The concept of “avoided carbon” is gaining traction in the secondary electronics sector. Companies like Recommerce, located in France, have issued carbon credits based on emissions supposedly prevented by selling used devices, but how reliable are these claims? Finsur looked into this in a bit more detail. The idea is that by refurbishing and reusing devices, emissions from manufacturing new ones are avoided. However, quantifying these avoided emissions is not easy and quite complex and involves significant assumptions.
The difficulty of proving carbon savings
Avoided carbon credits rely on hypothetical scenarios. For instance, when purchasing a refurbished Apple iPhone 12, did it genuinely prevent 77 kg CO2-e from being emitted? The answer is uncertain. The methodology used assumes that each refurbished and used device prevents a fraction of a new device from being manufactured. However, proving that a consumer would have bought a new device instead remains challenging.
Regulatory scrutiny and evolving standards
Governments and regulatory bodies are increasing scrutiny on carbon credit methodologies. The UK government has cited overestimations in emissions avoidance, and new EU rules set to ban greenwashing practices based on offsetting schemes will come into force in 2026. Additionally, the Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi) states that companies must disclose externally sourced carbon credits separately from their reported greenhouse gas inventories.
Methodologies under question
Various standards exist for carbon credits, including Verra, Gold Standard, and the Global Carbon Council. Interestingly, Verra rejected a proposed methodology for measuring avoided carbon in electronic refurbishment due to technical inconsistencies. Meanwhile, Riverse, a smaller standards body, has approved a methodology for refurbishing electronic devices, leading to the issuance of thousands of credits.
Challenges in data accuracy and assumptions
One key assumption in avoided carbon calculations is the "substitution effect," where each refurbished or used smartphone is assumed to prevent the production of 0.87 new ones. However, Apple's latest environmental report suggests a reduction in manufacturing emissions, challenging outdated emission factors. If product lifetimes extend beyond current assumptions, the estimated savings could be significantly overestimated.
What this means for the industry
While avoided carbon credits offer an additional revenue stream and marketing benefits, their credibility is under question. Increasing regulatory oversight, evolving methodologies, and inconsistencies in assumptions make them a risky bet for businesses. Companies in the refurbished electronics sector may be better off focusing on direct emission reductions rather than relying on potentially flawed offset mechanisms.
Want to follow Finsur? Use this link.
Market
Trade-in
Repair
Refurbishing
