It is already perfectly doable and easy to have the screen or battery replaced. It is not really expensive but there are parts and labour involved.
Recycling improvements would yield much more sustainable benefits but this is not as easy or PR-friendly as decreeing "just make then repairable" and then pat yourself on the back for saving the environment...
> It is not really expensive but there are parts and labour involved.
My SO's phone battery was busted after 3 years of use and replacing it would cost half of a new phone. Replacements battery itself is cheap, but amount of labor it takes to take apart current smartphones is just unreasonable.
I recently had my phone (Galaxy S21) stop charging and the SIM not be recognized anymore. I wasn't able to figure out why for a while until I opened the phone (it is relatively easy as the back is plastic and it bulges out if you blow into the SIM slot, making it easier to remove by hand). Ended up being that an internal cable came loose that connected the bottom board to the main components after I dropped it.
It just made me personally very happy that I was able to repair such a minor problem in the grand scheme of things. It really was just "detach the plastic back from the adhesive, unscrew some (~13) screws, reattach the cable, put everything back together". While I'd still love if it weren't that difficult it was all-in-all a very easy fix compared to other things I've done.
And yes, while the back still somewhat sticks to the case, is somewhat loose. I probably should replace the adhesive but I use a case anyway so it isn't really a problem.
So, it doesn't HAVE to be difficult to disassemble a phone, unless incentivised to do so, it is another revenue stream for manufacturers if they make it so that only they can repair it (pairing components cryptographically, to which they only have the keys to... just give the owner the fucking keys and let them decide...)
Smartphones (and everything in general) will be discarded at some point (realistically, sooner than later) with 100% certainty whatever slogans you want to push. So effective and efficient recycling is the most important for sustainability, it is absolutely crucial. But, as said, it is possibly the trickiest bit that requires in-depth industrial work across the whole chain so, instead, simplistic alternatives are pushed.
At one smartphone per human being over 10 years old, thinking that "reduce" and "reuse" (how?) will make a difference is completely unrealistic.
In the long term it makes zero difference if you don't recycle it. You'll end up with an unsustainable mountain of waste either way.
On the other hand, at the limit, with 100% recycling, whether you change every 2 years or 7 also makes little difference.
I really don't understand the push-back here. IMHO it really shows how wrapped by political ideology (degrowth, anti-consumption and ultimately anti-capitalism) this all is when the facts in terms of sustainability are clear: We must recycle very effectively and efficiently what we produce, otherwise in the long term we'll just marginally change the thickness of the waste the planet will end up covered with.
Regarding "degrowth", the one that we probably must go after to reduce our impact is population degrowth but strangely and illogically this is the one people don't want to hear about.
Population is declining everywhere (or will do after the lag of the current old generation). It's a serious problem as the world will have fewer workers looking after more non-workers who are used to a higher standard of living htan before.
It's pretty much settled that it's far better to only make 1 device than 3, even if you were to recycle the 3 devices and not recycle the 1 device.
On the whole recycling is a con from companies who make a fortune by making more waste. Some recycling is far better than others, but reuse is orders of magnitude better.
In the past milk came in glass bottles, delivered, drank, and then reused. That's far better than recycling the bottles after just one use, although recycling glass is far better than plastic. But there's more money to be made selling you plastic in the supermarket several times a week, so that's what we have.
Same with electronics. Far better to reuse the electronics for multiple years than to get a new one each year. Same with clothing.
> I really don't understand the push-back here.
If you currently recycle 0% of a phone every 2 years, that throws 5 phones away every decade. If you recycle 0% of a phone every 6 years, that throws 1.7 phones every decade
If you currently recycle 30% of a phone every 2 years, that throws 3.5 phones away every decade. If you recycle 30% of a phone every 6 years, that throws 1.2 phones every decade
If you currently recycle 50% of a phone every 2 years, that throws 2.5 phones away every decade. If you recycle 50% of a phone every 6 years, that throws 0.8 phones every decade
To increase recycling levels to make it better to recycle, you'd have to go from 0% to 65% recycled, or from 30% to 75%.
As a consumer I don't want a new phone every 2 years, I don't have a new phone every 2 years. I've had 4 iphones in the last 15 years. I don't even pay for them - work gives them to me for free when I push a button. I don't want a new laptop every 2 years either, the laptop I'm typing on was new in 2017. I have a desktop that I rarely use, but that still does the exact same job it did in 2016 when it was new.
> It's pretty much settled that it's far better to only make 1 device than 3, even if you were to recycle the 3 devices and not recycle the 1 device.
It's certainly neither settled not factual.
> Far better to reuse the electronics for multiple years than to get a new one each year. Same with clothing.
The point isn't whether it is 'better' or not. The point is that if you don't ultimately properly dispose of them through recycling you haven't solved anything. At best you've slowed the rate at which we're covering the planet in trash but obviously the end result will be the same: It will end up covered.
> Population is declining everywhere
Not yet and current level is unsustainable (as we're seeing) whether you do symbolic gestures like keeping your smartphone longer or not.
Recycling improvements would yield much more sustainable benefits but this is not as easy or PR-friendly as decreeing "just make then repairable" and then pat yourself on the back for saving the environment...