Which watchbrands are (more) sustainable?
Hello fellow Clockbusters!
Does anyone have information, which watch manufacturers have called themselves as "sustainable". Surely there is a lot of greenwashing going on but are there any (perhaps smaller?) brands that try to find out about their ESG risks (environmental/human rights) in global supply chains? If companies should do no harm to people and planet, what is the watch industry doing?
I'd love to own a wristwatch that is sustainable for real.
6 comments
Sort by
Juho
Greetings, gentlefolk! I, a humble time's minion, doth stand before thee with a penchant most peculiar – that of the wristwatch enthusiast. In a world where smartphones reign, I cling to these tiny te...
Helsinki
Member since
Last active: 2 days ago
6.89” / 17.50 cm
Any pre-owned watch?
Clemence watches plant a tree for each watch they sell.
I have opinions about "sustainability" but I won't bore you with those. Vintage watches don't impact the environment like any modern ones do.
Any pre-owned watch?
Good point!
Not a brand but some thoughts: It is estimated, that the production of one automatic watch needs 500-1000kWh. Materials, depth of automation, complications, depth of finishing etc. play a role here. Moreover quite a lot of raw material must be "mined", refined and transported. We are not in a clean business here, neither environmentally nor socially.
A quartz watch is estimated to consume somewhere around 100 kWh for production. In comparison to a mechanical watch far less material must be "mined", refined and transported. A battery for a quartz watch needs an average of 0,15 Wh for production.
Unless it is a full metal G-Shock a quartz watch is in most cases lighter than a mechanical watch. So you need more energy to transport the same amount of finished mechanical watches to the consumers than for finished quartz watches.
Depending on the quartz watch it needs all 3–10 years a new battery for 0,15 Wh plus five minutes of light for the watchmaker to change the battery and energy for transportation of the battery. If it is solar powered, you might need to change the power storage too like all 20 years or in even wider intervalls. A good quartz is serviceable, but the Intervall is more like once in a generation is enough.
On the other hand a mechanical watch needs full revision about all five years. Hours of electrical lights turned on, mashines running, cleaning liquids consumed, maybe spare parts transported. It is estimated that every revision consumes about 100-200 kWh, that is the full production of one or two quartz watches. Every full service on a mechanical watch is like tossing away at least one quartz watch. So with every single revision, the sustainability of mechanical watches become worse in comparison to a quartz watch. A solar powered watch simply destroys every single thought that a mechanical watch would be anywhere near sustainability. Even if the quartz watch wouldn't be serviceable you could toss 5-10 watches away just to close the initial gap to the production of one single mechanical watch and about every five years another one as equivalent of one full service.
Recycling is still an open issue.
Very good analysis @AndreasEU about energy consumption. A solar quartz watch is the clear winner here. I would still add to this equation the impact of global logistics. If it is possible, local production is better in that regard. And as for outsourcing some parts of the watch, global supply chains are complex and tackling scope-3 emissions is still its infancy. Moreover, one cannot exclude a possibility of unethical manufacturing processes (such as conflict minerals used in the watch).