View Single Post
  #79   Report Post  
Posted to alt.home.repair
ransley ransley is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,926
Default Energy savings of a ' fridge

On Apr 17, 8:27*am, wrote:
On Apr 17, 9:10*am, ransley wrote:





On Apr 17, 6:59*am, wrote:


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.- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


Has anybody here read how the Energy Star test is done or what it
tries to achieve.


Yes, I did. *Richard provided the link several days ago in one of his
posts. * That is the basis for most of what has been discussed here
regarding the accuracy of the tests. * Go back in his posts, find it
and take a look. *It says the tests are done with the doors closed, no
food, no ice maker, etc.

Years ago I found it and if I remember it simulated



a family of 4 with doors opening up to 90f interior temp and doors not
opened over 91f. Simulate it right, and it gets close even without
food as the air must cool. *Ive bought quite few 19cu ft friges, last
year about 10, my tenants electric bills dropped about 10$ a month, my
Kill a watt confirms usage on my new and old stuff. Sure you will
likely pay more than ratings but comparing new to old, to the Energy
Star units is pretty dramatic, If you look at all energy star tests
there are 20% better units then gov average. Overall 50-75% savings
over old units is a reality. I found I can *beat the Yellow Tag with
carefull use, my frige when tested with a KAW meter is as good as *Sun
Frost, which at the time was the most efficent with 6" of foam
insulation, At .125 kwh I was paying under 5$ a month. Whats so hard
to believe, ACs go to 20? seer, cfls save 75%, Boilers are up to
93-98%, 30 years ago few cared. Just 10 years ago my heating co would
not recommend a condensing boiler because they felt there were
reliability issues, now they do. If the tests were so far off it would
be headline news. Doing your own test is easy with a Kill a Watt or
other similar unit- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


I emailed you a pdf of what I found.