Antisocial innovation generates planned obsolescence – that generates e-waste and environmental degradation

2. Environmental Harms. It is abundantly clear that innovations can harm the environment. Scientists attribute a substantial portion of global climate change to human activities, many of which are the result of previous innovations.213 Obviously, coal-based electricity plants and gasoline-powered internal combustion engines are responsible for an enormous share of environmental pollution.214 This is not to say that electricity and automobiles have been a net negative for society. We don’t think so. But there are many innovations that have generated substantially fewer benefits while producing meaningful environmental degradation. Sometimes, innovations can harm the environment directly. For example, hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking, is believed by many scientists to cause increases in air toxins and substantial harm to groundwater.215 In addition, mining scarce minerals that are required for contemporary computing devices may be destroying environments in already ecologically stressed parts of the globe.216 And, of course, many innovations generate enormous amounts of air and water pollution.

Innovations don’t only harm the environment directly, however. In a range of industries, innovations contribute to environmental harms through planned obsolescence, the phenomenon in which people are encouraged to discard perfectly useful items once a new version is released.217 For example, over 100 million cell phones and over 300 million personal computers are discarded each year.218 Millions of new televisions are purchased, but very few are refurbished.219 Many of these products are still fully functional, but consumers have been induced into desiring new versions of them.220 Often, the new version may not represent any real upgrade in the product’s quality.221 In other cases, manufacturers intentionally limit a product’s lifetime in order to encourage new purchases.222 For example, light bulb filaments have been designed to burn out more quickly than necessary, and smartphone companies have designed software updates that degrade the phone’s battery.223 Finally, manufacturers can shorten product lifetimes by limiting consumers’ ability to repair their devices.224

By inducing unnecessary consumption of new products and generating unnecessary waste, planned obsolescence causes environmental harm. While the existence of cell phones may be socially valuable, the incessant versioning of new cell phones with trivially different features is likely not justified in light of the substantial ecological cost.225 Many otherwise durable goods, from digital technologies to fast fashion, likely generate net negative social value.226