Summary

We live in a throwaway system. Smartphones are replaced every three years, laptops often within five, and even appliances like washing machines rarely make it past the decade mark. But from a climate perspective, this model doesn’t hold up. According to recent data, these products should last two, three — or even ten times longer to make environmental sense. In this post, we break down what the data shows, why this mismatch exists, and how brands can respond.
Illustration of one hand passing a smartphone to another with planet Earth in the background, symbolizing reuse, circularity, and global responsibility.

We’re replacing things too soon

Let’s be honest — it feels like products don’t last anymore. And it’s not just a feeling. Across Europe, the majority of consumers would rather repair than replace, yet end up buying new devices anyway. It’s not because they want to — it’s because the system makes it hard not to.

Repairs are expensive. Spare parts are unavailable. Many devices aren’t built to be opened, let alone upgraded. At the same time, advertising and product cycles constantly push the idea that newer is better. The result? Perfectly functional products are discarded, and new ones take their place — again and again.

But this cycle comes at a cost. And most of it is hidden from view.

The real climate cost is hidden in the factory

When we think of emissions, we often think of use: the energy a product consumes once it’s in our hands. But for many electronic devices and appliances, the majority of greenhouse gas emissions happen long before we ever plug them in.

The Coolproducts report, published by the European Environmental Bureau, shows just how significant these “non-use phase” emissions are. For smartphones, up to 92% of their total climate impact comes from production, transport, and disposal. Laptops aren’t far behind, with figures ranging from 40 to 64%. Even washing machines — long considered energy-intensive during use — get up to half their emissions from being manufactured and distributed.

As energy efficiency improves and electricity grids decarbonize, this hidden footprint becomes even more important. The cleaner the use phase gets, the harder it is to ignore how dirty the production phase still is.

How long should a product last?

If we want to justify the emissions embedded in manufacturing a product, we have to use it long enough for those emissions to “pay off.” And the answer to how long that takes is often… shocking.

Take smartphones. While most are replaced every three years, the climate-optimal lifespan is estimated to be anywhere from 25 to over 200 years — depending on efficiency assumptions. Laptops, which currently last four to five years on average, would need to be used for 20 to 40 years to fully offset their environmental impact. Even washing machines, which already have longer lifespans, fall short: they would need to stay in service for at least 25 to 40 years.

In other words, even if newer models are more efficient, their benefits rarely outweigh the emissions generated to produce them. Holding onto your current product is almost always the greener choice.

Illustration of a hand holding a smartphone, with a floating calendar and clock icon beside it — symbolizing extended product use and lifespan awareness.

So why aren’t we keeping things longer?

The short answer: we’re not set up to. Most products are not designed with longevity in mind. They’re difficult to open, difficult to repair, and expensive to maintain. Batteries are glued in. Spare parts are unavailable. And when something breaks, the default recommendation is to replace — not restore.

Software plays a role too. Operating systems evolve faster than the hardware can keep up, making perfectly functioning devices feel slow, outdated, or incompatible. Meanwhile, marketing tells us that owning the latest version is aspirational. As a result, many people upgrade not because they have to — but because it’s the path of least resistance.

What this means for brands and manufacturers

This mismatch between climate reality and product design isn’t just a problem — it’s an opportunity.

Brands that acknowledge this gap can lead the shift toward longer-lasting, more circular products. That means rethinking how products are built: not just for durability, but for upgradeability, repair, and resale. It means offering alternatives to replacement — like trade-in programs, refurbishment services, and access to spare parts. And it means owning the second life of your product, instead of losing it to third-party resellers.

At koorvi, we help manufacturers and retailers make this shift. Our platform makes it easy to take back products, assess their condition, and reintroduce them into the market — all while automating the logistics and compliance behind the scenes. Extending product life doesn’t just reduce emissions. It increases customer retention, unlocks new revenue streams, and builds brand trust in a circular economy.

Design like lifespan matters

We’ve spent decades optimizing how much energy a product uses. Now it’s time to ask how long it will last. Not just for the sake of durability, but because lifespan is climate strategy.

If we want to reduce emissions, reduce waste, and build a business that works in the long run, we need to stop treating products as temporary. The data couldn’t be clearer: the most sustainable product is the one you already own.

👉 Want to build a strategy around products that last — and do more after the first sale? Let’s talk.

FAQs

How long should a washing machine last to be environmentally friendly?

While most washing machines are replaced after 10 to 12 years, studies show that they should ideally last 25 to 40 years to offset the emissions from production, transport, and disposal. Even with new models being slightly more efficient, the environmental cost of manufacturing still outweighs the savings from early replacement.

Is it better to repair or replace my old laptop?

From a climate perspective, it’s almost always better to repair rather than replace. Manufacturing a laptop generates significant emissions — up to 60% of its total carbon footprint. Unless your device is completely broken and irreparable, keeping it in use for as long as possible has the lowest environmental impact.

What is the carbon footprint of manufacturing a smartphone?

The majority of a smartphone’s lifetime emissions — up to 92% — occur during production, shipping, and disposal. That means the biggest environmental impact happens before you even use it. Replacing smartphones every two to three years has a high carbon cost, even if newer models are slightly more efficient.

Do newer appliances save enough energy to justify replacing the old ones?

In most cases, no. The small gains in energy efficiency are not enough to balance out the emissions created when manufacturing a new product. For example, even with optimistic assumptions, a washing machine would need to run for 20+ years to make up for the carbon cost of building a new one.

Why don’t products last as long as they used to?

Short product lifespans are often driven by design choices: glued-in batteries, lack of spare parts, and software that quickly becomes outdated. Add to that rapid marketing cycles and a lack of repair infrastructure, and many consumers are nudged into replacing rather than repairing — even if the product could still function.

What can brands do to support longer product lifespans?

Forward-thinking brands can shift from a replacement model to a circular model. That includes designing for durability, offering access to spare parts, enabling repairs, and launching trade-in and resale programs. Platforms like koorvi help manufacturers and retailers build the infrastructure to take back, refurbish, and resell products profitably.

What is the optimal lifespan of a smartphone for the environment?

To fully offset the carbon emissions from producing a smartphone, it would need to be used for at least 25 years, based on realistic energy efficiency trends. That sounds extreme — and it is — but it shows just how carbon-intensive production is. Holding on to your current phone a few years longer is one of the easiest climate wins.

What happens to the emissions if I replace my electronics too early?

When electronics are replaced too soon, you double the emissions: first from producing a new device, and second from disposing of the old one. The emissions from manufacturing often outweigh any efficiency gains in newer models. That’s why keeping products in use longer is almost always the better choice for the planet.

Are refurbished products better for the environment?

Yes — refurbished products can cut emissions by more than half compared to buying new. Since most of the carbon footprint is generated in the production phase, using what already exists is significantly more climate-friendly. Brands that offer take-back and resale programs not only reduce waste, but also tap into new customer segments.

How can I tell if a product is built to last?

Look for signals like modular design, availability of spare parts, and a repairability score (already available in France and soon EU-wide). Avoid products with glued-in batteries, closed systems, or no clear warranty. Transparent brands often highlight how long they support repairs or software updates — and that’s a good sign.

What’s the EU doing to make products more durable?

The EU is introducing new laws under the Ecodesign and Circular Economy frameworks. These include mandatory access to spare parts, software support for a minimum number of years, and potential “repairability labels” to help consumers make informed choices. But change is slow — and companies don’t have to wait to act.