Issue #0734/2 - Printer durability is an issue that rarely gets a mention but is a very important factor in an age where environmental issues are coming closer and closer to the forefront of public awareness and debate, yet we tend to expect to replace a printer like we’d expect to replace a jacket or pair of shoes.
Go to any municipal tip and you will see plenty of printers amongst the plethora of computer screens, televisions, fridges and freezers that have been dumped. The big question is, “have they been dumped because they are inoperative or because the owner has acquired something faster, smarter or just plain newer”?
Today’s culture expects to replace items at will because a more fashionable model has appeared. Mobile phones are probably the ultimate example.
According to Fonebak and the BBC (who have teamed up to raise funds for the BBC’s Children in Need charity in the UK), there are more than 90 million unused mobile phones sitting in drawers, cupboards or toy boxes in the UK alone. On top of this, around 18 million mobile phones are replaced every year as users upgrade to newer models.
With an estimated 77% of the population of around 60 million owning at least one mobile phone, these 18 million new handsets per year represent an annual turnover probably in the order of 40%.
Why? The average life of a mobile phone has been variously estimated at being as low as 11 months or as high as only 18 months. In the vast majority of cases this rapid turnover is sure to be the result of newer, smarter handsets being offered as free annual upgrades to contract customers.
What happens to the old ones? Some may be passed down to children who are in need of a phone but even many of these may be replacing previous models used by the child. But, with today’s teenagers being the most fashion or fad-conscious individuals in the history of mankind, a hand-me-down phone may be totally unacceptable!
I’m lucky; my one remaining teenage son was very excited to receive a hand-me-down touchscreen phone / PDA / palmtop computer with digital camera recently when my contract allowed me a new one that came in at about half the size and weight. But, this still leaves the problem of what to do with the phone that he had been using.
We always keep a spare in case of failure but, somewhere down the line, there is now at least one old phone in the house that can be recycled through Fonebak for use in the developing world while also raising money for Children in Need - £5 for every working handset.
For UK readers, please search out those old phones and send them off for Children in Need – it is free.
What of printers though? Because of a printer’s bulk, there may well be few sitting unused in homes and offices but, in all likelihood, there are plenty being disposed of that could be refurbished for re-use like the mobile phones. There certainly is a market for printers from commercial environments to be reconditioned for sale into developing countries where the latest technology is less critical than availability at low cost.
Key technology advances have been more significant in rendering older printer models undesirable than in rendering old models of mobile phone undesirable.
Inkjet printers have become, and continue to become, faster as the years pass but it is not print speed that determines whether an inkjet printer is unsuitable, or undesirable, or not. With some inkjet printers being marketed today still not exceeding a draft print speed (i.e. fastest possible) of 14ppm in mono and 8ppm in colour, for some users it is good quality photo printing and an exceptionally low cost of purchase that is the primary issue.
Similarly with laser printers, there is a constant shift in the print speed against price paid.
But again, raw print speed is not the main issue. It is particularly the availability of colour laser at extraordinarily low entry prices that encourages small businesses to replace old, but serviceable, mono laser printers.
Even more significant perhaps is the availability of compact All-in-One devices that offer us far greater levels of functionality in a more compact form factor than creating the same functionality from a selection of single function devices.
This is especially true when we consider some of the exceptionally compact and powerful four-function devices – of both technologies – that are now available at a price that makes them attractive for use in the office or home.
However, printers tend to be capable of performing for many, many years – far longer than the design life that the manufacturer puts on them.
Original Hewlett-Packard LaserJetprinter with toner cartridge
This is emphasised by repeating the fact that there are still many original Hewlett-Packard LaserJet printers in use more than 23 years later and a continuing market for remanufactured toner cartridges for this model – it is the one toner cartridge that Hewlett-Packard has discontinued! Hewlett-Packard is, however, proud of the LaserJet II models still in use with customers for which it still provides original toner cartridges.
Many small offices do not need the ultimate in printing speed and may not need colour either, except for very specific operations. In these cases, a low-cost second printer (perhaps inkjet) may be more suitable as a means of keeping printing costs down than the purchase of the latest new model. This is perhaps an unnecessary luxury.
So, we have discussed some of the dynamics involved in users’ purchase of new printers but we also have to consider the dynamics in place at the manufacturer’s end.
Each manufacturer is a business in its own right, concerned about turnover, profit, investors and its future. Its business is the manufacture of printers and the ongoing supply of consumables to keep that printer running for the customer. Factories have to be kept running and staff need on-going employment (and we shouldn’t underestimate the importance of employment).
On many occasions we have discussed the fact that a manufacturer’s profit lies in the consumables, not the hardware, and so it must do everything it can to maintain and increase that flow. It has to fight to gain as much market share as possible so that the potential for consumables sales is as high as possible.
One might argue that to build printers that will last 20 years guarantees demand for consumables for 20 years. However, on the basis that we have accepted the principle that individuals like to be up-to-date and fashionable, the best way for the manufacturer to work for the future is to continually present new models to the market and persuade customers (and users of other brands) to buy the latest and greatest new printer.
But, there is a cost involved in constantly providing the customer base with new and exciting equipment.
It costs more because new technologies and designs have to be developed in order to keep customers excited and to keep ahead of the competition; factories have to be re-tooled for the production of new models and new consumables; staff have to be trained for new features and functionality; and new marketing and sales activities have to be developed to ensure that the hardware that has been built is actually sold.
Perhaps we would be spending less on our printing if manufacturers were not constantly spending billions of dollars on research and development; on re-tooling factories and re-training staff.
Turning specifically to the environmental impact, with Carbon Footprint as the biggest new buzz-word of the decade, we should be aware of what cost is really behind the hardware we buy – whatever the product.
We start off with manufacturing. But, manufacturing products, whether hardware or consumables, does not start in the printer manufacturers’ factories. We have to go back in time to take into account the extraction of the raw materials from the earth in order to produce the plastic and metal components that are used in the factories to build the products.
Then, running throughout the process are two constant themes – energy and waste.
It takes energy to extract the raw materials – indeed it takes energy (and raw materials) to build the machinery that is required to extract the raw materials. Then mining produces waste – about 16% of the EU’s total waste production!
It takes energy to build factories (not to mention the energy required to build the machinery to build the factories), to equip the factories (with everything behind that process) and, ultimately, to demolish the factories – construction and demolition accounts for about 31% of the EU’s total waste production!
Once we have the raw materials and the factories, the manufacturing process can begin. This consumes energy and produces waste in the form of materials off-cuts, packaging waste and worn out tools, equipment, office-related items and so on – manufacturing accounts for around 15% of the EU’s total waste production!
Water has not been mentioned yet but this is another valuable natural resource that is being both consumed during the manufacturing process and also deposited as waste back into the ecosystem in the form of dirty and polluted water.
Another theme running throughout the story is transportation - raw materials transported to steelworks or refinery; then on to the product factories; probably the transportation of components from one factory to another; then transportation of finished goods to warehouses; on to distributors; further on to dealers and resellers; and finally to the customer.
Then, behind transportation lies another ecosystem involving raw materials, factories, energy, pollution and waste.
Once the customer has the printer and has used it for a specified lifetime, that product needs to be disposed of.
Herein lies yet another ecosystem involving exactly the same components as the manufacturing process for recycling or, at worst, simple dumping into landfill with all the implications of land availability and toxic pollution that brings – around 6% of the EU’s total waste production is household and commercial ‘municipal’ waste.
Finally, an aspect of consumerism that is almost completely ignored is that of getting ‘value’ out of a product. This means using the product to the point at which its overall production costs have been covered by the value of the service it has given.
This may be termed the ‘break-even’ point of a product. For mobile phones, this breakeven is estimated to be about 7 years, yet we replace our mobile phones at intervals somewhere between 11 and 18 months, as mentioned earlier.
Has anyone attempted to calculate the break-even point of a printer? Perhaps the conclusion would frighten us. The longer our printer lasts, the better for the environment, while changing printers too early accelerates the un-sustainability of the environment.
Let me leave you with a few more statistics, this time taken from the WEEE Man project.
The Countdown
“By 2050, at current consumption rates, we will need:- 8.5 planets to absorb our carbon dioxide
- 6 planets worth of steel
- 3.5 planets to sustain cement supply
- 3.5 planets to sustain timber demand.”
(Sustainable Design Award, 2004)
~End~
