2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration international internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

I'm looking for a new computer--but I think that "planned obsolescence" is a big part of the problem. 

 

Shouldn't producer's be responsible for the environmental costs of their products, so that they don't put the costs on us?

 

If they would make it to last, then they'd have lower environmental costs.

 

"Planned obsolescence is the process of a product becoming obsolete and/or non-functional after a certain period or amount of use in a way that is planned or designed by the manufacturer." (from Wiki) 

posted 3 years, 6 months ago
view in context

I think Lindsey hit the nail on the head--much of the environmental impact of the "stuff" that we buy occurs during the production or manufacturing process.  

posted 3 years, 6 months ago
view in context