On July 27, the Martha’s Vineyard Film Festival is scheduled to air the documentary Death by Design, whose executive producer is the Vineyard’s own Diana Barrett. The film is about the IT industry, focused on the devastating impacts of the industry on both its workforce and the environment.

It’s worse than I would have thought — if I had thought to think about it.

This film is not about a single company. It’s about the industry — Hewlett Packard, Apple, Intel, IBM, Microsoft, you name it. The film characterizes the IT business as a “chemical-handling industry,” with 500 pounds of raw materials allegedly going into the making of an eight-ounce cell phone.

Unsurprisingly, many of the chemicals used in production are toxic, some of them solvents that eat through the barrels used for disposal. Their fate is also predictable: they migrate to groundwater. When litigation in places like Endicott, New York and Silicon Valley made this uncomfortable for the companies, they, too, migrated — to China and other countries where environmental standards and enforcement are less stringent. Meanwhile, according to the film, 300 million rural residents in China don’t have access to safe drinking water, and 20 per cent of the arable land in the country is estimated to be polluted with heavy metals.

What about the workers, who, one hopes, are reaping the benefits of this piece of industrialization? That’s not a pretty picture either. The IT companies all share circuit board and chip manufacturers. Workers are paid so little that, the film tells us, labor makes up only about one per cent of the iPhone’s costs. Foxconn, the Taiwanese electronics manufacturer headquartered in China that supplies most of the world’s largest IT companies, employs over one million workers, and it reputedly pressures them relentlessly. Twenty-six of its workers have jumped from its facility roofs, 18 of whom died. Just five months after a Foxconn factory exploded from the combustion of aluminum dust — a well-known risk — an aluminum dust explosion occurred in the factory of another Apple supplier.

This is the cost of our addiction. And an addiction it is — although we don’t actually need the film’s testimonials to convince us of the point. Few of us can imagine life without our devices — our iPhones, iPads, and computers. In fact, it’s virtually impossible to function in the professional world without them. Even mundane social transactions — like, “I’ll call you when I land and then we can figure out where to meet”— require cell phones. Want an Uber? You need an iPhone. Need quick GPS instructions? Easiest to use an iPhone app. Try ignoring your email, and feel the craving.

But can we blame the IT industry for having created our addiction? Is it the companies’ fault that they’ve created products so useful, so attractive, that they’re irresistible, that we can’t live without them? No, probably not. But here’s what we can blame them for: planned obsolescence on a stunning level. Addiction combined with planned obsolescence. Now there’s an unholy pairing.

As the film’s title asserts, these devices are designed to die. Have you ever wondered why you can’t just change your iPhone battery when it wears out? It’s because the companies want you to upgrade every 18 months or so. And they virtually guarantee that you will, thanks to proprietary screw technology on the phone that prevents you from changing the battery. The film observes that it’s as if Ford sold you a car and made it impossible to change the tires. But actually, it’s worse than that. It’s as if Ford, Toyota, Honda, and all the rest made cars on which the tires couldn’t be changed.

By the way, where do these devices go when they die? It’s not a good death. According to the film, up to 90 per cent of electronic waste is illegally traded or dumped each year.

If I’d thought about it, I would have guessed that the IT industry takes a huge toll on the environment and its workforce. But I don’t know that I would have figured out the toxicity of addiction and planned obsolescence combined, which I think is the film’s most powerful point.

So what to do? The film details the growth of an Irish computer manufacturer that makes “fair trade” computers — no plastic, lead, or heavy metals. More power to that company, and others like it. The film also suggests that we upgrade less frequently. It’s impossible to imagine a successful campaign to forego our devices altogether, but a widespread movement to decline frequent upgrades seems conceivable. It would leverage the enormous consumer buying power that derives from the immense size and profitability of the industry, and it would call attention to the true costs of these devices.

Ann Berwick is a seasonal resident of Chilmark and former Undersecretary for Energy and Chairman of the Department of Public Utilities under Gov. Deval Patrick. She currently is a consultant and writer on energy issues.