becoming increasingly disposable and replaceable rather than repairable.
Obviously this is a motoring forum so cars are the first thing to focus on.
A friend recently scrapped his 2015 Citroen as it has a couple of minor mechanical issues. We have the engineering capabilities to make cars easy to fix yet we don't.
Phones haven't changed much in the past 5 years yet we throw away perfectly useable electronic devices.
Even in our homes, a neighbour had his boiler changed which was less than 10 years old, the old one going to scrap.
If we're concerned about sustainability, why aren't things being made repairable.
It seems that products are increasingly disposable yet we're told we're heading to both a climate and resource crisis.
How do these forces level out and why are things becoming increasingly disposable and replaceable rather than repairable.
Obviously this is a motoring forum so cars are the first thing to focus on.
A friend recently scrapped his 2015 Citroen as it has a couple of minor mechanical issues. We have the engineering capabilities to make cars easy to fix yet we don't.
Phones haven't changed much in the past 5 years yet we throw away perfectly useable electronic devices.
Even in our homes, a neighbour had his boiler changed which was less than 10 years old, the old one going to scrap.
If we're concerned about sustainability, why aren't things being made repairable.
Because the people making and selling stuff aren't compelled (legally, legislatively, commercially) towards sustainability.
Sustainable products cost more to make, and almost all retail is about racing to the bottom pricewise.
I have long had this hobbyhorse (which also applies to the car industry), which is that suppliers say "We're giving the customer what they want", whereas my attitude is "No, you're offering the customers something desirable, they buy it, and you justify it by saying that's what they wanted in the first place."
Sustainable products cost more to make, and almost all retail is about racing to the bottom pricewise.
I have long had this hobbyhorse (which also applies to the car industry), which is that suppliers say "We're giving the customer what they want", whereas my attitude is "No, you're offering the customers something desirable, they buy it, and you justify it by saying that's what they wanted in the first place."
Let me make it clear that I feel I'm far from an eco zealot. I do feel it's somewhat hypocritical to be campaigning for sustainability whilst promoting throwing away perfectly useable items to replace them with new.
It's difficult not to throw this thread of course if I raise emotive subjects like ULEZ which has caused the scrappage of thousands of vehicles prematurely but cars themselves are becoming increasingly difficult to fix when they could be engineered otherwise.
If environment and climate change are so important then why are we not encouraged to maximise the life of things.
Am I wrong in concluding that environment and climate are used as justification for increased consumerism and more taxation?
I have a neighbour who has recently turned eco zealot (he used to be catholic) and I understand his beliefs and respect him more for the fact he still drives an old diesel which he intends to keep indefinitely as he feels that keeping that vehicle has environmental benefits over replacing it with one with lower emissions.
I hear that the world has just reached a new high for fossil fuel use.
How has that happened when we're being railroaded to ditch them through taxation and what seems like poorly thought out schemes.
It's difficult not to throw this thread of course if I raise emotive subjects like ULEZ which has caused the scrappage of thousands of vehicles prematurely but cars themselves are becoming increasingly difficult to fix when they could be engineered otherwise.
If environment and climate change are so important then why are we not encouraged to maximise the life of things.
Am I wrong in concluding that environment and climate are used as justification for increased consumerism and more taxation?
I have a neighbour who has recently turned eco zealot (he used to be catholic) and I understand his beliefs and respect him more for the fact he still drives an old diesel which he intends to keep indefinitely as he feels that keeping that vehicle has environmental benefits over replacing it with one with lower emissions.
I hear that the world has just reached a new high for fossil fuel use.
How has that happened when we're being railroaded to ditch them through taxation and what seems like poorly thought out schemes.
Sustainability, along with all the other mantras the commercial world like to spout, only applies if saves/makes them money; otherwise it’s just lip service contained in a mission/sustainability statement.
Consumers, on the other hand are continually told, (rightfully so) we need to consider the environmental effects of our lifestyle choices; it’s just a bit galling, when you realize the products you purchase, have built in obsolesce.
Consumers, on the other hand are continually told, (rightfully so) we need to consider the environmental effects of our lifestyle choices; it’s just a bit galling, when you realize the products you purchase, have built in obsolesce.
greygoose said:
Sadly capitalism required endless buying of stuff so the world will die eventually.
The world will do just fine, it'll find a way to restore order to itself, humans are merely a tiny blip on the graph. Dinosaurs were way more successful at finding a natural balance and were around for waaaaaay longer than we will ever be.
Unfortunately I suspect that the "clearout" will probably destroy most other life on the planet too but that's the way it goes. Humanity (as we know it) is on a sinking ship. The problem is, everybody knows it but realises they'll be well dead first, so what's the point?
Happy Saturday everyone!
Capitalism is amoral, so it can have good consequences for mankind, technological improvements that make our lives better in the short term, yet it also has no thought about equality or sustainability. It seems to have sown the seeds of its own destruction though, both through the impact on our environment but also by changing society so that we aren’t producing enough children.
Fairphone.
Framework.
Car manufacturers are experimenting with total refurbishment / re manufacturing in a factory setting as well, to return older cars as good as new, because they see legislation coming.
You could always vote Green, they address everything you are describing and have gone on record to say they will accept a GDP reduction to protect the environment.
Framework.
Car manufacturers are experimenting with total refurbishment / re manufacturing in a factory setting as well, to return older cars as good as new, because they see legislation coming.
You could always vote Green, they address everything you are describing and have gone on record to say they will accept a GDP reduction to protect the environment.
Edited by wyson on Saturday 22 June 07:03
Cars are getting more complex and more expensive to repair. Replacement airbags, seat belt pretensioners, pedestrian safety bonnet charges, £1000s to replace with new parts which could easily tip an older car into a write-off.
Then you have parts that need to be coded to your car before they will work that only dealers can do.
EVs are even worse, high voltage electronics, non-servicable components, specialist skills along with all the stuff above.
The safety parts need legislation to force manufacturers to exchange blown parts for free or for a token price. Otherwise the temptation will be to fit ebay parts of dubious origin, or bypass them all with resistors!
I guess independent EV garages and skilled techs will come with time. Probably a good thing to get trained in now.
Then you have parts that need to be coded to your car before they will work that only dealers can do.
EVs are even worse, high voltage electronics, non-servicable components, specialist skills along with all the stuff above.
The safety parts need legislation to force manufacturers to exchange blown parts for free or for a token price. Otherwise the temptation will be to fit ebay parts of dubious origin, or bypass them all with resistors!
I guess independent EV garages and skilled techs will come with time. Probably a good thing to get trained in now.
Why would a commercial company that is driven by profit want to make anything sustainable? They would rather we buy in volume and replace in a short use cycle. We think the products are cheaper but more expensive in the long run.
Also people’s attention spans, need to have everything now and the latest version to support their insatiable egos mean that tech companies have a well planned upgrade path. And the idiots keep buying the goods at increased prices for little return in functionality more for a vanity show.
Also people’s attention spans, need to have everything now and the latest version to support their insatiable egos mean that tech companies have a well planned upgrade path. And the idiots keep buying the goods at increased prices for little return in functionality more for a vanity show.
Consumerism, product redundancy, excess packaging etc would be far more palatable if we recycled more. I've always thought that we've already got enough 'stuff'. If the stuff we didn't want was processed better to make stuff we do want, then we wouldn't have to chop down as many trees, mine as much minerals, bury and burn stuff.
Pistom said:
Let me make it clear that I feel I'm far from an eco zealot. I do feel it's somewhat hypocritical to be campaigning for sustainability whilst promoting throwing away perfectly useable items to replace them with new.
It's difficult not to throw this thread of course if I raise emotive subjects like ULEZ which has caused the scrappage of thousands of vehicles prematurely but cars themselves are becoming increasingly difficult to fix when they could be engineered otherwise.
If environment and climate change are so important then why are we not encouraged to maximise the life of things.
Am I wrong in concluding that environment and climate are used as justification for increased consumerism and more taxation?
I have a neighbour who has recently turned eco zealot (he used to be catholic) and I understand his beliefs and respect him more for the fact he still drives an old diesel which he intends to keep indefinitely as he feels that keeping that vehicle has environmental benefits over replacing it with one with lower emissions.
I hear that the world has just reached a new high for fossil fuel use.
How has that happened when we're being railroaded to ditch them through taxation and what seems like poorly thought out schemes.
Nail and head in two sentences. Follow the money not the words of government or their policies. It's difficult not to throw this thread of course if I raise emotive subjects like ULEZ which has caused the scrappage of thousands of vehicles prematurely but cars themselves are becoming increasingly difficult to fix when they could be engineered otherwise.
If environment and climate change are so important then why are we not encouraged to maximise the life of things.
Am I wrong in concluding that environment and climate are used as justification for increased consumerism and more taxation?
I have a neighbour who has recently turned eco zealot (he used to be catholic) and I understand his beliefs and respect him more for the fact he still drives an old diesel which he intends to keep indefinitely as he feels that keeping that vehicle has environmental benefits over replacing it with one with lower emissions.
I hear that the world has just reached a new high for fossil fuel use.
How has that happened when we're being railroaded to ditch them through taxation and what seems like poorly thought out schemes.
warp9 said:
Consumerism, product redundancy, excess packaging etc would be far more palatable if we recycled more. I've always thought that we've already got enough 'stuff'. If the stuff we didn't want was processed better to make stuff we do want, then we wouldn't have to chop down as many trees, mine as much minerals, bury and burn stuff.
Recycling in its current form is mostly a lie. The problem is just offshored, where it is illegally dumped or burned. Most of my stuff apart from glass and metal, which has a good chance of being processed in the UK, goes to landfill.The river cottage guy did programs on this with the BBC and petitioned Michael Gove to introduce a recycling tax on goods, so the cost of processing it properly was baked into the purchase price. That was years ago, obviously nothing has been done. Who is going to stick their head out and reduce demand like that?!
Edited by wyson on Saturday 22 June 12:37
Recycling does largely seem to be a lie as there's generally significantly more environmental cost in making individual things recyclable in the first place than making them last longer or repairable.
What good is a car with 95% recyclability if 100% of it is scrapped and has to be replaced by a completely new car?
Surely a car with a longer life in the first place would have a smaller environmental footprint.
What good is a car with 95% recyclability if 100% of it is scrapped and has to be replaced by a completely new car?
Surely a car with a longer life in the first place would have a smaller environmental footprint.
Really depends what you’re looking at. Things which can be recycled indefinitely are sustainable in themselves - metals, glass, minerals and metals used in batteries. Likewise things we can just make more of and which return to the environment from which they came when they rot or burn - wood, natural fibres, leather. The question then becomes whether recycling or remanufacturing them is sustainable, and that comes down largely to whether doing so consumes other finite resources. Recycling generally requires energy and globally a lot of energy generation is not sustainable. Fossil fuels are finite, and so is the amount of them we can burn without really screwing the climate. Farming can be sustainable, but often isn’t, and often has large energy inputs.
So making things last longer should save us energy and thus be more sustainable - except that some of those things we want to keep using use a lot more energy in use than modern replacements, and actually we’d be better off melting them down and making them into new things. And the fly in the ointment is that it’s often cheaper to dig up more stuff than to recycle the old materials.
I think we should try to make manufacturing impacts more transparent, and perhaps align them more to purchase costs. And perhaps make manufacturers support their goods for longer.
So making things last longer should save us energy and thus be more sustainable - except that some of those things we want to keep using use a lot more energy in use than modern replacements, and actually we’d be better off melting them down and making them into new things. And the fly in the ointment is that it’s often cheaper to dig up more stuff than to recycle the old materials.
I think we should try to make manufacturing impacts more transparent, and perhaps align them more to purchase costs. And perhaps make manufacturers support their goods for longer.
Doofus said:
Because the people making and selling stuff aren't compelled (legally, legislatively, commercially) towards sustainability.
Sustainable products cost more to make, and almost all retail is about racing to the bottom pricewise.
I have long had this hobbyhorse (which also applies to the car industry), which is that suppliers say "We're giving the customer what they want", whereas my attitude is "No, you're offering the customers something desirable, they buy it, and you justify it by saying that's what they wanted in the first place."
There's nothing that is an improvement over a 1.8 mpi 8V mk3 cavalier with a f16.5 gearbox, with its 3/4 hour cam belt change and a 40 minute clutch change. Sustainable products cost more to make, and almost all retail is about racing to the bottom pricewise.
I have long had this hobbyhorse (which also applies to the car industry), which is that suppliers say "We're giving the customer what they want", whereas my attitude is "No, you're offering the customers something desirable, they buy it, and you justify it by saying that's what they wanted in the first place."
Head gasket in 3 hours max.
wyson said:
Recycling in its current form is mostly a lie. The problem is just offshored, where it is illegally dumped or burned. Most of my stuff apart from glass and metal, which has a good chance of being processed in the UK, goes to landfill.
It really, really isn't a lie. Nor is it a problem.Recycling is a commodity that is being placed back into the supply chain. It has a financial value. Half is done via export. The only reason recycling in the UK ends up in the landfill is if it's contaminated with the wrong material. Overseas, some does get dumped. Sometimes for the same reason and sometimes because of the vagaries of commercial stability in developing nations. But it will still get recycled via informal recyclers that operate in those nations, picking out the valuable materials from the dumpsites to sell on.
Consider that the amount of your council tax that goes towards waste and related services is around £60 to £80 a year. To dump all of the waste each home produces in the UK would cost around £200 a year. The reason the council can charge less than this is because of the avoided disposal costs and revenue from the sale of the recyclable material.
It's not perfect by any means. But it is certainly not a lie.
What it isn't is the (or rather the only) solution.
What the OP is referring to is called the Circular Economy. In essence, what this describes is a situation where a material enters an economy and stays there. This requires the removal of material that will become waste from design of products. Or the reduction of that type material and using material from which it is easier to extract energy. Increased use of materials with higher levels if reusability and recyclability.
So taking the OP's example of the 9-year-old Citroen. It matters less that a car of that age is scrapped. What matters is the fact that almost every single part of that car can be extracted to its material parts, reprocessed and used again and that non recyclable materials are kept to an absolute minimum. That requires that the car is designed with this in mind. That requires that the design process is influenced by government policy, not in one country but in all the countries the car is sold.
That's the Circular Economy. And the fact that the Citroen achieves this shows that it exists and is working. But the fact that it is nowhere near as holistically applied as it needs to be demonstrates the glacial pace of institutional drivers towards sustainability around the world.
The problem we have in the UK and a few other countries, is that whilst Circular Economy is driven through practical need, it does overlap into the wider 'Net Zero' topic. The increasing share of political voice towards the right wing is risking this. Many right wing parties consider Net Zero to be, pardon the vernacular, a load of old b
ks and have pledged to either reduce it or bin it. Do that, and it vastly accelerates the depletion of raw materials and will rapidly increase the cost of almost everything. And because the industries around Net Zero have grown to huge levels, that industry will suffer, lessening the productivity of the nations that have previously embraced it.Either way, as consumers, it seems there's little we can do other demand more sustainable options, by making choices on what you buy to favour those that do. But actually, this is the most powerful thing that you can do. Companies respond to demand. Governments respond to popular opinion (sometimes).
(I operate in Behaviour Change Communications for the Solid Waste and Environmental Sectors, UK and Internationally - so ask away if you have any questions)
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff