this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2025
821 points (95.9% liked)
Microblog Memes
8393 readers
2334 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
More water and energy efficient to run, yes. If you have to replace them every couple of years the resources used to make new ones need to be included too though, and that will have a big impact on the comparison. That said, I have had a modern front load pair for at least 5 years now, no issues.
there are calculations and tables on exactly this, when a machine is to be replaced. Including production and shipment of a new one etc., some should be replaced. Look it up!
The resources used to make anything should always be included; called embodied energy.
Of course. Those resources are just a much larger impact percentage wise on an appliance replaced every two years vs 25.
In the 2008 economic slump, the U.K. had something called a “car scrappage scheme”. Shit was the most wasteful thing ever. Also saw really cool classics cubed.
USA had the same thing, "Cash for Clunkers". Some of the cars we were better off getting rid of. Some of them not, whether because they were rare or classic, or old but still more fuel efficient than a truck or SUV. Sure increased the average price of a used car though.
You could find driveable used cars for ~$700 before. Even accounting for inflation now, all you can find now are mechanic specials and parts only.
The newer more efficient machines also give worse washing results.