I wonder where the biggest opportunities are to get people reusing and repairing their things rather than buying new ones.
It's satisfying, usually functionally-equivalent and cheaper once you know where or how to get it done.
Back in the day you repaired things because a really well made thing would last a lifetime with proper care. But Amazon and Walmart made it their mission to get people to keep buying clothes, so now clothes are cheaper and more disposable.
I think the best thing we could do is encourage people to buy fewer things that are better quality. Maybe encourage manufacturers to have a warranty program that works with independent repair shops. You spend more with the intention of keeping it longer, and can get it repaired if needed.
However, we are fighting against the market on this. It is the same as the software subscription vs one-time-purchase model.
The economy depends on people constantly consuming, buying new things. Trend started long before Amazon and Wallmart; they just accelerated it.
Other economies are much more content to pay for reuse and repair.
I would LOVE to do this, but I have absolutely no idea how to identify quality. Is the $50 t-shirt at Macy's actually going to last me longer than the $10 that looks identical at The Gap?
Since I don't even know, I usually end up taking the $10 safer choice.
I’m unsure whether this would be good for the environment. What are the risks of not using it, or damaging it? Systematically, I believe our environmental footprint is approximately how much we earn, so deciding if the environment is better off for that choice is not obvious.
I just buy good second-hand clothes since that is more likely to be good for my pocket (and perhaps with luck, the environment).
1. Systematically, I believe our environmental footprint is approximately how much we earn. I spend less money buying second hand clothes, but I spend those savings elsewhere in the economy.
2. The revenue of a second-hand clothes dealer is spent in the economy, likely causing the average environmental impact of the economy where the store is located.
3. My marginal increase in second-hand clothing usage might cause a marginal increase in new clothes purchases. More likely for expensive “vintage” clothes since they have a limited supply, and vintage goods more likely cause a substitute goods effect for new clothes. Less likely for very low demand undesirable clothes (cheap thrift store clothes that would otherwise just be recycled).
Generally I think that most things make little difference. To make a positive environmental impact I suspect requires one to do something that has a fairly direct effect (plant some trees, change legislation), or reduces societies total impact (war, death, reducing reproduction). Reducing your use of something that is very clearly 100% petrochemical-based (gas, plane flights) makes some difference, but mostly your money goes into the economy: even 100% “green” goods are actually only as green as your country’s economy. There is massive amounts of green-washing going on, so most green goods are actually no better than whatever they replace (and from what I can tell, most green goods are worse for the environment).
Small things do have a big impact. Even just voicing our opinions makes a big impact. Why do you think eco-friendly products are so in vogue? Organic products, fair trade, rainforest alliance, products made with 50% recycled content, lower energy use devices, cars with higher gas mileage, electric cars. None of this stuff existed a few decades ago, but it has all been steadily increasing and having more of an impact. It's a slow pace, but small things do add up to big change over time.
Fabric quality is another big one, but that’s difficult to tell. But at least for cotton it’s generally a bit thicker and heavier.
Some well crafted garments also have thicker fabric near high-wear areas (jeans), or as a “patch”.
We don’t need a consumer society to thrive, but we need skilled artisans+quality goods to make it work (which we outsourced away generations ago, sigh).
It’d also help answer the more awkward issues of hidden-away slave labor that we rely on today.
I love it so much and it is so functional that I refuse to replace it.
I wish I could just mail it to a service that would fix all the holes, clean it, and mail it back.
I'm sure I could find a local tailor, but local tailors aren't always easy to find, and the whole process is such a hassle.
Seamstress-as-a-service? Any takers?
Are they pretty? No. Only so much you can do, I guess. But it's functional, and it's inside, so, no worries.
A daily driver jacket is just like an old friend.
Linus was right.
It sure is (currently wearing pants which are probably 20 years old - as such their style is also back in fashion if I see what youth is wearing these days), but only if you were raised or self-thaught to hold that in high regard. Or I could even say 'if you have common sense' but that's perhaps just bias from my part.
I wonder where the biggest opportunities are
I'm tempted to say 'education' and 'have politics push for it' but I honestly don't know at this point. Seeing what it takes to even get a slight notion of something being fixed for other global problems (climate, biodiversity) I'm not exactly optimistic about that.
I've been thinking about this lately with a wristwatch. I have a 10 year old Seiko mechanical watch that cost me $50. To get it serviced will cost more than I paid for the watch, however there's nothing about the watch that makes it less worthy of servicing than a watch that would have cost 10 or 100x more.
Other than submissions like this one?