Usage versus manufacturing - a dilemma

I really struggle with this. Clearly the manufacturing of tech uses carbon. Let's take for example a laptop. We should make sure that we really get use of the carbon spent producing it. So in theory we should just keep using it forever. On the other hand more modern devices use less power. Actually, the older devices get, the more energy they seem to consume. 

So when is the right time to replace them??? My favourite approach is to look at finance. Depending on your company and tax legislation laptops tend to be depreciated over 3 to 4 years. The reasoning for the time span is the commercially viable live of the device. Basically saying that after 3 to 4 years the device is outdated and can't really cope with the demands of modern software and usage. 

Are there any better ways of looking at this? I really would appreciate comments and insights. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Carbon Footprint Transparency of Dell Hardware

Image
Just to be clear, this post is NOT  sponsored by Dell, but they are together with a few of their competitors, which I will also write about in future posts, leading the way in terms of transparency of the carbon footprint of their hardware products. There is a great collection of "carbon data sheets" of their more recent products: https://www.dell.com/learn/us/en/uscorp1/corp-comm/environment_carbon_footprint_products Just as an example, here are the details of a E7270 laptop: I really like that they are also honest enough to state that there is a (relatively high) level of uncertainty. Seeing as these figures do not necessarily mean a lot to people Dell also include a nice little real world comparison: In my opinion this is best in class. They are not alone, but this is certainly an example of how this should be done.  
Read more

Carbon Footprint Transparency of Lenovo Hardware

Image
Yesterday I wrote about how Dell are reporting on the carbon footprint of their hardware. I definitely do not want to be seen as biased, so here is the equivalent from Lenovo. Personally I find this one not quite as pretty, but it is about the content rather than the looks and in that respect  Lenovo might even offer a little more detail. The most important point for me is that the hardware vendors seem to be taking this subject seriously.
Read more

Scope 1, Scope 2 and Scope 3 - What is That All About???

As soon as you get into a conversation about CO2, GHG, GHP, CO2e, Decarbonization and so on, people start to through the terms "Scope 1/2/3" around and I am not sure that everybody who uses them actually understands them. Well, here is my attempt at summarising them, but I am not proud. If you think that I am wrong or inaccurate then feel free to help me to learn. Anyway, here it goes: Scope 1 This is the most fundamental scope. It basically means that you (or your company) directly burns fossil fuels. Popular examples are: Company cars fuelled by patrol, LPG, diesel (or gas if you are from the US) Generators to provide electricity if the mains supply fails Furnaces You get the idea - if you burn it and the result is the emission of carbon, than it is Scope 1 Scope 2 This is basically all the non fossil fuel energy you you buy. So usually that is the electricity for your offices, data centres and factories. There is not really much more to say about Scope 2. Scope 3 Now this
Read more