Scientists from the University of Michigan are optimistic that their recent research will encourage some Americans to reconsider their laundry habits. Regardless of the perspective you take, clothes dryers consume a significant amount of relatively expensive energy when air drying is a free alternative.

Domestic dryers in the United States account for approximately 3% of our household energy expenditure, which is about six times the energy consumption of washing machines. In total, powering dryers costs over $7 billion annually in this nation, and the energy production results in emissions comparable to over 27 million tons of carbon dioxide.

The United States also tops global statistics for dryer ownership, with more than 80% of households possessing one, contrasted with less than 30% in South Korea, slightly above 40% in Germany, and almost 60% in the United Kingdom.

This prompted researchers from the U-M School for Environment and Sustainability, or SEAS, to ponder the implications of adopting air drying for the average American home.

“In most parts of the world, finding a clothes dryer is quite rare,” stated Zhu Zhu, the principal author of the new research, who conducted this work as a master’s student and is currently pursuing a Ph.D. at Purdue University.

“We understand that dryers utilize significant energy, so what if line drying was the alternative? What savings could you achieve? How much CO2 could be prevented?” Zhu queried.

Under the mentorship of Shelie Miller, SEAS professor and co-director of the U-M Center for Sustainable Systems, Zhu examined the financial and emission impacts linked to various drying technologies employed in the U.S.

A breakdown of the expenses related to operating different dryer types throughout their lifetimes illustrates how much an average household could save through line drying, according to a new study from the University of Michigan. Data sourced from Z. Zhu and S. A. Miller, Resour., Conserv. Recycl. (2025) DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2025.108212

Over the lifespan of a dryer, utilizing 100% line drying could yield savings of over $2,100 for a household. This would also diminish CO2 emissions by more than 3 tons per household during the same duration. While the difference between dryers and line drying is significant, it was not unexpected, according to the researchers.

“We anticipated that while line drying would be zero, dryers would incur significant costs,” Miller explained.

However, the pair did uncover some notable findings in their analysis, which was published in the journal Resources, Conservation, and Recycling.

For instance, a combination of line drying and dryer usage emerged as the second most cost-effective and environmentally friendly choice, surpassing alterations like upgrading to more efficient dryers. In various scenarios, households investing in more energy-efficient dryers might not realize financial savings in the long term.

“Our focus is often on technological enhancements, but many times, altering our behavior can yield more significant results,” Miller remarked. “To effectively address climate change, we must consider both cultural and technological approaches.”

The study also highlighted an important nuance regarding emissions from clothes drying: they differ significantly across various regions in the United States. In regions primarily powered by coal, for instance, dryers will lead to higher emissions compared to areas that utilize more sustainable sources, such as hydroelectric power.

While it is logical for there to be variations, the extent is astonishing. Depending on the location, transitioning from a gas dryer to an electric one could decrease emissions by over 90% or increase them by more than 220%.

Thus, advancing towards a cleaner energy grid represents another technological method to mitigate the environmental impact of dryers. Yet, for individuals unwilling to wait, a clean and nearly free alternative is readily accessible.

“Much of this involves questioning whether the consumption we engage in enhances our lives in meaningful ways,” Miller noted. “The most eco-friendly choice is always the action you choose not to take.”

For those not ready for a complete transition away from their heated dryers, minor behavioral adjustments can still have a positive impact. Operating dryers at night during “off-peak” times can lead to an 8% reduction in emissions, as indicated by the study.

Moreover, the authors recognize that individuals might have reservations about switching to line drying. It can make certain fabrics feel stiff, but this can be alleviated by a brief spin—rather than a complete cycle—in the dryer. Some might also feel like they reside in an unsuitable environment for line drying, but as long as they have a space that doesn’t become excessively humid or cold, the air will effectively do its job, Zhu reassured.

“You don’t need an expansive balcony or a large yard,” Zhu mentioned, recalling his own experience line drying in a small apartment during his college years. “From my personal insights, you have far more potential than you think.”