Is WEEE working?
18 October 2010
A vast subject this and one that no single blog could really scratch the surface of. So this week I am going to take one off-the-cuff idea and run with it…
The idea came during the SMART Group conference a couple of weeks ago, which like IPC, SMTA and other events round the world, never seem to be without a fair proportion of the presentations being about WEEE, RoHS, lead-free and the rest of the legislation-lead technological problems that face the electronics industry. The fact that such topics are still top of the agenda several years after the legislation was introduced indicates to me that electronics manufacturers still question the validity of the technology that this legislation has spawned.
More specifically there are still many to be convinced that joints made using lead-free solder will last for the lifetime of the product, and evidence, or at least indications, of both mechanical and electrical (the cursed tin whiskers!) failings continue to give manufacturers of aerospace, automotive, defence and medical electronics sleepless nights.
During such a discussion at the above conference, Chairman for the day Graham Naisbitt ventured that every product should carry a compulsory minimum warranty of, say, five or ten years. This would not only guarantee the safety of a product for that time span, he argued, it would also help the electronics industry meet its waste management responsibilities.
While I think the idea probably needs a bit of developing, it does have the makings of a solution to the inter-related problems of consumers with a throw-away mentality and manufacturers producing products that usually fall apart in a year or two.
Despite the rapid developments in consumer, and particularly portable, electronics goods, I think the above would cover the vast majority of products. Digital photography has moved on considerably over recent years, but such is the quality of my 8 mega pixel camera (which, as a Canon, does have a good lens) that I can take pictures that can be blown up to A3 size without losing resolution. So why would I want a 15 mega pixel camera? As it happens I do want one but that in part demonstrates the consumerist nature of modern society, which is what we should try and slow down if we are serious about reducing the amount of waste we produce and the amount of raw materials we use up. If I do get a new camera my existing one would certainly be well used by one of my children – it is a good example of a consumer product that has a genuinely useful life of over five years. The same is true of my digital voice recorder, TV, microwave and the vast majority of other electrical and electronic goods I own.
Where the theory would need a bit of modifying is at either end of the longevity scale. I concede that nobody, unless they have absolutely no shame, has a mobile phone more than five years old. The functionality required of a modern day device, even if that functionality is barely used, ensures that phones usually last little more than a year, two at the most. Having a five year warranty on such items would only unnecessarily increase the price for no added gain to customer, retailer or manufacturer.
Equally, at the other end of the scale, a military control system on a battleship may have a projected life of 30 years, with an additional decade or two tagged on the end when squeezed defence budgets dictate that refurb is a better option than replace. A five year guarantee in such an environment – or under the hood of a car, in a medical scanner or the cockpit of a plane – is meaningless.
The conclusion I would come to is that consumerism will not go away (I will get that camera!), but building products that are designed and guaranteed to last could well encourage people to buy more sensibly, dispose of them more reluctantly and consequently reduce the impact on the environment. Some products such as mobile phones, MP3 players and ‘netbook’ computers might slip into a two-year warranty category, everything else at five years and the high-rel market making its own definitions depending on the safety requirements and longevity of the products.
It sounds more workable than legislation that the general public neither understands or buys into it, and it would allow the electronics industry to make more meaningful decisions about the technology needed to meet these demands.
What are your thoughts on this? Send an email to: tim.fryer@imlgroup.co.uk
Contact Details and Archive...
Most Viewed Articles...