View Single Post
  #75   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
[email protected] trader4@optonline.net is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,500
Default Energy savings of a ' fridge

On Apr 16, 11:03*pm, Tony Hwang wrote:
Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
"Richard J Kinch" wrote in message
...


Edwin Pawlowski writes:


That tag though, does give me some idea that A is better than B.


Exactly: it gives you that idea. *An untested, unproven idea that
plausibly
could be the inverse of the truth.


The function of the tag is to sell refrigerators and provide cover for the
government. No doors, no contents, no ice. *A schoolboy doing a science
fair project would come up with a better test.


Do you have evidence that it may be the inverse? *Have you done any testing?


The test is not perfect, the circumstances are not the same as every
household uses their fridge in a different manner, but overall, heat gain
into a given volume insulated container has to be removed. *If two boxes,
one more insulated than the *other sit side by side in a *70 degree room,
the better insulated one will have less gain. *So, measure it, put it on a
yellow tag and you have some basis for comparison. *Real use will vary if
you open the door five times or fifty times a day, but the comparison of A
to BE will still be reasonably close. Add five pounds of water to each and
make ice. *You still have to move the same number of calories to get the
water from 50 to 0 or whatever.


If the yellow tag sates $50 per year, my use may be 20% more, but the model
that says $150 per year is still going to be 17% to 22% more and that is all
I need to know. "Look honey, this one is better insulated so we can save a
whale for dinner." *That's all I need to know no matter how detailed your
proposed test is.


I bought a car that states 30 mpg on the sticker and I'm happy with the 25
that I get and expected. *I knew that difference up front. *I do, in fact,
know that it is better than the cars with the 20 mpg sticker and not as good
as the ones with the 35 mpg sticker.


Hmmm,
No sense arguing with a person like that. He is never happy with
anything. Typically person like that blame everything/everyone but
himself. That Energuide sticker is a quick reference for comparing
A to B no matter what. If you are so energy concious, look at your life
style first.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -



I think both sides of this argument have merit. The bottom line is,
we really don't know how adding ice makers, a reasonably full load of
food and opening and closing doors will affect the overall energy
usage of the units. I would agree it's likely there is some
corelation between the current energy test and how they will perform
under more realistic conditions. I'd be surprised if the most
efficient one suddenly became the most inefficient, but we really
don't know.

I agree with Richard on one thing. That is the way they test them is
not even close to how they are actually used. Unless I'm missing
something, that means the stickers on all the doors showing the
estimated annual energy used is not even close to accurate, as it's
underestimated. And I would have to agree that it sure looks
suspiciously like a way to fool consumers into thinking the new unit
on the showroom floor is going to use less energy than it really does,
which helps sell them. The tests were arrived at jointly between
the EPA and the manufacturers and by having a test that is skewed
helps the manufacturers sell units and helps the EPA by making it look
like the Energy Star program is producing better results that it
actually is.