Front, Reduce, Reuse, Sustainability
Why we Should Only Buy Products with True Value
It’s without question that today the more we choose to purchase the more waste that is inevitably created as a result, with many of us often buying for short-term desires, not the long-term true value. Either way, one way or another all products fundamentally end with their disposal, whether it be disposed of through general waste or recycled to the best of their ability. Accordingly, to force real change to reduce waste we need to re-evaluate purchases and purchase with sustainability in mind.
As a guide to be sustainable we should attempt to follow the known rules of Reduce, Reuse, Recycle to try and limit overconsumption, but as you will see this is not always easy.
1st REDUCE
Reduce or Eliminate the use of materials.
Making the choice not to purchase at all is ultimately the most environmental choice any of us can make.
2nd REUSE
Suggests getting the most use out of a product we acquire over the long-term, whether it be yourself or others.
The goal is to ultimately extend the value and functionality consumers get from a product before replacing it with something else.
Other points such as repurposing etc, fit in this category,
3rd RECYCLING
Once earlier points or further reuse option is no longer open
Disposing of it in the most environmental means possible by separating and arranging the materials or components to be made into something else.
Why this is challenging?
In the world we live in abiding by these environmental fundamentals is not simple because knowingly or unknowingly this is what many brands are wanting us to avoid by manufacturing, marketing, and selling new things. Brands and manufacturers across the world function through innovation and creativity, releasing products that amaze and desire that are 1. Not often a necessity to us, and 2. often developed without sustainability in mind. In many ways that is what marketing departments around the world do, tapping into our wants, desires, and perceived needs to sell us something that in reality we could live without. And, thanks to the scale of manufacturing, at great prices. This is often the case for some electronics and fast fashion.
Are products deliberately being made to be replaced?
There have even been claims of some products deliberately built not to last the test of time, rather for a limited lifespan to force another purchase down the line. This has been termed “built to fail” and is not necessarily recent. According to the BBC manufacturers of light bulbs in the 1920s colluded to make light-bulbs disposable by reducing their lifetimes to 1000 hours, while also highlighting the need to completely repurchase and replace ink-cartridges rather than refill them.
See the article, Here’s the truth about the ‘planned obsolescence’ of tech – BBC Future
More recently in 2017, Apple was forced to apologize when it was proven they were slowing down iPhone 6’s without consent, claiming this was done to maintain functionality to preserve old batteries. You can use your own judgment on that one.
Apple apologises for slowing down older iPhones with ageing batteries | Technology | The Guardian
In terms of fast fashion, although not necessarily built to fail, it’s easily argued that they are not built to last, and for some consumers considered only relevant for a limited time due to perceived trend changes. In either case, this could result in a repurchase later down the line.
Developing Products Sustainably in the Future
There are ongoing discussions regarding the circular economy, whereby products are designed and manufactured in ways that allow for all parts to be recycled without the need for raw materials or waste that goes unused. This would demand that products are easier to be disassembled and thus designed accordingly. Should we as a society wish to reduce waste in the longer term, this will likely become inevitable, but there are insufficient pushes from consumers or governments to force this change to date.
Although not truly circular, there have been talks of modular mobile phones, where a newer, better component becomes available, say a new camera or faster processor, a user can choose to replace these and keep the overall product the same. To date, there’s no truly modular solution, but FAIRPHONE is the closest available. The phone, made out of a percentage of recycled materials comes with interchangeable modules for cameras and speakers, etc, allowing easy upgrading and self-repairing. Although it’s a start, it remains to be seen whether major electronic manufacturers will make such a switch.
How Can You Play Role to Reduce Waste?
In reality, it’s true that we cannot begin to understand how the world will change or exactly how we will come to value future products. In the 1990’s you wouldn’t have expected people to own smartphones with the marvel of those we carry today. Accordingly, the products we give true value to today are different from what we gave such value to yesterday, and new products can ultimately eliminate the value we had for products in previous years. Think the VCR, then the DVD player, even the Bluray player (already), all now often replaced by streaming services.
That being said, we should all try and purchase products only that give us true value, real functionality, and perhaps desire through repeated use over the long term. This should mean taking a step back and briefly analyzing, rethinking, and reconsidering your purchases, including its disposal before spending the money. Avoid buying something on a whim.
How can you re-evaluate purchases to reduce waste? Ask yourself:
Do you really need this product?
Is there anything I or my family have that performs the same purpose sufficiently?
Will I use this for mainly years to come and get true value long-term from it?
Can I dispose/repurpose or recycle this product easily or will it likely create unnecessary waste?
How Can Society Improve?
Fundamentally, it demands the government and consumer support to really make vast changes. With regulations and agendas created to prevent unsustainable products or products with no circularity or limited use of sustainable materials in place to stay in the mainstream.
We need to ask ourselves, is it right to continue to champion products for the functionality of the product itself, or should we champion it in how it functions in a broader sense of the circular economy. This gives cause to those reviewing products on media; TV, online, etc to give a sustainability factor to the products in question.
Moving forward as consumers and society and enacting a positive green agenda we need to:
We should all demand more from manufacturers, prioritizing those with more sustainable credentials.
Champion and give value to products where ease of recycling or environmental disposal is factored in from the very beginning.
Demand manufactures products utilize elements of the circular economy, preventing the use of raw materials where possible,
Prioritize and give incentives for manufacturers with more sustainable credentials.
Champion those which have long lifespans could potentially be extended, but ultimately when reach their end can be made into something new.
