Newer stuff is more efficient. For example washers and dryers have a direct drive technology with gears that help it use less power and maybe even less water.
The energy saved by a new washer or dryer vs an older one is dwarfed by the energy needed to make the new washer or dryer.
FWIW, the same applies to most building replacements. Yes, the newer buildings use less energy, but the savings doesn't pay for the cost of replacing an old one.
This really depends on what you're replacing. Replacing a standard electric water heater that uses ~$500/year of electricity with a heat pump water heater that uses ~$100/year (that's about what ours uses) has a pretty quick payback period.
> Newer stuff is more efficient. For example washers and dryers have a direct drive technology with gears that help it use less power and maybe even less water.
That's never going to pay off in the long run. They're not significantly more efficient and they're less repairable, so the penny you save per wash is going to be more than offset by buying a new washing machine every five years when the bearing fails just out warranty.
New washing machines have a plastic outer drum that's welded together, so you can't get them apart to replace the bearing when it fails. They are designed that way so they're essentially disposable - after 5000 washes, you must replace the whole washing machine instead of a five quid part you can get from the tractor supply place down the road.
I don't think efficiency matters at all for washers, as they are a rounding error in terms of water usage. Most water is for agriculture, not domestic consumption.[1] The main issues for appliances are reliability and ease of repair. Newer machines have more electronics and software, making them worse in both respects.
As a resident of rural New Mexico, and board member of our local village water association, I'ev thought about and spoken about this issue a lot. Most of the time, I'm saying the same as you.
However ... when you move from the biggest picture view (in this case either state or regional water use patterns) and instead focus on a smaller, local one (e.g. the well(s) that tap into a single aquifer for all the 250 people who live here), a different story emerges.
The story: the low-water appliances may make no difference at the state/regional level, but they may keep our aquifer within its normal range during a 23 year and counting drought. That is, while our residential water usage is swamped by the ranches down the road growing alfalfa for their animals, it is still relevant to the state of our aquifer, and reducing that usage by 30-50% (as has been the case over the last 30 years or so) may play a significant role in not overdrawing the aquifer.
I assumed it would go without saying that a general statement about agricultural water usage would not apply to a desert community of 250 people experiencing a 23 year drought.
FWIW, the same applies to most building replacements. Yes, the newer buildings use less energy, but the savings doesn't pay for the cost of replacing an old one.