On Sun 05 Oct 2008 04:41:06p, ransley told us...

On Oct 5, 6:26*pm, mike wrote:
My new fridge says it costs $43/year to run. Call it T$
What test conditions lead to that number?

If I let it run and never open the door, it will cost me X$ to run.

So, the annual cost of opening the door is Y$ = T$ - X$.

What's the magnitude of Y$? *And what opening rate does it assume?

If it's a significant percentage of the total cost, it might make
sense to address the opening problem.

95% of my accesses are for stuff stored on the door.
The inside is mostly empty and rarely accessed.
Maybe curtain the inside of the box?
OR fill the empty space with empty boxes so less cold
air spills out when the door opens.
It's the same concept
as putting open-topped vessels in your toilet tank to reduce
the water/flush.

Sounds like it's probably way into diminishing returns, but
every little bit helps save the planet.

Any idea the ratio of Y$ to T$?

Thanks, mike

If you dont open it it will cost less than T, if you use it minimaly
it should cost T, how they test is published somewhere, try
www.energystar.gov I get less than T with easy use. That 43$ figure is
unlikely the amount that you pay per kwh. What do they say 0.08kwh, im
at 0.13


First it was the idiot who wanted to encase his freezer in thick foam
insulation and operate it in a kitchen kept at barely above freezing
temperature.

Now this...

Can't people accept the fact that an appliance takes energy to operate it,
and in the case of freezers and refrigerators that there is some energy
lost when it's opened?

Usually people select an appliance on usage factors and consideration of
its energy consumption. Given that they made a specific choice, they must
have a great deal of time on their hands to worry about relatively
insiginificant issues as this.

--
Wayne Boatwright
(correct the spelling of "geemail" to reply)

*******************************************
Date: Sunday, 10(X)/05(V)/08(MMVIII)
*******************************************
Countdown till Veteran's Day
5wks 1dys 6hrs 48mins
*******************************************
Therefore, knowing that you are merely
human, do not assign yourself merit.

On Sun 05 Oct 2008 06:33:51p, mike told us...

Wayne Boatwright wrote:
On Sun 05 Oct 2008 04:41:06p, ransley told us...

On Oct 5, 6:26 pm, mike wrote:
My new fridge says it costs $43/year to run. Call it T$
What test conditions lead to that number?

If I let it run and never open the door, it will cost me X$ to run.

So, the annual cost of opening the door is Y$ = T$ - X$.

What's the magnitude of Y$? And what opening rate does it assume?

If it's a significant percentage of the total cost, it might make
sense to address the opening problem.

95% of my accesses are for stuff stored on the door.
The inside is mostly empty and rarely accessed.
Maybe curtain the inside of the box?
OR fill the empty space with empty boxes so less cold
air spills out when the door opens.
It's the same concept
as putting open-topped vessels in your toilet tank to reduce
the water/flush.

Sounds like it's probably way into diminishing returns, but
every little bit helps save the planet.

Any idea the ratio of Y$ to T$?

Thanks, mike
If you dont open it it will cost less than T, if you use it minimaly
it should cost T, how they test is published somewhere, try
www.energystar.gov I get less than T with easy use. That 43$ figure is
unlikely the amount that you pay per kwh. What do they say 0.08kwh, im
at 0.13

The ratio is independent of the $/kwh. That's why I asked it that way.


First it was the idiot who wanted to encase his freezer in thick foam
insulation and operate it in a kitchen kept at barely above freezing
temperature.

Now this...

Can't people accept the fact that an appliance takes energy to operate
it, and in the case of freezers and refrigerators that there is some
energy lost when it's opened?

Usually people select an appliance on usage factors and consideration
of its energy consumption. Given that they made a specific choice,
they must have a great deal of time on their hands to worry about
relatively insiginificant issues as this.


I suppose that people who add their two-cents
worth of derision without adding
actual useful relevant content consider their time to be extremely
valuable. If only they'd just share the calculations that led them to
the conclusion of "insignificant", we could all go home informed and
happy. But alas, no joy here today.

My electricity consumption is 60% of what it was two weeks ago.
I see no reason to stop there.

mike


I buy green and operate conservatively whenever I find it practical *and*
convenient. Convenience is more important to me than saving a few bucks
here and there.

--
Wayne Boatwright
(correct the spelling of "geemail" to reply)

*******************************************
Date: Sunday, 10(X)/05(V)/08(MMVIII)
*******************************************
Countdown till Veteran's Day
5wks 1dys 5hrs 23mins
*******************************************
I'm sorry, I become inaudible when I
am shy.

On Sun 05 Oct 2008 07:00:13p, PanHandler told us...


"Wayne Boatwright" wrote in message
5.247...

First it was the idiot who wanted to encase his freezer in thick foam
insulation and operate it in a kitchen kept at barely above freezing
temperature.

And how efficient do you suppose *that* process was?

I have no idea and could care less. It would be extremely uncomfortable
and impractical to use that room, regardless of the OP's arguments.

--
Wayne Boatwright
(correct the spelling of "geemail" to reply)

*******************************************
Date: Sunday, 10(X)/05(V)/08(MMVIII)
*******************************************
Countdown till Veteran's Day
5wks 1dys 4hrs 54mins
*******************************************
Money is the root of all evil. Send
$20 for more info.

On Sun 05 Oct 2008 07:15:53p, mike told us...

Wayne Boatwright wrote:


I buy green and operate conservatively whenever I find it practical
*and* convenient. Convenience is more important to me than saving a
few bucks here and there.

You're entitled to live the way you want.

As are you.

But there's no cause to belittle me for trying harder.

I was not intentionally trying to "belittle" you. I just find it
incredible that anyone would go to such lengths.

If you have no helpful input...you know what to do...well...
I guess you don't...

In case you don't realize it, this is an open forum, for either positive
or negative commentary.

--
Wayne Boatwright
(correct the spelling of "geemail" to reply)

*******************************************
Date: Sunday, 10(X)/05(V)/08(MMVIII)
*******************************************
Countdown till Veteran's Day
5wks 1dys 3hrs 37mins
*******************************************
Aren't cats just little furry balls of
love?

My new fridge says it costs $43/year to run. Call it T$
What test conditions lead to that number?

If I let it run and never open the door, it will cost me X$ to run.

So, the annual cost of opening the door is Y$ = T$ - X$.

What's the magnitude of Y$? And what opening rate does it assume?

If it's a significant percentage of the total cost, it might make
sense to address the opening problem.

95% of my accesses are for stuff stored on the door.
The inside is mostly empty and rarely accessed.
Maybe curtain the inside of the box?
OR fill the empty space with empty boxes so less cold
air spills out when the door opens.
It's the same concept
as putting open-topped vessels in your toilet tank to reduce
the water/flush.

Sounds like it's probably way into diminishing returns, but
every little bit helps save the planet.

Any idea the ratio of Y$ to T$?

Thanks, mike

On Oct 5, 6:26*pm, mike wrote:
My new fridge says it costs $43/year to run. Call it T$
What test conditions lead to that number?

If I let it run and never open the door, it will cost me X$ to run.

So, the annual cost of opening the door is Y$ = T$ - X$.

What's the magnitude of Y$? *And what opening rate does it assume?

If it's a significant percentage of the total cost, it might make
sense to address the opening problem.

95% of my accesses are for stuff stored on the door.
The inside is mostly empty and rarely accessed.
Maybe curtain the inside of the box?
OR fill the empty space with empty boxes so less cold
air spills out when the door opens.
It's the same concept
as putting open-topped vessels in your toilet tank to reduce
the water/flush.

Sounds like it's probably way into diminishing returns, but
every little bit helps save the planet.

Any idea the ratio of Y$ to T$?

Thanks, mike

If you dont open it it will cost less than T, if you use it minimaly
it should cost T, how they test is published somewhere, try www.energystar..gov
I get less than T with easy use. That 43$ figure is unlikely the
amount that you pay per kwh. What do they say 0.08kwh, im at 0.13

A few more things play a part in exactly how much it will cost to run a
refrigerator, including the temp of the room and how well air flows around
the coils.

An empty refrig will cost more to run than a full one, pretty much because
of what you say - the cold air flows out when opened, but also because air,
particularly the dry air in a frost-free frig, changes temp quickly. Best
would be to fill it with FULL bottle of water or something that holds temp
better.


"mike" wrote in message
...
My new fridge says it costs $43/year to run. Call it T$
What test conditions lead to that number?

If I let it run and never open the door, it will cost me X$ to run.

So, the annual cost of opening the door is Y$ = T$ - X$.

What's the magnitude of Y$? And what opening rate does it assume?

If it's a significant percentage of the total cost, it might make
sense to address the opening problem.

95% of my accesses are for stuff stored on the door.
The inside is mostly empty and rarely accessed.
Maybe curtain the inside of the box?
OR fill the empty space with empty boxes so less cold
air spills out when the door opens.
It's the same concept
as putting open-topped vessels in your toilet tank to reduce
the water/flush.

Sounds like it's probably way into diminishing returns, but
every little bit helps save the planet.

Any idea the ratio of Y$ to T$?

Thanks, mike

Wayne Boatwright wrote:
On Sun 05 Oct 2008 04:41:06p, ransley told us...

On Oct 5, 6:26 pm, mike wrote:
My new fridge says it costs $43/year to run. Call it T$
What test conditions lead to that number?

If I let it run and never open the door, it will cost me X$ to run.

So, the annual cost of opening the door is Y$ = T$ - X$.

What's the magnitude of Y$? And what opening rate does it assume?

If it's a significant percentage of the total cost, it might make
sense to address the opening problem.

95% of my accesses are for stuff stored on the door.
The inside is mostly empty and rarely accessed.
Maybe curtain the inside of the box?
OR fill the empty space with empty boxes so less cold
air spills out when the door opens.
It's the same concept
as putting open-topped vessels in your toilet tank to reduce
the water/flush.

Sounds like it's probably way into diminishing returns, but
every little bit helps save the planet.

Any idea the ratio of Y$ to T$?

Thanks, mike
If you dont open it it will cost less than T, if you use it minimaly
it should cost T, how they test is published somewhere, try
www.energystar.gov I get less than T with easy use. That 43$ figure is
unlikely the amount that you pay per kwh. What do they say 0.08kwh, im
at 0.13

The ratio is independent of the $/kwh. That's why I asked it that way.


First it was the idiot who wanted to encase his freezer in thick foam
insulation and operate it in a kitchen kept at barely above freezing
temperature.

Now this...

Can't people accept the fact that an appliance takes energy to operate it,
and in the case of freezers and refrigerators that there is some energy
lost when it's opened?

Usually people select an appliance on usage factors and consideration of
its energy consumption. Given that they made a specific choice, they must
have a great deal of time on their hands to worry about relatively
insiginificant issues as this.


I suppose that people who add their two-cents
worth of derision without adding
actual useful relevant content consider their time to be extremely valuable.
If only they'd just share the calculations that led them to the
conclusion of "insignificant", we could all go home informed and happy.
But alas, no joy here today.

My electricity consumption is 60% of what it was two weeks ago.
I see no reason to stop there.

mike

"Wayne Boatwright" wrote in message
5.247...

First it was the idiot who wanted to encase his freezer in thick foam
insulation and operate it in a kitchen kept at barely above freezing
temperature.

And how efficient do you suppose *that* process was?

Wayne Boatwright wrote:


I buy green and operate conservatively whenever I find it practical *and*
convenient. Convenience is more important to me than saving a few bucks
here and there.

You're entitled to live the way you want.
But there's no cause to belittle me for trying harder.
If you have no helpful input...you know what to do...well...
I guess you don't...

Mark wrote:

An empty refrig will cost more to run than a full one... the cold air
flows out when opened... Best would be to fill it with FULL bottle of
water...

I've never found a serious test of this myth on the web. Some serious
energy conservation sites (eg Oregon's) don't mention it.

With more exposed cold surface inside, room air will flow faster through
the fridge when the door is open, with more sensible heat gain and
condensation, which raises energy consumption.

Nick

PanHandler wrote:

"Wayne Boatwright" wrote

First it was the idiot who wanted to encase his freezer in thick foam
insulation and operate it in a kitchen kept at barely above freezing
temperature.

And how efficient do you suppose *that* process was?

At best, a $23.95 new Danfoss freezer thermostat ($0.00 if scrounged from
a dead freezer) that turns on the bulb in the fridge when the freezer temp
rises to 15 F might cut the $51 annual yellow-tag cost to $3.60.

Or less, with more complex controls.

Nick

On Oct 5, 12:17*pm, Wayne Boatwright
wrote:
On Sun 05 Oct 2008 04:41:06p, ransley told us...





On Oct 5, 6:26*pm, mike wrote:
My new fridge says it costs $43/year to run. Call it T$
What test conditions lead to that number?

If I let it run and never open the door, it will cost me X$ to run.

So, the annual cost of opening the door is Y$ = T$ - X$.

What's the magnitude of Y$? *And what opening rate does it assume?

If it's a significant percentage of the total cost, it might make
sense to address the opening problem.

95% of my accesses are for stuff stored on the door.
The inside is mostly empty and rarely accessed.
Maybe curtain the inside of the box?
OR fill the empty space with empty boxes so less cold
air spills out when the door opens.
It's the same concept
as putting open-topped vessels in your toilet tank to reduce
the water/flush.

Sounds like it's probably way into diminishing returns, but
every little bit helps save the planet.

Any idea the ratio of Y$ to T$?

Thanks, mike

If you dont open it it will cost less than T, if you use it minimaly
it should cost T, how they test is published somewhere, try
www.energystar.govI get less than T with easy use. That 43$ figure is
unlikely the amount that you pay per kwh. What do they say 0.08kwh, im
at 0.13

First it was the idiot who wanted to encase his freezer in thick foam
insulation and operate it in a kitchen kept at barely above freezing
temperature.

Now this...

Can't people accept the fact that an appliance takes energy to operate it,
and in the case of freezers and refrigerators that there is some energy
lost when it's opened? *

Usually people select an appliance on usage factors and consideration of
its energy consumption. *Given that they made a specific choice, they must
have a great deal of time on their hands to worry about relatively
insiginificant issues as this.

--
* * * * * * *Wayne Boatwright * * * * * *
(correct the spelling of "geemail" to reply)

*******************************************
Date: Sunday, 10(X)/05(V)/08(MMVIII)
*******************************************
* * * *Countdown till Veteran's Day * * *
* * * * * 5wks 1dys 6hrs 48mins * * * * *
*******************************************
* Therefore, knowing that you are merely *
* *human, do not assign yourself merit. *- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Whats your problem. I tested my Energy Star Sears frige several times
with a Kill-A-Watt meter, the results I post are what I found in
actual use in a kitchen that goes to 85f. Do a test and post something
other than an opinion.

On Oct 6, 5:09*am, wrote:
PanHandler wrote:
"Wayne Boatwright" wrote

First it was the idiot who wanted to encase his freezer in thick foam
insulation and operate it in a kitchen kept at barely above freezing
temperature.

And how efficient do you suppose *that* process was?

At best, a $23.95 new Danfoss freezer thermostat ($0.00 if scrounged from
a dead freezer) that turns on the bulb in the fridge when the freezer temp
rises to 15 F might cut the $51 annual yellow-tag cost to $3.60.

Or less, with more complex controls.

Nick

How could putting in an electric heater in a refrigerator make it
"more effecent" No dont answer that, It just wont make it more
"efficent" My Sears 19.5 resessed-covered with foam is more efficent
than Danfos ratings, Danfoss was-is not up to modern standards on
Compressors, [at least 5 years ago they were not].

"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...
Wayne Boatwright wrote:

As are you.

But there's no cause to belittle me for trying harder.

I was not intentionally trying to "belittle" you. I just find it
incredible that anyone would go to such lengths.


My grandmother had a cigar-box labeled "Bits of string too short to be of
any use."

I read where someone had 3 coffee cans labeled: "Nails", "Bent Nails", and
"Slightly Bent Nails".

Don Young

On Mon 06 Oct 2008 03:50:32a, ransley told us...

On Oct 5, 12:17*pm, Wayne Boatwright
wrote:
On Sun 05 Oct 2008 04:41:06p, ransley told us...

On Oct 5, 6:26*pm, mike wrote:
My new fridge says it costs $43/year to run. Call it T$
What test conditions lead to that number?

If I let it run and never open the door, it will cost me X$ to run.

So, the annual cost of opening the door is Y$ = T$ - X$.

What's the magnitude of Y$? *And what opening rate does it assume?

If it's a significant percentage of the total cost, it might make
sense to address the opening problem.

95% of my accesses are for stuff stored on the door.
The inside is mostly empty and rarely accessed.
Maybe curtain the inside of the box?
OR fill the empty space with empty boxes so less cold
air spills out when the door opens.
It's the same concept
as putting open-topped vessels in your toilet tank to reduce
the water/flush.

Sounds like it's probably way into diminishing returns, but
every little bit helps save the planet.

Any idea the ratio of Y$ to T$?

Thanks, mike

If you dont open it it will cost less than T, if you use it minimaly
it should cost T, how they test is published somewhere, try
www.energystar.govI get less than T with easy use. That 43$ figure is
unlikely the amount that you pay per kwh. What do they say 0.08kwh,
im at 0.13

First it was the idiot who wanted to encase his freezer in thick foam
insulation and operate it in a kitchen kept at barely above freezing
temperature.

Now this...

Can't people accept the fact that an appliance takes energy to operate
it
,
and in the case of freezers and refrigerators that there is some energy
lost when it's opened? *

Usually people select an appliance on usage factors and consideration
of its energy consumption. *Given that they made a specific choice,
they m
ust
have a great deal of time on their hands to worry about relatively
insiginificant issues as this.

Whats your problem. I tested my Energy Star Sears frige several times
with a Kill-A-Watt meter, the results I post are what I found in
actual use in a kitchen that goes to 85f. Do a test and post something
other than an opinion.

What's the point? Were you going to return it if you didn't like the
results? Both my refrigerator and upright freezer are Energy Star
compliant. My kitchen is kept at a constant 75°F. Nothing's likely to
change how much energy they use, except possibly how often and for how
long I open the door. That, too, is not likely to change since I open the
doors when I need to and for no longer than necessary.

You gotta a problem with that? Tough!

--
Wayne Boatwright
(correct the spelling of "geemail" to reply)

*******************************************
Date: Monday, 10(X)/06(VI)/08(MMVIII)
*******************************************
Countdown till Veteran's Day
5wks 19hrs 8mins
*******************************************
Cats must knock things off the coffee
table so they can lie down more

Wayne Boatwright wrote:

As are you.

But there's no cause to belittle me for trying harder.

I was not intentionally trying to "belittle" you. I just find it
incredible that anyone would go to such lengths.


My grandmother had a cigar-box labeled "Bits of string too short to be of
any use."

On Mon 06 Oct 2008 05:04:52a, HeyBub told us...

Wayne Boatwright wrote:

As are you.

But there's no cause to belittle me for trying harder.

I was not intentionally trying to "belittle" you. I just find it
incredible that anyone would go to such lengths.


My grandmother had a cigar-box labeled "Bits of string too short to be of
any use."

LOL!


--
Wayne Boatwright
(correct the spelling of "geemail" to reply)

*******************************************
Date: Monday, 10(X)/06(VI)/08(MMVIII)
*******************************************
Countdown till Veteran's Day
5wks 18hrs
*******************************************
Abandon all hope ye who have entered
cyberspace.

On Oct 6, 6:57*am, Wayne Boatwright
wrote:
On Mon 06 Oct 2008 03:50:32a, ransley told us...





On Oct 5, 12:17*pm, Wayne Boatwright
wrote:
On Sun 05 Oct 2008 04:41:06p, ransley told us...
On Oct 5, 6:26*pm, mike wrote:
My new fridge says it costs $43/year to run. Call it T$
What test conditions lead to that number?

If I let it run and never open the door, it will cost me X$ to run.

So, the annual cost of opening the door is Y$ = T$ - X$.

What's the magnitude of Y$? *And what opening rate does it assume?

If it's a significant percentage of the total cost, it might make
sense to address the opening problem.

95% of my accesses are for stuff stored on the door.
The inside is mostly empty and rarely accessed.
Maybe curtain the inside of the box?
OR fill the empty space with empty boxes so less cold
air spills out when the door opens.
It's the same concept
as putting open-topped vessels in your toilet tank to reduce
the water/flush.

Sounds like it's probably way into diminishing returns, but
every little bit helps save the planet.

Any idea the ratio of Y$ to T$?

Thanks, mike

If you dont open it it will cost less than T, if you use it minimaly
it should cost T, how they test is published somewhere, try
www.energystar.govIget less than T with easy use. That 43$ figure is
unlikely the amount that you pay per kwh. What do they say 0.08kwh,
im at 0.13

First it was the idiot who wanted to encase his freezer in thick foam
insulation and operate it in a kitchen kept at barely above freezing
temperature.

Now this...

Can't people accept the fact that an appliance takes energy to operate
it
,
and in the case of freezers and refrigerators that there is some energy
lost when it's opened? *

Usually people select an appliance on usage factors and consideration
of its energy consumption. *Given that they made a specific choice,
they m
ust
have a great deal of time on their hands to worry about relatively
insiginificant issues as this.
Whats your problem. I tested my Energy Star Sears frige several times
with a Kill-A-Watt meter, the results I post are what I found in
actual use in a kitchen that goes to 85f. Do a test and post something
other than an opinion.

What's the point? *Were you going to return it if you didn't like the
results? *Both my refrigerator and upright freezer are Energy Star
compliant. *My kitchen is kept at a constant 75°F. *Nothing's likely to
change how much energy they use, except possibly how often and for how
long I open the door. *That, too, is not likely to change since I open the
doors when I need to and for no longer than necessary.

You gotta a problem with that? *Tough!

--
* * * * * * *Wayne Boatwright * * * * * *
(correct the spelling of "geemail" to reply)

*******************************************
Date: Monday, 10(X)/06(VI)/08(MMVIII)
*******************************************
* * * *Countdown till Veteran's Day * * *
* * * * * * *5wks 19hrs 8mins * * * * * * *
*******************************************
* *Cats must knock things off the coffee *
* * * table so they can lie down more * * *- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I dont think you understood my original post, I believe in, and have
all energy star apliances and was trying to point out energy star
ratings can be met by consumers, even beaten.

On Mon 06 Oct 2008 07:44:36a, ransley told us...

On Oct 6, 6:57*am, Wayne Boatwright
wrote:
On Mon 06 Oct 2008 03:50:32a, ransley told us...





On Oct 5, 12:17*pm, Wayne Boatwright
wrote:
On Sun 05 Oct 2008 04:41:06p, ransley told us...
On Oct 5, 6:26*pm, mike wrote:
My new fridge says it costs $43/year to run. Call it T$
What test conditions lead to that number?

If I let it run and never open the door, it will cost me X$ to
run.

So, the annual cost of opening the door is Y$ = T$ - X$.

What's the magnitude of Y$? *And what opening rate does it assume
?

If it's a significant percentage of the total cost, it might make
sense to address the opening problem.

95% of my accesses are for stuff stored on the door.
The inside is mostly empty and rarely accessed.
Maybe curtain the inside of the box?
OR fill the empty space with empty boxes so less cold
air spills out when the door opens.
It's the same concept
as putting open-topped vessels in your toilet tank to reduce
the water/flush.

Sounds like it's probably way into diminishing returns, but
every little bit helps save the planet.

Any idea the ratio of Y$ to T$?

Thanks, mike

If you dont open it it will cost less than T, if you use it
minimaly
it should cost T, how they test is published somewhere, try
www.energystar.govIget less than T with easy use. That 43$ figure is
unlikely the amount that you pay per kwh. What do they say 0.08kwh,
im at 0.13

First it was the idiot who wanted to encase his freezer in thick foam
insulation and operate it in a kitchen kept at barely above freezing
temperature.

Now this...

Can't people accept the fact that an appliance takes energy to
operate
it
,
and in the case of freezers and refrigerators that there is some
energ
y
lost when it's opened? *

Usually people select an appliance on usage factors and consideration
of its energy consumption. *Given that they made a specific choice,
they m
ust
have a great deal of time on their hands to worry about relatively
insiginificant issues as this.
Whats your problem. I tested my Energy Star Sears frige several times
with a Kill-A-Watt meter, the results I post are what I found in
actual use in a kitchen that goes to 85f. Do a test and post something
other than an opinion.

What's the point? *Were you going to return it if you didn't like the
results? *Both my refrigerator and upright freezer are Energy Star
compliant. *My kitchen is kept at a constant 75°F. *Nothing's likel
y to
change how much energy they use, except possibly how often and for how
long I open the door. *That, too, is not likely to change since I open
the
doors when I need to and for no longer than necessary.

You gotta a problem with that? *Tough!


I dont think you understood my original post, I believe in, and have
all energy star apliances and was trying to point out energy star
ratings can be met by consumers, even beaten.


Perhaps I didn't. Thanks for clarifying. I'm all for buying higher
efficiency and energy conserving appliances for the home. However, I put
convenience above *extraordinary* measures to lower my energy rate. I do
not have high electric bills.

--
Wayne Boatwright
(correct the spelling of "geemail" to reply)

*******************************************
Date: Monday, 10(X)/06(VI)/08(MMVIII)
*******************************************
Countdown till Veteran's Day
5wks 15hrs 23mins
*******************************************
I dreamed I saw the bombers turning
into butterflies.

On Mon 06 Oct 2008 04:50:42a, Don Young told us...


"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...
Wayne Boatwright wrote:

As are you.

But there's no cause to belittle me for trying harder.

I was not intentionally trying to "belittle" you. I just find it
incredible that anyone would go to such lengths.


My grandmother had a cigar-box labeled "Bits of string too short to be
of any use."

I read where someone had 3 coffee cans labeled: "Nails", "Bent Nails",
and "Slightly Bent Nails".

I believe it!


--
Wayne Boatwright
(correct the spelling of "geemail" to reply)

*******************************************
Date: Monday, 10(X)/06(VI)/08(MMVIII)
*******************************************
Countdown till Veteran's Day
5wks 4hrs 44mins
*******************************************
STUPIDITY is NOT a HANDICAP! Park
elsewhere!

vinny had written this in response to
http://www.thestuccocompany.com/main...ns-334852-.htm
:


-------------------------------------
mike wrote:




My new fridge says it costs $43/year to run. Call it T$
What test conditions lead to that number?

If I let it run and never open the door, it will cost me X$ to run.

So, the annual cost of opening the door is Y$ = T$ - X$.

What's the magnitude of Y$? And what opening rate does it assume?

If it's a significant percentage of the total cost, it might make
sense to address the opening problem.

95% of my accesses are for stuff stored on the door.
The inside is mostly empty and rarely accessed.
Maybe curtain the inside of the box?
OR fill the empty space with empty boxes so less cold
air spills out when the door opens.
It's the same concept
as putting open-topped vessels in your toilet tank to reduce
the water/flush.

Sounds like it's probably way into diminishing returns, but
every little bit helps save the planet.

Any idea the ratio of Y$ to T$?

Thanks, mike


I agree that they should put some sort of information on how they came up
with $43 cost to run a fridge for the whole year. How many times it was
open and at what temp setting the fridge is in..etc..



##-----------------------------------------------##
Delivered via http://www.thestuccocompany.com/
Building Construction and Maintenance Forum
Web and RSS access to your favorite newsgroup -
alt.home.repair - 317267 messages and counting!
##-----------------------------------------------##

On Oct 8, 1:46*am, (vinny)
wrote:
vinny had written this in response tohttp://www.thestuccocompany.com/maintenance/Refrigerator-efficiency-t...
*:

-------------------------------------





mike wrote:
My new fridge says it costs $43/year to run. Call it T$
What test conditions lead to that number?
If I let it run and never open the door, it will cost me X$ to run.
So, the annual cost of opening the door is Y$ = T$ - X$.
What's the magnitude of Y$? *And what opening rate does it assume?
If it's a significant percentage of the total cost, it might make
sense to address the opening problem.
95% of my accesses are for stuff stored on the door.
The inside is mostly empty and rarely accessed.
Maybe curtain the inside of the box?
OR fill the empty space with empty boxes so less cold
air spills out when the door opens.
It's the same concept
as putting open-topped vessels in your toilet tank to reduce
the water/flush.
Sounds like it's probably way into diminishing returns, but
every little bit helps save the planet.
Any idea the ratio of Y$ to T$?
Thanks, mike

I agree that they should put some sort of information on how they came up
with $43 cost to run a fridge for the whole year. How many times it was
open and at what temp setting the fridge is in..etc..

##-----------------------------------------------##
Delivered via *http://www.thestuccocompany.com/
Building Construction and Maintenance Forum
Web and RSS access to your favorite newsgroup -
alt.home.repair - 317267 messages and counting!
##-----------------------------------------------##- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -



I can tell you that the new Kitchenaid side by side that I bought a
few months ago is spot on to the Energy Star numbers on the label.
It was supposed to use $95 a year to run and I measured it for several
days with a Kilowatt meter and that indeed is what it was using. And
that was with normal usage, opening closing doors, etc.

On the other hand, the DOE Energy Star website has a calculator that
supposed to show you how much your current fridge uses vs a new one.
You can put in your current fridge make/model and energy cost and it
generates numbers. That was way off. It indicated my 24 year old
fridge should be using over $300 a year. With the kilowatt meter, it
was actually around $190. I suspect this calculator may have built-
in assumptions about the old fridge, ie that it has badly leaking door
seals, dirtied up coils, etc.

My bottom line conclusion was that I'm saving about $100 a year with
the new fridge vs the old one. Which means the cost savings to run a
new one can be a factor in making a replacement decision. But
clearly in my case, even at the current energy costs, replacing it is
not justified based just on economics.

I think as others have pointed out, it doesn't make sense to try to
take additional measures like putting curtains inside, filling up the
fridge with thermal ballast, etc. in the hopes of saving anything.
When you get down to $95 a year to run a 25 cb ft side by side, I
don't see that you're going to do much other than inconvenience
yourself.