

An Effort To Bury A Throwaway Culture One Repair At A Time - olegious
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/09/world/europe/amsterdam-tries-to-change-culture-with-repair-cafes.html

======
ctdonath
I just bought a used sewing machine. It cost less than a new one. It's 98
years old, and with a minimum of care will last another 98. It was built to
last.

This notion of "bury the throwaway culture one repair at a time" treats
symptoms, not roots: there is nothing persuading manufacturers to make stuff
which will last. Should the movement take hold, manufacturers may very well
respond by making stuff even _cheaper_ , as the effort to make things so
inexpensive it utterly undermines the movement is easier than making things
robust and durable. I appreciate the movement's intentions, but think they
should seek means of persuading production of durable goods, not eeking
another 20% of life out of something having a very short lifespan to start
with.

Occurs to me that the only durable products made today are firearms. Ironic.

~~~
winestock
That reminds me of the Linksys WRT54G. Some people predicted that it would
disrupt ISPs because it was so hackable.

[http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2004/pulpit_20040527_0004...](http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/2004/pulpit_20040527_000456.html)

The manufacturer responded by replacing the Linux firmware with a proprietary
real-time operating system. That allowed them to use hardware that was less
powerful than the original both in terms of electricity consumption and
computational performance. Furthermore, most people have better things to do
than reprogramming their wi-fi routers.

Reading Cringley's predictions in that article is cringeworthy.

~~~
SkyMarshal
I just bought the WRT54GL a couple months ago, after suffering through several
newer model routers the previous year.

Needless to say, it's brilliant. Fast, stable, consistent (for a change). And
not only in my anecdotal experience - it still gets higher average reviews on
Newegg and Amazon than any other modern router, despite being an almost decade
old tech product.

It may not have met Cringley's predictions, but it is a really interesting
case study in what years of software optimization on stable, robust hardware
can achieve, vs the competing model of throwaway software on frequently
updated hardware.

------
dhx

      When Mr. van den Akker put the iron back together,
      two parts were left over — no matter, he said,
      they were probably not that important. He plugged
      the frayed cord into a socket. A green light went
      on. Rusty water poured out. Finally, it began to
      steam.
    

The risk is significant and far outweighs any benefit gained.

A classic example of poor risk assessment.

~~~
noonespecial
"Nothing is allowed unless its completely perfect" is a dangerous attitude.
Its made a lot of people homeless, closed a ton of the soup kitchens and
shelters those homeless might have sought refuge in and IMHO prevented a great
deal of innovation from seeing the light of day.

Its possible that this pervasive bit of anal retentiveness has made some(1)
individuals marginally safer, but its super dangerous to societies.

(1) Except for the aforementioned homeless. They're not safer.

~~~
dhx
Would you:

* sleep on a heavily soiled mattress made of highly flammable material

* dress your baby in highly flammable second-hand sleepwear

* consume unsanitary meat that has been sitting out in the heat for too long

* feed your family a diet of donated junk food including chocolate, biscuits, chips and frozen pizzas

* give your teenage daughter a second hand hair dryer with a frayed electrical lead exposing live wires

* wear bright fluorescent green clown-like clothing that has been collecting dust in someone's attic for 20 years

* allow your children to play with lead-painted toys that pose a choke/suffocation hazard

What makes it acceptable to purchase a brand new electrical appliance and
dispose of the old, worn and unsafe one to the less fortunate? What message
does it send?

Charities are forced at great expense to dispose of huge amounts of junk
similar to the items listed above. It's not just a case of charities looking
out for everyone's safety and well-being. To a large extent it's also a desire
not to insult those in need by offering junk that the rest of the world
wouldn't want to purchase and use.

The rule of thumb that charities use is: _donate items that you would purchase
yourself or gift to your friends and family_.

~~~
excuse-me
Would you dress your child in last years baby clothes now that the regulations
have changed?

We had this panic here - everybody had to throw out their Nalgene water
bottles because they contain PBA and it MIGHT leach out AND it might be a
health hazard - although we had been using them for 20years

~~~
bandy
The BPA problem (and hence the Nalgene problem) was discovered because it was
interrupting people's research on other things due to BPA leeching out of
polycarbonate lab ware, causing differences between cell cultures grown in the
plastic and those grown in traditional glass petri dishes when they were
supposed to be behaving in an identical manner.
[http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/132/the-real-story-on-
bp...](http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/132/the-real-story-on-
bpa.html?page=1%252C1%2C0) <http://suss.stanford.edu/blog/?p=4119> That's Real
Science.

If you'd like to dig it out for yourself, the search terms are: Stanford
cancer bpa

(Yes, I'm well-aware that studies sponsored by chemical companies find no
problem whatsoever. Quelle surprise.)

~~~
snowwrestler
It's a long way from the cell culture to the human being when it comes to
pharmaceutical effects. That is one of the main reasons it costs so much to
develop new drugs--most compounds that produce promising effects in vitro are
indistinguishable from placebo during human trials (if they even get that
far).

The pharmaceutical industry actually tested BPA as an estrogen replacement
decades ago, and did not adopt it because BPA did not produce measurable
results. Today most of the BPA warnings are based on extrapolations from cell
cultures. But based on the history of drug development such extrapolations are
rarely valid. This is why U.S. regulatory agencies have not banned BPA; there
just hasn't any solid evidence yet that BPA harms humans at the incidental
levels of exposure most people experience.

------
bobsy
> When Mr. van den Akker put the iron back together, two parts were left over
> — no matter, he said, they were probably not that important.

A week later the owner of the iron was electrocuted. Just kidding.

The culture of discard and buy another really comes about from items being
pretty cheap and the repair costs being pretty high. I personally have this
biased opinion that a repaired item is likely to break again. This is almost
certainly wrong but it was an idea I was brought up with and is difficult to
shake.

I really like what these people doing. I would certainly get more items
repaired if it could be done cheaply. A repair shop as a place to gather is
cool.

I do think though there is a limit to what is worth repairing. Things like
hoovers, irons etc are worth repairing. Technology really doesn't move that
fast and paying £20 to have a hoover patched up is far better than buying a
new one.

Computers though. If they fail within the warranty you are already covered. If
they fail after that then it really depends what the computer cost. If brought
a computer for £3-400 you may find the repair cost is 50% of what you paid for
it. In this case there is a strong argument that this £200 could go towards a
higher spec computer.

I have a laptop which overheats, it isn't worth much but it is - or should be
- pretty handy. The cost to investigate the fault would cost me £75. This is
before a repair is made. I was told if the problem is what he thought it might
be then the cost to repair would be a £100 on top of that. In the end I just
brought a new netbook for £300.

I have a little problem with my iMac. The harddrive is faulty. It has some bad
sectors or something which causes programs to crash. Do you know tricky it is
to replace the harddrive of an iMac? Its ridiculous. To be honest pretty much
all Apple devices are terribly inconvenient to repair. Its a shame that one of
the worlds biggest companies isn't doing more to prevent consumer waste.

~~~
gurkendoktor
> The culture of discard and buy another really comes about from items being
> pretty cheap and the repair costs being pretty high.

Not necessarily. A big part of it is simply our broken economic system. Many,
many, many items are made to break.[1]

I hope we start to rent more things as a service instead of paying for them.
If we paid a flat fee every month to have our houses lighted, I bet our light
bulbs would be durable as heck. Obviously this is not going to be feasible for
a while.

But why can't we pay a flat fee to have a usable Mac? Apple stores can be
found all around the world. The incentive for Apple would be to use durable
hardware and write highly optimized, a little more portable software.

I think gov'ts should force companies to think more about the long term by
enforcing a longer minimum warranty for hardware, and force vendors to release
security updates for at least 10 years. (All 32-bit Macs will have _zero_
professional use cases once Apple stops patching 10.6. Meanwhile, my mom has
owned her XP Word machine for almost a decade.)

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence>

~~~
chernevik
Building something suitable for repair requires attention to fundamental
structure -- design, materials, construction. All of that has costs. I have
shoes a decade old that look brand new and will look so three decades hence.
I'm wearing a boot of a type that will last forever and could climb Mount
Washington or attend a Fortune 500 board meeting. Every time I replace running
shoes I curse their irreparability and 6 month life span. But a solid shoe
costs three or four times a comparable cheaper shoe and need annual
maintenance costing about 10-15% of initial cost.

I have one fountain pen that's twenty-five years old. Pricey, cost about 100x
a disposable ballpoint, but it's charged by ink bottles and has now outlasted
500 of those things.

Or t-shirts, you can now get woolen ones that last for years, can be worn
several days without washing, and are warmer or cooler as needed. But each is
20x the cost of cotton alternative, and they last best if washed in an
expensive detergent and air-dried.

Now I think these are good choices economically, and also socially and even
spiritually. But I can see why others might not like those costs. Buying stuff
worth of repair is a form of savings. It imposes some new maintenance
knowledge and chores. And it forces some long-term decisions, if you want to
change the style message of your shoes every year then this is not the route
for you.

The culture of repair and retain is already around us and has always been. The
question is the proportion of the population willing to pay the cost and
acquire the knowledge to access it.

~~~
gurkendoktor
I know what you are saying about knowledge. I want to break out of the
terrible world of throw-away razorblades, but it requires some googling (and
living in the right country).

One obvious item where I have made the wrong decision twice are bloody Eastpak
backpacks. They have a gazillion years of warranty on everything except the
zippers. Now both backpacks' zippers are broken and I am shocked that
absolutely noone is willing to repair them, even if you'd pay them most of the
€90 that the bag originally cost.

The advantage of a service model for computers, cars etc., would be to avoid
the huge one-time cost.

~~~
gurkendoktor
> Eastpak

Ohmygod, I accidentally repeated what seems to be an urban myth in Germany.
Eastpak DOES repair broken zippers - unlike all the independent repair shops
that I have asked.

Grandparent poster, thanks for making me actually google this!

------
gouranga
Good for them.

I'm a firm believer that _everything_ can be repaired cost effectively. You
just have to know what you are doing, know when to give up, know how to spot a
lemon and start from the right end of the problem. That is the art.

The main trick is to start with the broken item, not an item that you paid
full price for and broke...

i.e. I don't mean buying a $1000 item new and when it breaks spend $200 on
fixing it.

I mean buying a $100 broken item to start with and spending $200 fixing it,
resulting in not spending that extra $700 on the new item in the first place.

Despite the cost of repair in cash and time, the gain usually runs in favour
of your own time, satisfaction and knowledge. It also makes you less of a
slave to the credit facilities which when you consider interest, results in a
lot of time spend earning to pay back.

I will repair anything and everything rather than buy new.

My latest win: Sony Bravia 26EX smart OLED TV. Paid 25GBP as it was completely
dead and just out of warranty. 30 mins diagnostics with a Fluke multimeter
(which cost me 10GBP that I repaired) pointed to duff PSU. 30 mins on the
Tektronix scope (which cost me 30GBP that I repaired) pointed to a problem
with a VRM. Replaced VRM in PSU from Farnell order (12GBP incl delivery) - was
a bit fiddly as it was an SMD component. Works fine now and the kids have a
nice TV.

Also don't buy any old consumer junk. If you can't remove the battery it's not
likely to want to be repaired (yes you Apple).

~~~
digitalsushi
So you're some sort of electrical engineer, then. You need to factor in all
the time, energy, and resources it took you to get to this point of self-
sufficiency.

For me to fix a dead TV safely, I'd need a few semesters of college or a solid
month of shadowing an expert, if I was just interested in TV repair alone. Or
just pay you the 700 dollars to do it.

~~~
gouranga
Well yes I admit that but I did the same before I even started the degree and
I knew virtually nothing back then...

And I wouldn't charge you $700 to fix it. I tend to do favours like that for
cider, swap a few books or mowing the lawn for me.

Not every "transaction" needs a wadge of cash changing hands.

~~~
mahyarm
Finding people willing to do it for $50 of goods or casually is fairly
difficult by itself.

~~~
gouranga
Not in the UK it's not. Perhaps it's a cultural difference.

~~~
mahyarm
Also it's a matter of ability and free time, most people don't have a nack to
repair electronics. And if they do, they tend to be busy people.

~~~
gouranga
I tend to find that they work the least as they have highly paid skilled
positions where they do a short week.

------
_delirium
The participatory/social aspect of this is pretty interesting beyond repairs.
It seems like a plausible low-barrier route to learning something more about
how things work, by getting some help from someone who knows how to
disassemble and explain the innards of a particular item.

But, seems like it'd work better for older stuff, unfortunately. A lot of
newer stuff is just not made to be dis/reassembled or to have parts replaced,
so it's much more difficult to do. I tried to repair a toaster recently, and
as far as I can tell you can't even _open_ it without some serious hard-to-
reverse effort, because unlike older toasters, the housing isn't closed with
removable screws, but is stamped/crimped together somehow.

~~~
cschneid
I bought a clothes steamer a while back (Jiffy Steamer), and I was pleasantly
surprised that it had a full circuit diagram and component list included in
the instruction book. I can take that sucker apart, fix things, and put it
back together.

(well, maybe not me, but somebody could).

I am willing to buy more products like that. Where do I find them?

------
DanBC
cstross mentioned the extraordinary cost of stuff in a recent post. A pair of
jeans was fantastically expensive. People had no option but to repair things.

> _Studies of retail pricing indicate that, after correcting for inflation, a
> good pair of workmans' trousers -- jeans, in other words -- would have cost
> the equivalent of roughly $400 in 2001 dollars in 1901. A reasonable quality
> man's suit would have cost the equivalent of $2-3000._

I get annoyed by jumpers[2] that get holes after a year or two, and try to
darn or patch them. I'd be really angry if that jumper cost me £400.

See also semi-disposable scandinavian furniture. It sort of looks okay, and it
works alright so long as you don't move it. But a bit of solid wood is nicer
(and probably better for the environment) than chipboard and veneer, and will
last a lot longer, but is a lot more expensive.

I'm not sure society will be comfortable with children that cannot afford to
move out (or who will be without almost any possessions) when that same
society cannot cope with light bulbs that need a few seconds to warm up.

[1] (<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3934728>)

[2] sweater? A woollen garment with sleeves and not buttons up the front.

~~~
brc
I get very annoyed by clothes and shoes that do not last. I'm lucky to get a
couple of years out of shirts and shorts. The only thing that seems to last is
levis jeans - I've been faithfully buying them for decades and the style goes
before the fabric does.

As for disposable furniture - it's frustrating as it deterioates quickly if
moved around. I learnt to make my own furniture. Very rewarding but
painstakingly slow. But then, if you plan to keep something for 50 years,
what's a couple of months to build it? Everything I have built myself (with
help from my Dad, who hands down the knowledge and tools) is still in perfect
condition. That's because it's made properly in the first place, from quality
materials.

I've also taken up my own car maintenance. Cars are big complex devices, and
debugging one can be fun if you know where to start. Modern mechanics can't
possibly keep up with all the various models and if they can't diagnose
something in 30 minutes they won't, and just start replacing parts at random.
Armed with a home data port program, an analytical eye and plenty of internet
research, it's possible to track down problems yourself for a fraction of the
cost.

~~~
namdnay
Re the levis - I always find the front right hand pocket (and especially the
"mini pocket" inside) starts fraying after a year or two. Maybe it's because
that's where I put my keys

~~~
Lewton
Get a key pouch!.. 10 dollar item that has saved me many many pants ever since
I got it

------
vinayan3
A lot of people I know simply throw away things. It hurts sometimes. However,
sometimes it is tough given that technology simply becomes old so fast.

I do think that there are certain electronics that can last along time. In
particular, it annoys me when people buy LCD TVs and one year down the road
throw it away because it stopped working. The manufactures give limited
warranty and suggest to buy another one. I purposely bought a TV with a much
longer warranty, three years. It did cost 3x as much as a cheaper one from
costco. It does look wonderful and function nearly 4 years after I bought it.

~~~
wladimir
Right, it's a matter of perception and quickly changing "fashion". Many people
regard devices of a year old already as very old. So they choose in favor of
replacing it, even if it is a minimal problem that is easy (and cheap) to fix.

I do suspect that financial pressure (due to increasing resource prices) will
cause this to change around in the near future, and make people hold on to
their devices for longer. In some circles, like described in the article, I'm
already seeing this happen. Also, many skilled people are out of a job and
have time enough to do basic repairs for each other.

Hopefully this will reduce the e-waste problem...

------
wtracy
The root cause of the "throwaway culture" seems to be the assembly line: Stuff
becomes cheap when it can be produced in a series of simple, non-varying
steps.

Stuff just doesn't break in a consist way. If every repair were identical, we
could fix stuff on an assembly line, and we would no longer constantly run
into ridiculous situations where it costs less to buy a whole new widgit than
to repair your old one.

~~~
hencq
Yes and on top of that a lot of products are "designed for assembly" which
often means using parts that 'click' together, instead of using screws. This
means they're fast to assemble, but almost impossible to take apart again,
making repairs overly difficult and costly.

~~~
maxerickson
Indeed. There was even a "Design for Manufacturability" elective in my ME
undergrad. I don't recall seeing a countervailing "Design for Serviceability".

I think another factor is the inordinate price sensitivity of the aggregate
consumer.

------
moylan
i always regret that i didn't take my parents valve radio when the house was
cleared and sold over a decade ago. it was bulky, inefficient but worked
perfectly. had a lot of fond memories of that radio as a kid. they got it as a
wedding present in the early sixties. the valves would eventually need
replacing but there are still places selling the parts if you know where to
go.

but my favourite bike as a kid in the late 70s and early 80s was a bsa bike
that had been built in the early forties. that thing was a tank. it's probably
still out there in use every day. completely indestrucible with a little light
maintenance.

now however things are not built to last. ignoring electronics or computers
which date fast. casettes, vcrs. analog mobiles 8bit, 16bit and now even 32bit
computers are edging towards obsolescence for desktop use. a crappy tin opener
still needed for those tins still sold without a prestressed ring pull will
die in less than a decade. the bullhead tin opener in my parents kitchen seems
to have been one of the first types sold in the late 19th century.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:BullOpener.png>

i like to think that growing up with ancient hardware gave me an appreciation
for well designed and easy to maintain items. i try to avoid flashy
insubstantial items.

------
sedachv
There's a few comments here about old appliances and the cliche that "back
then," things were built to last. Barring contrary statistical evidence,
sentiments like those can largely be attributed to survivorship bias:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias>

------
jpeg_hero
It's entirely possible that the extra material required to make items that can
be repaired, wastes more material than making objects that are "disposable"

Modern manufactured goods have -huge- volumes (there are a lot of people on
this planet) and low failure rates.

If serviceability takes more material, it will probably be more waste, than
otherwise.

------
specialist
Another facet to consumption culture is the cost of ownership. After a tipping
point, your stuff owns you.

Having stuff and clutter makes me feel anxious.

I've been unloading everything that's not essential. eg, I only used my
microwave to heat water for tea. And it was pain in the ass to clean within
and around. So it went to the curb, snatched up within minutes.

------
alexkearns
I think buying new things is great, not only in that you get something new and
shiny to play with, but it also has great social benefits, stimulating
economic growth, rewarding entrepreneurism and people who create things, and
creating jobs.

So I applaud the throwaway culture that loads of people seem to complain
about. We need more of it!

~~~
JumpCrisscross
See: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window>.

If person A throws away his widget which could have been repaired for $2 and
buys a new, identical widget for $10 his balance sheet shows $10 of assets
(scenario A). If person B repairs his widget, he now has a widget worth $10
plus the $8 cash he saved - his balance sheet shows $18 of assets. Thus,
person A destroyed $8 of assets by behaving irrationally/inefficiently.

One may say person A's frenzied purchasing of widgets drives R&D dollars into
the development of better widgets. A good counter-argument is that it was more
important to develop things other than widgets and that by focusing so much on
accelerating widget development scenario A forsook technological progress in
more productive areas.

We saw this happen with the construction industry across the developed world
siphoning dollars and talent away from other areas that would have produced
more long-term benefit.

~~~
alexkearns
I take what you say but I don't think that the term "throwaway culture" is to
do with throwing away broken things. It is more to do with throwing away old
or unfashionable things.

And actually this desire for better, shinier versions of existing things
drives creativity, forcing companies to innovate and endlessly create newer
and shinier things. I think this process of renewal and innovation is
generally a good thing, rewarding creative people.

The downside, you could argue, is in this scenario all the cash goes into
shiny new products, rather than some boring but vital product or services.
There, I suppose, is where the government comes in.

------
specialist
I'd love someone to make a tank of a laser printer. Like just clone an HP
LaserJet 6 (the pinnacle). Make the internals open source, the paper trays
modular, and boom.

Most printers are sold on price. But I think a small niche player selling
durable printers with low consumable costs could do well.

------
Teapot
I'm _pissed_ when things brake. But: Repairing things is an opportunity to
save your own money. And to save your own planet. And possibly explore and
learn something new, or at least harvest some spare parts. And just enjoy the
fun of disassembling stuff.

------
noonespecial
Get these guys a Rep-Rap and a connection to thingverse...

