Something somewhat similar is already law in germany and works rather well. There is no reason society should have to pay for expected costs for disposing a company's products - as this would only incentivize companies to care even less about the difficulty of recycling/disposal.
The American way is to possibly put too few responsibilities on manufacturers. The European way seems to be to saddle them with just too many regulations -- possibly killing so much innovation.
One way to approach this would be to put more responsibilities on large established companies and less on smaller companies. But then the problem is that larger companies will want to arbitrage this somehow by indirectly "owning" these smaller companies with less environmental responsibilities.
This area is far more complex than we think it is.
Also what do we do about totally new materials that are thought to be benign when introduced but then are proved to have harmful effects many years later. Does the company that introduced them now have huge open ended costs and now go bankrupt ?
The solution is as always in the middle ground. Society as a whole bears some cost of cleanup (a kind of insurance policy for all companies) and companies bear some of costs.
Importers and producers are required to be a member of a approved company handling returns, like RENAS[2].
Shops selling EE goods are required to accept returned EE goods from individuals of the type they sell. So if you sell fridges you have to take my old fridge and handle it in accordance with the rules.
Seems to work better than nothing, though how well I don't know. As with all such regulations there's money to be made by skipping steps, and some do[3].
[1]: https://www.miljodirektoratet.no/ansvarsomrader/avfall/Retur...
[2]: https://renas.no/
[3]: https://www.miljodirektoratet.no/publikasjoner/2022/februar/...
Well that's what the European way is lol. Tax and regulate instead of focusing on the crux of the problem, which is overproduction and planned obsolescence. Any solution that uses taxes and extra charges will simply pass the costs onto the consumer.
I like the idea of putting the onus on companies to get rid of the product, but there should be a consumer onus too. Consumers should be discouraged from tossing everything to the landfill, and companies should be forced to collect the stuff they product after the lifecycle is complete. This might even drive the companies to revise their designs to use more recyclable materials.
Maybe instead of a charge this could be a credit. If the recycling happens after a long time the company gets a bigger payback than if it happens before. The money is collected on checkout so the company can't claim bankruptcy or low profits to make the payment.
Here in Norway consumers enjoy a 5 year warranty on products that are meant to last, and 2 years on other non-consumables.
So if my fridge dies due to a manufacturing flaw within 5 years, the store I purchased it on has to repair free of charge, replace it with an equal or better product, or give a full refund. If the product keeps breaking in the same way, the customer can demand a full refund.
And it's up to the store to convincingly argue it's not a manufacturing flaw if they don't want to do that.
This provides similar disincentive to import crappy goods.
Sure, you're disincentivizing crappy goods, but then you'd also barr a strata of society who can only afford those crappy goods. While it's not as much of a problem in Norway I suppose, it is a problem in the majority of the world.
You must be joking.
"Fifteen major car manufacturers have been fined almost €600 million by the European Commission and the British government after Mercedes-Benz blew the whistle on a cartel that fixed car recycling costs and processes." https://www.dw.com/en/eu-and-uk-fine-carmakers-millions-over...
Sarcasm was indeed intended...
Also, what happens if you order a product online from another company in a different country ? Does Norway still get to add tax for cleanup on these imported goods ? I would guess that this would be a powerful incentive for customers to skirt these regulations for lower prices.
If you import as a private person AFAIK no. Consumers have very good consumer protection on goods bought from domestic shops, so there's a strong incentive to do that rather than import.
Though all that Temu junk is another story...
But companies importing EE goods have to report to the return company they're a member of, and pay them accordingly.
Can't recall offhand if there's special "flag" on the import declaration or if they just go by HS code. And presumably they get audited on this.
IIRC it used to be more directly linked to the import declaration but they streamlined it.
1. employment-rate for Americans. 2. bringing back industrial capacity in US.
If large companies are forced to recycle/repair INSIDE USA, that ultimately means employment for Americans, and bringing back industrial capacity back to US.
(which could mean forcing Chinese manufacturers settings up whole industrial complexes in US...)
btw, this would be a much easier/lesser-side-effect measure than "tariff on everyone" situation
And for disposal modern landfills in rich countries are very good at avoiding environmental problems.
For example? What products do you mean?
Plastics recycling is a scam.
Glass recycles well, if colours are kept separated.
Aluminium and iron and most pure or semi-pure metals too.
Far better to wash and reuse, of course, as was still the rule when I was a child, and in some of Scandinavia even 25Y ago.
The other difference between "renting" from the producer is that the producer isn't collecting any rent, only initial purchase.. and that producer cannot claim the item back whenever they please.
Actually you should be able to bring it to one of the multiple 3rd party repair shops of your choice, get it fixed and not have Lenovo involved at all, except maybe by selling you parts at a reasonable price.
Incidentally you should also be able to modify the laptop as you want, or if you lack the skills, pay said 3rd party repair shops to do it for you.
You already can, it's just often not economically viable in high-income countries. Lenovo have a very comprehensive parts service and provide useful service manuals.
Ironically, Apple devices are the most widely repaired by third-party specialists despite Apple's strenuous efforts to make that difficult, because they're expensive and depreciate slowly.
> You already can, it's just often not economically viable in high-income countries.
But are we sure it's only because of high labor costs?
People used to darn holes in their socks, but that's an eccentric hobby in a world where you can buy perfectly good socks for less than $1 a pair.
It's still a factor in the developing world. Those awful scenes of e-waste being melted down for scrap in open pits are symptomatic of the fact that a lot of devices just aren't worth fixing or dismantling for spare parts, even at third-world labour rates.
Manufacturing is heavily automated, which is the reason why you can buy a toaster or a clock radio for less than $10; without massive advances in robotics and AI, the only similarly automated end-of-life solution for those items involves a shredder and a furnace. Here in the EU, the manufacturer is responsible for bearing the end-of-life costs for electronic devices, but it doesn't really change the economics.
So the end users, got it.
Where I live, you pay a "removal fee" when buying electronics or appliances for just that. If you're buying a new washing machine for example, the party delivering your device is obligated to take the old one with them.
Of course, that's only part of it, your country also needs to have good waste processing and ideally not export it.
Basically you just drop them off at your local recycling center, and they have a program that ensures they go to an audited recycler. There is a small fee when you buy electronics that pays for the program.
https://www.recyclemy-assets.com/1738262511-epra_bc_obligate...
Boy have I got a WEEE for you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waste_Electrical_and_Electroni...
More broadly: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Dot_(symbol)
(however, both of those schemes don't put everything back directly - which would be inefficient. They allow delegation by paying recyclers. This can result in "carbon offset" like shenanigans.)
Why does Toyota need to get involved if there is already a multi-billion dollar salvage industry doing what you already propose with no obligation?
My last car I was paid ~$200 and that was low because I had them tow it from my home.