 |
| Image: Pixabay |
The ever-growing mountain of electronic waste (e-waste) is a major environmental concern, contributing to pollution and resource depletion. Electronic devices add significantly to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions with their production, use, and improper disposal. Various US-based tech companies persist with fast-paced cycles of product innovation in the quest for market share and shareholder value. To combat the consequent environmental degradation, a shift towards a circular economy – where products are designed for repair, reuse, and refurbishment – is crucial. This policy statement proposes a two-pronged approach: enacting Right to Repair legislation and implementing Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) programs in the United States. The policies incentivize manufacturers to design repairable devices and hold them accountable for end-of-life management, ultimately reducing e-waste and its associated emissions. They are intended to help the US achieve the Paris Agreement 1.5 degree target by 2030.
Circular Economy Principles to Tackle E-Waste
Our current "throw-away culture" is unsustainable. Planned obsolescence practices, coupled with the difficulty and expense of repair, incentivize frequent replacements, thereby intensifying the e-waste problem. According to the US Public Interest Research Group, the United States alone discards an estimated 6.9 million tons annually, and only 17.4% of it is recycled properly. The relentless stream of discarded electronics contributes heavily to pollution. It has detrimental environmental consequences and burdens consumers with the high costs of constantly acquiring new devices.
According to a survey by Windows Report, 67% of people attempt home electronics repairs. This suggests that there is already a growing need for more accessible and widespread home repairs. With new devices becoming slimmer and using fewer components, repairs become increasingly complicated for consumers. The lack of readily available repair options often leads to the premature disposal of functional electronics, further contributing to the e-waste crisis.
This policy statement prioritizes three key circular economy principles: product longevity, repair and reuse, and responsible end-of-life management. By designing electronics with repairability in mind, using modular components, and ensuring readily available spare parts, companies can empower consumers to extend the lifespan of their devices through repair. Holding manufacturers accountable for the collection and proper recycling of their products at end-of-life ensures responsible disposal and minimizes the environmental impact of e-waste. To enact this transition to a circular economy for electronics, the policy statement proposes two key policies: Right to Repair legislation and an Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) program.
Right To Repair
Right to Repair legislation mandates manufacturers to provide readily available spare parts, diagnostic tools, and repair manuals for a designated period after a product is sold. Manufacturers are required to design devices with repairable components and user-friendly repair instructions. This allows consumers to extend device lifespans, reduces the need for frequent replacements and associated production emissions, stimulates the growth of a domestic repair service industry, and lowers overall e-waste sent to landfills. By fostering a culture of repairability and promoting sustainable consumption, Right to Repair encourages economic empowerment and stimulates innovation in product design and repair technologies.
Extended Producer Responsibility
Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) is a policy framework that holds manufacturers accountable for managing the disposal of their products. Producers must finance and execute programs for collecting, recycling, and disposing of covered products. EPR aims to internalize the environmental costs associated with product disposal and encourage producers to adopt more sustainable practices. By shifting the burden of waste management from taxpayers and municipalities to producers, EPR incentivizes manufacturers to design products for recyclability, creates a domestic market for recycled materials, and fosters innovation in electronics recycling technologies. It typically involves producers paying fees to a Producer Responsibility Organization (PRO) or developing producer responsibility plans (Sustainable Packaging Coalition). EPR regulations vary but generally seek to ensure that producers bear the environmental and financial costs of their products throughout their lifecycle.
Current Instruments
In the United States, there are few instruments in place for advancing these policies:
- The Environmental Protection Agency has a framework for electronic waste management, including certifications for electronic recyclers, and National Strategy for Electronics Stewardship (NSES). The NSES outlines recommendations for sustainable electronics management in the United States. It aims to incentivize environmentally preferable product design, enhance research and technology development, and improve domestic and international electronics recycling.
- A handful of manufacturers operate take back programs, such as Apple and Microsoft. However, restrictions on factors like condition, age, and model can inhibit a return on a device (OceanTech). In order for take back programs to be effective, they must be much more widespread and federally mandated.
- The Right to Repair movement has gained momentum in the US, with states such as California and New York implementing their own legislation. California's Fair Repair Act, effective July 1, 2024, requires manufacturers to provide parts, manuals, and tools for a broad range of electronic and appliance products, excluding game consoles (Builtin). Similarly, New York's Digital Fair Repair Act, in effect since July 2023, mandates manufacturers to make diagnostic tools, repair information, and parts readily available for most digital electronic equipment (Builtin). These pioneering laws represent significant strides in the Right to Repair movement, working towards a more sustainable electronics landscape. However, the implementation of these laws in just a few states is not enough. Strong federal legislative action is required for implementation in all 50 states.
2025-2029 Timeline
Implementing a comprehensive Right to Repair and EPR program requires a phased approach. In the first two years, Right to Repair legislation should be enacted at the federal level, establishing clear standards for repairable design and parts availability. Subsequently, an EPR program should be developed and implemented, including the establishment of a national collection infrastructure for e-waste. In years three and four, consumer incentives, such as tax breaks or rebates, should be implemented to encourage repair and the purchase of refurbished electronics.
Funding mechanisms for these programs include EPR fees manufacturers pay into a central fund such as a PRO based on the volume and type of electronics they produce and government allocation of a portion of EPR fees for developing and enforcing regulations, researching advancements in e-waste processing technologies, and conducting public awareness campaigns.
When it comes to actually passing the legislation, there are two tools that could be beneficial. In the United States, the budget reconciliation process and executive orders can be effective for advancing regulatory agendas. Leveraging these mechanisms can expedite the enactment of crucial policies aimed at introducing circular economic practices. Budget reconciliation is a special process that is used to advance high priority fiscal legislation, by exempting it from Senate filibuster (CBPP). As the 2024 presidential elections approach, it is important to consider how the next administration will make pivotal decisions towards the 2030 Paris Agreement goals. Advocates can work with lawmakers to include provisions for repairability standards in budget reconciliation bills. This approach simplifies the legislative process by bypassing the need for bipartisan support, making it an attractive option for advancing key reforms in the face of a potential new administration with a different leading party. Executive Orders present another powerful tool for advancing sustainability and consumer rights in the electronics sector. By leveraging the authority vested in the President, executive orders can direct federal agencies to prioritize sustainability in their practices. This would mandate the purchase of electronics exclusively from manufacturers that adhere to Right to Repair and Extended Producer Responsibility initiatives.
Potential Drawbacks
While the Right to Repair and EPR programs offer significant environmental and economic benefits, potential drawbacks must also be considered. These include potentially higher electronics prices due to manufacturers needing to offset the costs of parts production, increased e-waste generation if more components are used (though proper recycling infrastructure can mitigate this), and energy inefficiency of older devices (though advancements in energy-efficient components can address this). According to Brittanica, a common criticism for Right to Repair is that underskilled technicians may perform repairs incorrectly, putting users in danger. Manufacturers advocate for their certified technicians to perform repairs to prevent safety risks, and potential intellectual property violations. Advocates for Right to Repair argue that it is a “non-infringing use of the IP-protected components of the products (WIPO).
Moving Forward
By implementing a comprehensive Right to Repair and EPR program, the US can achieve a significant and lasting impact. Environmental benefits include reducing e-waste generation, minimizing environmental pollution from improper disposal, and decreasing the environmental footprint associated with electronics production. Economic benefits include stimulating the domestic repair industry, creating jobs, and potentially lowering overall electronics costs for consumers. These policies enable consumers to take control of their devices and promote more responsible consumption habits. Circular economic practices present a powerful opportunity to combat the growing e-waste crisis and transition towards a more sustainable electronics sector - building a future where technology thrives alongside environmental responsibility.
Sources
Gisonna, Nicholas. “Right to Repair | History, Controversies, and Facts.” Encyclopedia Britannica, 15 Aug. 2023, www.britannica.com/topic/right-to-repair.
IanS. “Weighing the Pros and Cons of Manufacturer Takeback Programs.” OceanTech, 19 Apr. 2021, www.oceantech.com/manufacturer-takeback-programs.
Introduction to the Guide for EPR Proposals. Sustainable Packaging Coalition, epr.sustainablepackaging.org.
“National Strategy for Electronics Stewardship (NSES) | US EPA.” US EPA, 15 June 2023, www.epa.gov/smm-electronics/national-strategy-electronics-stewardship-nses.
Right to Repair 2023 Legislation. 12 Oct. 2023, www.ncsl.org/technology-and-communication/right-to-repair-2023-legislation.
Right to Repair: Making Repair Easier and More Appealing to Consumers | News | European Parliament. www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/press-room/20240419IPR20590/right-to-repair-makin g-repair-easier-and-more-appealing-to-consumers.
The Right to Repair: Recent Developments in the USA. www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine_digital/en/2023/article_0023.html.
Turiceanu, Vlad. “What You Need to Know About the Right to Repair Act in 2024.” Built In, 9 Jan. 2024, builtin.com/articles/right-to-repair-act#.
Comments
Post a Comment