Consumers may need help making wise choices that save time and money, as Bo Ingerstam from the Swedish consumer organisation Konsumentkraft once said, ‘No one wants to get sick and no one wants to be cheated,’ but how can we tackle the fact that industries have systematically built planned obsolescence into their products?
Planned obsolescence is probably the biggest systematic fraud against consumers. Freelance journalist Bertil Janson wrote an opinion piece on the Råd & Rön (Advice & Information) website about printers that break down, which can be repaired by private individuals with the help of instructions on YouTube instead of being replaced by new ones from consumer electronics stores.
Twenty years ago, a senior executive at the Electrolux Group told me that the company had invested £10 million in research to limit the lifespan of refrigerators to 10 years. When my refrigerator broke down, I checked the receipt. Exactly 10 years had passed since I bought it in the shop!
At the time of publication, I was not familiar with the concept of planned obsolescence, but called it a ‘built-in expiry date’. The end result is the same. Products stop working one day and consumers are expected to throw them away and buy new ones.
The purpose of built-in expiry dates is obvious. Product turnover must increase. Consumers must be forced to buy new products more often. It should not be worthwhile to send broken products to repair shops. Repairing a refrigerator can cost £500, so most people choose to buy a new one.
In another case, my washing machine broke down. The motor worked, but the drum did not rotate. I realised that the drive belt must have broken. I was right. A local repair shop was able to order the correct drive belt, and I was able to attach it easily without needing a technician. That was six months ago. The washing machine still works perfectly. The drive belt cost £5.
There is a deeper aspect to planned obsolescence, which is what Daniel Kjellberg, editor-in-chief and CEO of Råd & Rön, describes as ‘long-term sustainable consumption, both for our own wallets and for the planet we are leaving behind’.
If we accept that products have built-in expiry dates that serve the profit interests of industry, we are ignoring sustainable consumption and the natural resources and energy that are wasted as a result of planned obsolescence.
Could the reason for this ignorance be traced back to the fact that all environmental work in the last decade has basically been about carbon dioxide and a related debate that in the popular press often blames people, cars and cows, but never the industry’s planned obsolescence?
Sweden needs a strong consumer movement and a logical climate and environmental movement that addresses industry-driven, systematic, and planned obsolescence. Built-in expiry dates must be stopped.
Torbjörn Sassersson, Bachelor of Environmental Science, publicist
