On Tuesday, January 1, 2019 at 3:04:41 PM UTC-5, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 00:45:53 -0000, trader_4 wrote:

On Monday, December 31, 2018 at 7:35:36 PM UTC-5, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 00:05:09 -0000, Roger Wilco wrote:

On 12/31/18 4:07 PM, William Gothberg wrote:
I thought modern freezers were meant to have better insulation, so why is mine always running? It doesn't seem to have a lower duty cycle than the old ones of 30 years ago. Sure, the power consumption (according to the label) is less, but shouldn't
they have better insulation nowadays? Or was all that banned by the greenies for that ozone nonsense?

The really high R-value foams are much more expensive...which adds cost to the unit. And some of the high-performance foam out-gasses which upsets the environmental whackos.

Truth be told, most people ignore the Energy Guide label and just buy the shiny stainless steel model. Energy Star? What's that?

Maybe if the energy guide label had actual numbers people would take notice. A to G is not useful. But 50kWh per year is, people can quickly establish how much it will save them per year, and if it's worth buying the more expensive model. When you buy a car, it doesn't have a rating from A to G, it has miles per gallon, so you can work out how much petrol it will cost you.

HEre in the US the label shows the estimate of what it costs per year to
run, assuming electric is some average cost of electric, and they give
that cost per kwh they use too, whatever it is. From that you can
extrapolate.

Ours is most likely EU bull****. They never get anything right, which is why we tried to leave, but our current ****wit government is ignoring our request.

However I bet not many are buying based on that anyway.

Depends if you want to save money or have something of the correct colour or size for your needs. But I would think most people care about either "the environment" [1], or their budget.

[1] I put that in quotes because it's usually due to morons thinking that giving off CO2 kills the planet, despite it being raw materials for plants to grow.

The last comment is incredibly stupid. Just because normal amounts of something
are beneficial doesn't mean that excessive amounts can't have serious effects.
You can die from drinking too much water. And in the case of CO2, plants
obviously are not absorbing the excess CO2 being produced by man, as evidenced
by the simple fact that CO2 in the atmosphere has gone up by a third in just
the last 100 years and is now as high as it was 700,000 years ago. And
those previous up cycles took tens or hundreds of thousands of years, not
just 100 years. That extra CO2 traps heat.

You never have facts to support your liberal causes just name calling.


"trader_4" wrote in message
...


The last comment is incredibly stupid.

On Tuesday, January 1, 2019 at 4:07:50 PM UTC-5, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 10:28:51 -0000, alan_m wrote:

On 31/12/2018 21:44, William Gothberg wrote:

It's a perfectly valid question, why are we still using equipment that
needs running so often?

Proportional control rather than bang/bang control?

If the insulation was better than that used 30 years ago, then the time between switching off and back on again would be longer, as less cold would leak out - this can be verified by observing the sides are cold. Also, if you look at the energy ratings on various freezers, you'll find a factor of almost 4 between different models, so clearly some are using really **** insulation.


Another incorrect conclusion. It's also very likely that newer fridges
maintain temperature more accurately than old ones. New ones, for example,
mostly have electronic controls now and don't rely on an old bi-metal
thermostat design. To maintain temperature closer, the off time would
be shorter, regardless of the insulation.

How can he be wrong when you have no facts to support your name calling.

" It's also very likely " is not a fact...Jack!
It is only your limited view



"trader_4" wrote in message
...

Another incorrect conclusion. It's also very likely that newer fridges
maintain temperature more accurately than old ones.

On Wed, 2 Jan 2019 05:36:27 -0800 (PST), tardo_4 an especially stupid,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blathered:


Another incorrect conclusion.

The ONLY conclusion here is that he is a trolling asshole, while YOU are a
troll-feeding senile asshole, tardo_4!

On Wed, 2 Jan 2019 05:31:59 -0800 (PST), tardo_4 an especially stupid,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blathered:



The last comment is incredibly stupid.

Well, it was meant for YOU, senile troll-feeding asshole!

On Wed, 2 Jan 2019 06:22:06 -0500, Jack Frost, another mentally challenged,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blathered:


Look for Energy Star Certification, the best chest freezers are Energy Star certified.

Nah, he will just look and count how many senile idiots took all his baits
in this thread again and then he'll jerk off to his latest big success, you
****ed up, troll-feeding, senile idiots!

On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 00:52:09 -0000, Clare Snyder wrote:

On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 16:41:26 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"
wrote:

On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 16:28:09 -0000, Arthur Conan Doyle wrote:

"Commander Kinsey" wrote:

No, I'm referring to all fridges and freezers in general. They just don't seem to run less than they did 30 years ago. I thought we'd got better insulation now.

I suspect the compressors are smaller in newer units. That means lower enegy
consumption, but they need to run longer for a given level of cooling.

Indeed, but that doesn't negate the fact we haven't fixed the poor insulation. People seem to be going mad insulating houses, but not freezers.
That's your uninformed opinion.

No, it's a statement of fact.

On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 00:53:48 -0000, Clare Snyder wrote:

On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 16:42:21 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"
wrote:

On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 16:19:36 -0000, danny burstein wrote:

In "Commander Kinsey" writes:


How's about starting off the new year with a resolution
to research issues a bit more closely. Like, in this
case, how much power those motors are drawing when
running today versus 30 years ago.

Which has nothing to do with insulation.

Bzzt. They're all interconnected.

And your rants have nothing to do with reality or
thinking.

Find a five year old to explain basic thermodynamics
to you.

A lower power motor does not affect the R value of the insulation. Are you quite mad? Do you really think if you put a more efficient boiler in your house that your house will magically gain better insulation and cool more slowly?
It doesn't affect the R value of the insulation but it may addect
the run time of the compressor which is your only half-baked clue that
your new freezer has no better insulation than your old one.

You've made an invalid assumption. Every modern freezer I've seen runs for the same time as older ones, and they cool at the same rate. So clearly the compressor outputs the same cooling, but using less electricity. All well and good, but I can feel the cold escaping from the unit. And I notice the compressor has to keep running just as often as it used to,. So obviously the insulation sux. Oh and also, just have a look at the energy consumption ratings, which vary by a factor of 4 between different models. Looks like a a lot of them are rubbish.

On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 00:59:20 -0000, Clare Snyder wrote:

On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 16:48:46 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"
wrote:

On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 15:27:17 -0000, trader_4 wrote:

On Tuesday, January 1, 2019 at 10:14:26 AM UTC-5, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 13:12:21 -0000, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:

harry wrote:
On Monday, 31 December 2018 21:08:00 UTC, William Gothberg wrote:
I thought modern freezers were meant to have better insulation, so
why is mine always running? It doesn't seem to have a lower duty
cycle than the old ones of 30 years ago. Sure, the power
consumption (according to the label) is less, but shouldn't they
have better insulation nowadays? Or was all that banned by the
greenies for that ozone nonsense?

It's probably lost refrigerant gas.
ie a leak.

Hucker probably got it free.
And yes, could be a gas leak or it is just shagged.

No, I'm referring to all fridges and freezers in general. They just don't seem to run less than they did 30 years ago. I thought we'd got better insulation now.


Even assuming it's true, that current units run the same amount of time
that old ones did, the inference that this implies anything about
insulation is nonsense. New units use half or less the energy that old
ones did. You could have a large, old inefficient compressor running for 5 minutes
and a high efficiency new one running for 10 minutes and the latter could use
substantially less energy. It's not just the run times, it's the actual
power draw while running and the amount of time it runs. My fridge is so
quiet, I don't even know when it's running.

But that doesn't mean the insulation's better, it means the compressor and cooling pipes are better. If you get a more efficient heating system in your house, you don't gain free insulation, you have to buy that seperately. New freezers might use less power than before, but they're still losing the same amount of cold into the room, this could easily be sorted. And if you look at the energy efficiency ratings for new ones, you'll find a range of 5 to 19p/litre/year. That's almost a factor of 4, so we can easily see that a lot of makes (including big names like Bosch, Samsung, Whirlpool) must be doing something drastically bad. Assuming everyone uses decent compressors, it must be the shoddy insulation.
You are ASS U ME ing a lot.

Are you 6? Did you really think that was an appropriate pun for an adult to make?

On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 01:13:54 -0000, Clare Snyder wrote:

On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 18:16:54 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"
wrote:

On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 18:10:11 -0000, Steve wrote:

wotsit Commander Kinsey sed...

On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 17:19:13 -0000, Steve wrote:

wotsit William Gothberg sed...
I thought modern freezers were meant to have better insulation, so why is mine always running?

Try using some common sense, Peter. Either there is something
wrong with it, or it's user error.

Not "it", but almost every modern freezer, belonging to me or otherwise.

If the outside walls of the freezer don't feel cold than it's
unlikely to be crappy insulation.

They do feel cold. (Attempting to delete your double negative) So you're saying it IS crappy insulation, as I said.

Are you trying to freeze large amounts of unfrozen food?

No.

You could have your thermostat set too cold, in which case the
compressor will run continually because it is trying to reach a
temp it can't attain.

It's set so all the freezer is -18C or lower.

You might have your superfreeze on, so it will run continually.

It doesn't have that function, and I haven't seen that on anything made in the last two decades. Not sure why they ever had it, you always want the inside to be at -18C or less, so the stat should turn on if it's above -18C. You just don't need to tell it you've put new food in.

Does it need defrosting? That can cause the freezer to run
continually as the frost build up acts as insulation preventing it
from reaching the set temp.

All freezers have been frost free for the last two decades, so no.

It could be short of gas or the compressor may be not pumping
efficiently. The thermostat may be knackered.

I'm talking about NEW freezers.

Rule out what could be the problem, don't assume.

BTW, you're a ****wit.

Evidently not, as nothing you've said was of any use.

It's funny how you and only you have this problem, then, isn't it?
Seeing as how a great national debate about crappy freezer
insulation seems to be curiously absent.

Because nobody else has noticed the ****ty designs? This is the 21st century ffs. We still have internal combustion engines in cars from a whole century or more ago. We still haven't cured the common cold. Most cancers still can't be cured. Loads of illnesses don't even have names yet. What the **** are scientists doing?!
Get off your useless ass and do something about it.

I don't own a donkey, I use a car. Or did you mean arse? Learn how to spell.

Iinstead of kvetching

Get a spellchecker, they're free you know.

endlessly about things you are ignorant about go out and
educate yourself so you can make a difference. Otherwize you are just
a pitiful waste of space and oxygen.

More like I'm pointing out how **** things are and you're defending the worthless moronic designers.

On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 11:22:06 -0000, Jack Frost wrote:

On 12/31/18 4:07 PM, William Gothberg wrote:
I thought modern freezers were meant to have better insulation, so why is mine always running? It doesn't seem to have a lower duty cycle than the old ones of 30 years ago. Sure, the power consumption (according to the label) is less, but shouldn't they
have better insulation nowadays? Or was all that banned by the greenies for that ozone nonsense?


Look for Energy Star Certification, the best chest freezers are Energy Star certified.
On average, an Energy Star chest freezer costs only $53 dollars per year, which is $50 dollars less than most older models.

I'm in the UK, where they ALL have energy ratings by law. But most of them are rubbish ratings. They made a law insisting they publish how **** they are, but the law doesn't force them to make better ones. Doh!

In "Commander Kinsey" writes:

You've made an invalid assumption. Every modern freezer I've seen
runs for the same time as older ones, and they cool at the same
rate. So clearly the compressor outputs the same cooling, but using
less electricity. All well and good, but I can feel the cold escaping
from the unit.

"cold escaping". There you go doubling down on your stupidity again.

--
__________________________________________________ ___
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key

[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]

On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 15:49:26 -0000, danny burstein wrote:

In "Commander Kinsey" writes:

You've made an invalid assumption. Every modern freezer I've seen
runs for the same time as older ones, and they cool at the same
rate. So clearly the compressor outputs the same cooling, but using
less electricity. All well and good, but I can feel the cold escaping
from the unit.

"cold escaping". There you go doubling down on your stupidity again.

There's no reason to think of it as heat. Have you never calculated current flow imagining it flows from + to -?

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 00:53:48 -0000, Clare Snyder
wrote:
On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 16:42:21 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"
wrote:

On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 16:19:36 -0000, danny burstein
wrote:
In "Commander Kinsey"
writes:

How's about starting off the new year with a resolution
to research issues a bit more closely. Like, in this
case, how much power those motors are drawing when
running today versus 30 years ago.

Which has nothing to do with insulation.

Bzzt. They're all interconnected.

And your rants have nothing to do with reality or
thinking.

Find a five year old to explain basic thermodynamics
to you.

A lower power motor does not affect the R value of the insulation. Are
you quite mad? Do you really think if you put a more efficient
boiler in your house that your house will magically gain better
insulation and cool more slowly?
It doesn't affect the R value of the insulation but it may addect
the run time of the compressor which is your only half-baked clue
that your new freezer has no better insulation than your old one.

You've made an invalid assumption. Every modern freezer I've seen
runs for the same time as older ones, and they cool at the same rate.
So clearly the compressor outputs the same cooling, but using less
electricity. All well and good, but I can feel the cold escaping
from the unit. And I notice the compressor has to keep running just
as often as it used to,. So obviously the insulation sux. Oh and
also, just have a look at the energy consumption ratings, which vary
by a factor of 4 between different models. Looks like a a lot of
them are rubbish.

Make, model and age?

On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 16:35:47 -0000, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 00:53:48 -0000, Clare Snyder
wrote:
On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 16:42:21 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"
wrote:

On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 16:19:36 -0000, danny burstein
wrote:
In "Commander Kinsey"
writes:

How's about starting off the new year with a resolution
to research issues a bit more closely. Like, in this
case, how much power those motors are drawing when
running today versus 30 years ago.

Which has nothing to do with insulation.

Bzzt. They're all interconnected.

And your rants have nothing to do with reality or
thinking.

Find a five year old to explain basic thermodynamics
to you.

A lower power motor does not affect the R value of the insulation. Are
you quite mad? Do you really think if you put a more efficient
boiler in your house that your house will magically gain better
insulation and cool more slowly?
It doesn't affect the R value of the insulation but it may addect
the run time of the compressor which is your only half-baked clue
that your new freezer has no better insulation than your old one.

You've made an invalid assumption. Every modern freezer I've seen
runs for the same time as older ones, and they cool at the same rate.
So clearly the compressor outputs the same cooling, but using less
electricity. All well and good, but I can feel the cold escaping
from the unit. And I notice the compressor has to keep running just
as often as it used to,. So obviously the insulation sux. Oh and
also, just have a look at the energy consumption ratings, which vary
by a factor of 4 between different models. Looks like a a lot of
them are rubbish.

Make, model and age?

Take your pick and explain the difference of 5 to 19p running cost:
https://www.sust-it.net/energy-savin...freezers-large

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 16:35:47 -0000, Mr Pounder Esquire
wrote:
Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 00:53:48 -0000, Clare Snyder
wrote:
On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 16:42:21 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"
wrote:

On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 16:19:36 -0000, danny burstein
wrote:
In "Commander Kinsey"
writes:

How's about starting off the new year with a resolution
to research issues a bit more closely. Like, in this
case, how much power those motors are drawing when
running today versus 30 years ago.

Which has nothing to do with insulation.

Bzzt. They're all interconnected.

And your rants have nothing to do with reality or
thinking.

Find a five year old to explain basic thermodynamics
to you.

A lower power motor does not affect the R value of the
insulation. Are you quite mad? Do you really think if you put a
more efficient boiler in your house that your house will
magically gain better insulation and cool more slowly?
It doesn't affect the R value of the insulation but it may addect
the run time of the compressor which is your only half-baked clue
that your new freezer has no better insulation than your old one.

You've made an invalid assumption. Every modern freezer I've seen
runs for the same time as older ones, and they cool at the same
rate. So clearly the compressor outputs the same cooling, but using
less electricity. All well and good, but I can feel the cold
escaping from the unit. And I notice the compressor has to keep
running just as often as it used to,. So obviously the insulation
sux. Oh and also, just have a look at the energy consumption
ratings, which vary by a factor of 4 between different models. Looks
like a a lot of them are rubbish.

Make, model and age?

Take your pick and explain the difference of 5 to 19p running cost:
https://www.sust-it.net/energy-savin...freezers-large

Answer my question.

On 1/2/2019 5:36 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Tuesday, January 1, 2019 at 4:07:50 PM UTC-5, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 10:28:51 -0000, alan_m wrote:

On 31/12/2018 21:44, William Gothberg wrote:

It's a perfectly valid question, why are we still using equipment that
needs running so often?

Proportional control rather than bang/bang control?

If the insulation was better than that used 30 years ago, then the time between switching off and back on again would be longer, as less cold would leak out - this can be verified by observing the sides are cold. Also, if you look at the energy ratings on various freezers, you'll find a factor of almost 4 between different models, so clearly some are using really **** insulation.


Another incorrect conclusion. It's also very likely that newer fridges
maintain temperature more accurately than old ones. New ones, for example,
mostly have electronic controls now and don't rely on an old bi-metal
thermostat design. To maintain temperature closer, the off time would
be shorter, regardless of the insulation.

I am sure the new freezers run longer because that is what they are
designed to do. It is more efficient than having them short cycle. Every
time it cycles, power is used just getting temps to working levels, and
longer running time allows smaller more efficient compressors.

On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 16:47:53 -0000, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 16:35:47 -0000, Mr Pounder Esquire
wrote:
Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 00:53:48 -0000, Clare Snyder
wrote:
On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 16:42:21 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"
wrote:

On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 16:19:36 -0000, danny burstein
wrote:
In "Commander Kinsey"
writes:

How's about starting off the new year with a resolution
to research issues a bit more closely. Like, in this
case, how much power those motors are drawing when
running today versus 30 years ago.

Which has nothing to do with insulation.

Bzzt. They're all interconnected.

And your rants have nothing to do with reality or
thinking.

Find a five year old to explain basic thermodynamics
to you.

A lower power motor does not affect the R value of the
insulation. Are you quite mad? Do you really think if you put a
more efficient boiler in your house that your house will
magically gain better insulation and cool more slowly?
It doesn't affect the R value of the insulation but it may addect
the run time of the compressor which is your only half-baked clue
that your new freezer has no better insulation than your old one.

You've made an invalid assumption. Every modern freezer I've seen
runs for the same time as older ones, and they cool at the same
rate. So clearly the compressor outputs the same cooling, but using
less electricity. All well and good, but I can feel the cold
escaping from the unit. And I notice the compressor has to keep
running just as often as it used to,. So obviously the insulation
sux. Oh and also, just have a look at the energy consumption
ratings, which vary by a factor of 4 between different models. Looks
like a a lot of them are rubbish.

Make, model and age?

Take your pick and explain the difference of 5 to 19p running cost:
https://www.sust-it.net/energy-savin...freezers-large

Answer my question.

There is no specific answer, as I'm referring to many modern fridge freezers, most of which aren't mine.

On Wednesday, January 2, 2019 at 10:45:29 AM UTC-5, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 00:53:48 -0000, Clare Snyder wrote:

On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 16:42:21 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"
wrote:

On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 16:19:36 -0000, danny burstein wrote:

In "Commander Kinsey" writes:


How's about starting off the new year with a resolution
to research issues a bit more closely. Like, in this
case, how much power those motors are drawing when
running today versus 30 years ago.

Which has nothing to do with insulation.

Bzzt. They're all interconnected.

And your rants have nothing to do with reality or
thinking.

Find a five year old to explain basic thermodynamics
to you.

A lower power motor does not affect the R value of the insulation. Are you quite mad? Do you really think if you put a more efficient boiler in your house that your house will magically gain better insulation and cool more slowly?
It doesn't affect the R value of the insulation but it may addect
the run time of the compressor which is your only half-baked clue that
your new freezer has no better insulation than your old one.

You've made an invalid assumption. Every modern freezer I've seen runs for the same time as older ones, and they cool at the same rate.
So clearly the compressor outputs the same cooling, but using less electricity. All well and good, but I can feel the cold escaping from the unit.


Close the door, ****wit.

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 16:47:53 -0000, Mr Pounder Esquire
wrote:
Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 16:35:47 -0000, Mr Pounder Esquire
wrote:
Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 00:53:48 -0000, Clare Snyder
wrote:
On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 16:42:21 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"
wrote:

On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 16:19:36 -0000, danny burstein
wrote:
In "Commander Kinsey"
writes:

How's about starting off the new year with a resolution
to research issues a bit more closely. Like, in this
case, how much power those motors are drawing when
running today versus 30 years ago.

Which has nothing to do with insulation.

Bzzt. They're all interconnected.

And your rants have nothing to do with reality or
thinking.

Find a five year old to explain basic thermodynamics
to you.

A lower power motor does not affect the R value of the
insulation. Are you quite mad? Do you really think if you put a
more efficient boiler in your house that your house will
magically gain better insulation and cool more slowly?
It doesn't affect the R value of the insulation but it may
addect the run time of the compressor which is your only
half-baked clue that your new freezer has no better insulation
than your old one.

You've made an invalid assumption. Every modern freezer I've seen
runs for the same time as older ones, and they cool at the same
rate. So clearly the compressor outputs the same cooling, but
using less electricity. All well and good, but I can feel the
cold escaping from the unit. And I notice the compressor has to
keep running just as often as it used to,. So obviously the
insulation sux. Oh and also, just have a look at the energy
consumption ratings, which vary by a factor of 4 between
different models. Looks like a a lot of them are rubbish.

Make, model and age?

Take your pick and explain the difference of 5 to 19p running cost:
https://www.sust-it.net/energy-savin...freezers-large

Answer my question.

There is no specific answer, as I'm referring to many modern fridge
freezers, most of which aren't mine.

All I asked for was the make model and age of the appliance in question.
And you can't even do that!
And, you are weaseling.

On 1/2/2019 10:59 AM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 15:49:26 -0000, danny burstein
wrote:

In "Commander Kinsey"
writes:

You've made an invalid assumption.* Every modern freezer I've seen
runs for the same time as older ones, and they cool at the same
rate.* So clearly the compressor outputs the same cooling, but using
less electricity.* All well and good, but I can feel the cold escaping
from the unit.

"cold escaping".* There you go doubling down on your stupidity again.

There's no reason to think of it as heat.* Have you never calculated
current flow imagining it flows from + to -?

You can't make cold unless you change the laws of physics. You don't
lose cold, you gain heat.

On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 17:47:17 -0000, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:

Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 16:47:53 -0000, Mr Pounder Esquire
wrote:
Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 16:35:47 -0000, Mr Pounder Esquire
wrote:
Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 00:53:48 -0000, Clare Snyder
wrote:
On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 16:42:21 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"
wrote:

On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 16:19:36 -0000, danny burstein
wrote:
In "Commander Kinsey"
writes:

How's about starting off the new year with a resolution
to research issues a bit more closely. Like, in this
case, how much power those motors are drawing when
running today versus 30 years ago.

Which has nothing to do with insulation.

Bzzt. They're all interconnected.

And your rants have nothing to do with reality or
thinking.

Find a five year old to explain basic thermodynamics
to you.

A lower power motor does not affect the R value of the
insulation. Are you quite mad? Do you really think if you put a
more efficient boiler in your house that your house will
magically gain better insulation and cool more slowly?
It doesn't affect the R value of the insulation but it may
addect the run time of the compressor which is your only
half-baked clue that your new freezer has no better insulation
than your old one.

You've made an invalid assumption. Every modern freezer I've seen
runs for the same time as older ones, and they cool at the same
rate. So clearly the compressor outputs the same cooling, but
using less electricity. All well and good, but I can feel the
cold escaping from the unit. And I notice the compressor has to
keep running just as often as it used to,. So obviously the
insulation sux. Oh and also, just have a look at the energy
consumption ratings, which vary by a factor of 4 between
different models. Looks like a a lot of them are rubbish.

Make, model and age?

Take your pick and explain the difference of 5 to 19p running cost:
https://www.sust-it.net/energy-savin...freezers-large

Answer my question.

There is no specific answer, as I'm referring to many modern fridge
freezers, most of which aren't mine.

All I asked for was the make model and age of the appliance in question.
And you can't even do that!
And, you are weaseling.

There is no one appliance in question, it's a general observation of several appliances, only two of which are mine, of various ages, but all young enough to have modern insulation and low power compressors.

On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 17:50:44 -0000, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 1/2/2019 10:59 AM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 15:49:26 -0000, danny burstein
wrote:

In "Commander Kinsey"
writes:

You've made an invalid assumption. Every modern freezer I've seen
runs for the same time as older ones, and they cool at the same
rate. So clearly the compressor outputs the same cooling, but using
less electricity. All well and good, but I can feel the cold escaping
from the unit.

"cold escaping". There you go doubling down on your stupidity again.

There's no reason to think of it as heat. Have you never calculated
current flow imagining it flows from + to -?

You can't make cold unless you change the laws of physics. You don't
lose cold, you gain heat.

Did what I just said go right over your head? Most people think of electricity going from the +ve end of the battery to the -ve end. But we know that's the wrong way round. It doesn't matter though, the calculations still work.

In the same way we can think of a freezer losing cold, just as an oven or a house loses heat. Or in summer an air conditioned house loses cold. Technically the heat is entering the house through the walls, but if we consider the house losing 2C of cold, it's the same thing as it gaining 2C of heat.

On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 17:06:12 -0000, trader_4 wrote:

On Wednesday, January 2, 2019 at 10:45:29 AM UTC-5, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 00:53:48 -0000, Clare Snyder wrote:

On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 16:42:21 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"
wrote:

On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 16:19:36 -0000, danny burstein wrote:

In "Commander Kinsey" writes:


How's about starting off the new year with a resolution
to research issues a bit more closely. Like, in this
case, how much power those motors are drawing when
running today versus 30 years ago.

Which has nothing to do with insulation.

Bzzt. They're all interconnected.

And your rants have nothing to do with reality or
thinking.

Find a five year old to explain basic thermodynamics
to you.

A lower power motor does not affect the R value of the insulation. Are you quite mad? Do you really think if you put a more efficient boiler in your house that your house will magically gain better insulation and cool more slowly?
It doesn't affect the R value of the insulation but it may addect
the run time of the compressor which is your only half-baked clue that
your new freezer has no better insulation than your old one.

You've made an invalid assumption. Every modern freezer I've seen runs for the same time as older ones, and they cool at the same rate.
So clearly the compressor outputs the same cooling, but using less electricity. All well and good, but I can feel the cold escaping from the unit.


Close the door, ****wit.

Don't give up the day job.

On 1/2/2019 11:17 AM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 16:53:28 -0000, Bob F wrote:

On 1/2/2019 5:36 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Tuesday, January 1, 2019 at 4:07:50 PM UTC-5, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 10:28:51 -0000, alan_m
wrote:

On 31/12/2018 21:44, William Gothberg wrote:

It's a perfectly valid question, why are we still using equipment
that
needs running so often?

Proportional control rather than bang/bang control?

If the insulation was better than that used 30 years ago, then the
time between switching off and back on again would be longer, as
less cold would leak out - this can be verified by observing the
sides are cold.* Also, if you look at the energy ratings on various
freezers, you'll find a factor of almost 4 between different models,
so clearly some are using really **** insulation.


Another incorrect conclusion.* It's also very likely that newer fridges
maintain temperature more accurately than old ones.* New ones, for
example,
mostly have electronic controls now and don't rely on an old bi-metal
thermostat design.* To maintain temperature closer, the off time would
be shorter, regardless of the insulation.

I am sure the new freezers run longer because that is what they are
designed to do. It is more efficient than having them short cycle. Every
time it cycles, power is used just getting temps to working levels, and
longer running time allows smaller more efficient compressors.

They don't seem to run longer, they run the same as the old ones.* But I
can tell they're outputting just as much cold.* When you first turn them
on, they get down to temperature just as quickly.* So if the output of
th compressor is the same with new ones, it shouldn't have to run so
much if the insulation has been improved.

If.

On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 13:36:27 -0000, trader_4 wrote:

On Tuesday, January 1, 2019 at 4:07:50 PM UTC-5, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 10:28:51 -0000, alan_m wrote:

On 31/12/2018 21:44, William Gothberg wrote:

It's a perfectly valid question, why are we still using equipment that
needs running so often?

Proportional control rather than bang/bang control?

If the insulation was better than that used 30 years ago, then the time between switching off and back on again would be longer, as less cold would leak out - this can be verified by observing the sides are cold. Also, if you look at the energy ratings on various freezers, you'll find a factor of almost 4 between different models, so clearly some are using really **** insulation.

Another incorrect conclusion. It's also very likely that newer fridges
maintain temperature more accurately than old ones. New ones, for example,
mostly have electronic controls now and don't rely on an old bi-metal
thermostat design. To maintain temperature closer, the off time would
be shorter, regardless of the insulation.

I observe newer models running for the same sort of time and the same sort of duty cycle. Ok, the compressor is using less power while running, but judging by the rate it cools down when you first switch it on, the output of the compressor is the same as with the older ones. So, the same duty cycle means that the same amount of cold is lost from new ones as old ones, ergo the insulation has not been improved.

And you haven't responded to "Also, if you look at the energy ratings on various freezers, you'll find a factor of almost 4 between different models."
Here's the link again: https://www.sust-it.net/energy-savin...freezers-large

On Wednesday, January 2, 2019 at 12:50:48 PM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 1/2/2019 10:59 AM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 15:49:26 -0000, danny burstein
wrote:

In "Commander Kinsey"
writes:

You've made an invalid assumption.Â* Every modern freezer I've seen
runs for the same time as older ones, and they cool at the same
rate.Â* So clearly the compressor outputs the same cooling, but using
less electricity.Â* All well and good, but I can feel the cold escaping
from the unit.

"cold escaping".Â* There you go doubling down on your stupidity again.

There's no reason to think of it as heat.Â* Have you never calculated
current flow imagining it flows from + to -?

You can't make cold unless you change the laws of physics. You don't
lose cold, you gain heat.

You essentially can lose cold. It I have a picnic cooler and it has two
pounds of ice in it and I take one pound out, it's lost some cold without
gaining heat, except for the negligible heat of the small amount of air
that replaces it. Make it replaced by a vacuum, if you like.

On 1/2/2019 11:15 AM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 13:36:27 -0000, trader_4 wrote:

On Tuesday, January 1, 2019 at 4:07:50 PM UTC-5, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 10:28:51 -0000, alan_m
wrote:

On 31/12/2018 21:44, William Gothberg wrote:

It's a perfectly valid question, why are we still using equipment
that
needs running so often?

Proportional control rather than bang/bang control?

If the insulation was better than that used 30 years ago, then the
time between switching off and back on again would be longer, as less
cold would leak out - this can be verified by observing the sides are
cold.* Also, if you look at the energy ratings on various freezers,
you'll find a factor of almost 4 between different models, so clearly
some are using really **** insulation.

Another incorrect conclusion.* It's also very likely that newer fridges
maintain temperature more accurately than old ones.* New ones, for
example,
mostly have electronic controls now and don't rely on an old bi-metal
thermostat design.* To maintain temperature closer, the off time would
be shorter, regardless of the insulation.

I observe newer models running for the same sort of time and the same
sort of duty cycle.* Ok, the compressor is using less power while
running, but judging by the rate it cools down when you first switch it
on, the output of the compressor is the same as with the older ones.
So, the same duty cycle means that the same amount of cold is lost from
new ones as old ones, ergo the insulation has not been improved.

And you haven't responded to "Also, if you look at the energy ratings on
various freezers, you'll find a factor of almost 4 between different
models."
Here's the link again:
https://www.sust-it.net/energy-savin...freezers-large

On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 16:53:28 -0000, Bob F wrote:

On 1/2/2019 5:36 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Tuesday, January 1, 2019 at 4:07:50 PM UTC-5, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 10:28:51 -0000, alan_m wrote:

On 31/12/2018 21:44, William Gothberg wrote:

It's a perfectly valid question, why are we still using equipment that
needs running so often?

Proportional control rather than bang/bang control?

If the insulation was better than that used 30 years ago, then the time between switching off and back on again would be longer, as less cold would leak out - this can be verified by observing the sides are cold. Also, if you look at the energy ratings on various freezers, you'll find a factor of almost 4 between different models, so clearly some are using really **** insulation.


Another incorrect conclusion. It's also very likely that newer fridges
maintain temperature more accurately than old ones. New ones, for example,
mostly have electronic controls now and don't rely on an old bi-metal
thermostat design. To maintain temperature closer, the off time would
be shorter, regardless of the insulation.

I am sure the new freezers run longer because that is what they are
designed to do. It is more efficient than having them short cycle. Every
time it cycles, power is used just getting temps to working levels, and
longer running time allows smaller more efficient compressors.

They don't seem to run longer, they run the same as the old ones. But I can tell they're outputting just as much cold. When you first turn them on, they get down to temperature just as quickly. So if the output of th compressor is the same with new ones, it shouldn't have to run so much if the insulation has been improved.

On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 13:31:59 -0000, trader_4 wrote:

On Tuesday, January 1, 2019 at 3:04:41 PM UTC-5, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 00:45:53 -0000, trader_4 wrote:

On Monday, December 31, 2018 at 7:35:36 PM UTC-5, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 00:05:09 -0000, Roger Wilco wrote:

On 12/31/18 4:07 PM, William Gothberg wrote:
I thought modern freezers were meant to have better insulation, so why is mine always running? It doesn't seem to have a lower duty cycle than the old ones of 30 years ago. Sure, the power consumption (according to the label) is less, but shouldn't
they have better insulation nowadays? Or was all that banned by the greenies for that ozone nonsense?

The really high R-value foams are much more expensive...which adds cost to the unit. And some of the high-performance foam out-gasses which upsets the environmental whackos.

Truth be told, most people ignore the Energy Guide label and just buy the shiny stainless steel model. Energy Star? What's that?

Maybe if the energy guide label had actual numbers people would take notice. A to G is not useful. But 50kWh per year is, people can quickly establish how much it will save them per year, and if it's worth buying the more expensive model. When you buy a car, it doesn't have a rating from A to G, it has miles per gallon, so you can work out how much petrol it will cost you.

HEre in the US the label shows the estimate of what it costs per year to
run, assuming electric is some average cost of electric, and they give
that cost per kwh they use too, whatever it is. From that you can
extrapolate.

Ours is most likely EU bull****. They never get anything right, which is why we tried to leave, but our current ****wit government is ignoring our request.

However I bet not many are buying based on that anyway.

Depends if you want to save money or have something of the correct colour or size for your needs. But I would think most people care about either "the environment" [1], or their budget.

[1] I put that in quotes because it's usually due to morons thinking that giving off CO2 kills the planet, despite it being raw materials for plants to grow.

The last comment is incredibly stupid. Just because normal amounts of something
are beneficial doesn't mean that excessive amounts can't have serious effects.
You can die from drinking too much water. And in the case of CO2, plants
obviously are not absorbing the excess CO2 being produced by man, as evidenced
by the simple fact that CO2 in the atmosphere has gone up by a third in just
the last 100 years and is now as high as it was 700,000 years ago. And
those previous up cycles took tens or hundreds of thousands of years, not
just 100 years. That extra CO2 traps heat.

The extra CO2 we've created is still a tiny fraction of what it used to be. Just think about this logically for a moment - before fossil fuels were created, what do you think was creating them? That's right, plants! Plants that were perfectly happy breathing the CO2 rich air! All we're doing is moving the atmosphere back to what it was before fossil fuels were created. We're not magically creating more CO2 that wasn't there before!

On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 19:15:49 -0000, trader_4 wrote:

On Wednesday, January 2, 2019 at 12:50:48 PM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 1/2/2019 10:59 AM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 15:49:26 -0000, danny burstein
wrote:

In "Commander Kinsey"
writes:

You've made an invalid assumption. Every modern freezer I've seen
runs for the same time as older ones, and they cool at the same
rate. So clearly the compressor outputs the same cooling, but using
less electricity. All well and good, but I can feel the cold escaping
from the unit.

"cold escaping". There you go doubling down on your stupidity again.

There's no reason to think of it as heat. Have you never calculated
current flow imagining it flows from + to -?

You can't make cold unless you change the laws of physics. You don't
lose cold, you gain heat.

You essentially can lose cold. It I have a picnic cooler and it has two
pounds of ice in it and I take one pound out, it's lost some cold without
gaining heat, except for the negligible heat of the small amount of air
that replaces it. Make it replaced by a vacuum, if you like.

Now you're getting philosophical. Kinda like the argument that when you pee, it comes out at body temperature, so you're losing heat, yet you don't get colder.

To make sense of your picnic cooler and the peeing, really you're not losing heat or cold, you're actually changing what you are. You now contain less pee, the cooler contains less ice. You've changed the composition of the object, so to think of it as losing cold or heat is meaningless. But I was talking about a fridge/freezer which still contains the same food, the door was left closed, all that's changed is the heat/cold in it.

On 1/2/2019 2:15 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Wednesday, January 2, 2019 at 12:50:48 PM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 1/2/2019 10:59 AM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 15:49:26 -0000, danny burstein
wrote:

In "Commander Kinsey"
writes:

You've made an invalid assumption.Â* Every modern freezer I've seen
runs for the same time as older ones, and they cool at the same
rate.Â* So clearly the compressor outputs the same cooling, but using
less electricity.Â* All well and good, but I can feel the cold escaping
from the unit.

"cold escaping".Â* There you go doubling down on your stupidity again.

There's no reason to think of it as heat.Â* Have you never calculated
current flow imagining it flows from + to -?

You can't make cold unless you change the laws of physics. You don't
lose cold, you gain heat.

You essentially can lose cold. It I have a picnic cooler and it has two
pounds of ice in it and I take one pound out, it's lost some cold without
gaining heat, except for the negligible heat of the small amount of air
that replaces it. Make it replaced by a vacuum, if you like.


Your terminology, but you really changed the ability of heat absorption.
That ice was made by removing heat energy from water.

On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 19:15:12 -0000, Bob F wrote:

On 1/2/2019 11:17 AM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 16:53:28 -0000, Bob F wrote:

On 1/2/2019 5:36 AM, trader_4 wrote:
On Tuesday, January 1, 2019 at 4:07:50 PM UTC-5, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 10:28:51 -0000, alan_m
wrote:

On 31/12/2018 21:44, William Gothberg wrote:

It's a perfectly valid question, why are we still using equipment
that
needs running so often?

Proportional control rather than bang/bang control?

If the insulation was better than that used 30 years ago, then the
time between switching off and back on again would be longer, as
less cold would leak out - this can be verified by observing the
sides are cold. Also, if you look at the energy ratings on various
freezers, you'll find a factor of almost 4 between different models,
so clearly some are using really **** insulation.


Another incorrect conclusion. It's also very likely that newer fridges
maintain temperature more accurately than old ones. New ones, for
example,
mostly have electronic controls now and don't rely on an old bi-metal
thermostat design. To maintain temperature closer, the off time would
be shorter, regardless of the insulation.

I am sure the new freezers run longer because that is what they are
designed to do. It is more efficient than having them short cycle. Every
time it cycles, power is used just getting temps to working levels, and
longer running time allows smaller more efficient compressors.

They don't seem to run longer, they run the same as the old ones. But I
can tell they're outputting just as much cold. When you first turn them
on, they get down to temperature just as quickly. So if the output of
th compressor is the same with new ones, it shouldn't have to run so
much if the insulation has been improved.

If.

They do - "When you first turn them on, they get down to temperature just as quickly."

On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 19:15:54 -0000, Bob F wrote:

On 1/2/2019 11:15 AM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 13:36:27 -0000, trader_4 wrote:

On Tuesday, January 1, 2019 at 4:07:50 PM UTC-5, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 10:28:51 -0000, alan_m
wrote:

On 31/12/2018 21:44, William Gothberg wrote:

It's a perfectly valid question, why are we still using equipment
that
needs running so often?

Proportional control rather than bang/bang control?

If the insulation was better than that used 30 years ago, then the
time between switching off and back on again would be longer, as less
cold would leak out - this can be verified by observing the sides are
cold. Also, if you look at the energy ratings on various freezers,
you'll find a factor of almost 4 between different models, so clearly
some are using really **** insulation.

Another incorrect conclusion. It's also very likely that newer fridges
maintain temperature more accurately than old ones. New ones, for
example,
mostly have electronic controls now and don't rely on an old bi-metal
thermostat design. To maintain temperature closer, the off time would
be shorter, regardless of the insulation.

I observe newer models running for the same sort of time and the same
sort of duty cycle. Ok, the compressor is using less power while
running, but judging by the rate it cools down when you first switch it
on, the output of the compressor is the same as with the older ones.
So, the same duty cycle means that the same amount of cold is lost from
new ones as old ones, ergo the insulation has not been improved.

And you haven't responded to "Also, if you look at the energy ratings on
various freezers, you'll find a factor of almost 4 between different
models."
Here's the link again:
https://www.sust-it.net/energy-savin...freezers-large

Your reply is missing.

So itdid gain heat..you are a true liberal ****wad.


LOL


"trader_4" wrote in message
...
except for the negligible heat of the small amount of air
that replaces it.

On Wed, 2 Jan 2019 12:50:44 -0500, d Pawlowski, the mentally challenged,
troll-feeding senile Yankietard, blathered again:


There's no reason to think of it as heat.* Have you never calculated
current flow imagining it flows from + to -?

You can't make cold unless you change the laws of physics. You don't
lose cold, you gain heat.

ALL the senile idiots on ahr firmly under the Scottish ******'s thumb!
****ing unbelievable! LOL

On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 19:23:49 -0000, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 1/2/2019 2:15 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Wednesday, January 2, 2019 at 12:50:48 PM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 1/2/2019 10:59 AM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 15:49:26 -0000, danny burstein
wrote:

In "Commander Kinsey"
writes:

You've made an invalid assumption. Every modern freezer I've seen
runs for the same time as older ones, and they cool at the same
rate. So clearly the compressor outputs the same cooling, but using
less electricity. All well and good, but I can feel the cold escaping
from the unit.

"cold escaping". There you go doubling down on your stupidity again.

There's no reason to think of it as heat. Have you never calculated
current flow imagining it flows from + to -?

You can't make cold unless you change the laws of physics. You don't
lose cold, you gain heat.

You essentially can lose cold. It I have a picnic cooler and it has two
pounds of ice in it and I take one pound out, it's lost some cold without
gaining heat, except for the negligible heat of the small amount of air
that replaces it. Make it replaced by a vacuum, if you like.

Your terminology, but you really changed the ability of heat absorption.
That ice was made by removing heat energy from water.

Indeed, as far as heat is concerned, he's made the cooler smaller. Or if you like, split the cooler in half. One half now has no insulation of course. It sounds like one of those deliberately confusing Physics/Maths problems designed to mix people up. What we need now is a continuation of the story where he puts the ice into something else and makes a perpetual motion device.

On Wed, 2 Jan 2019 09:06:12 -0800 (PST), tardo_4 an especially stupid,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blathered:

So clearly the compressor outputs the same cooling, but using less
electricity. All well and good, but I can feel the cold escaping from
the unit.

Close the door, ****wit.

Why, when he keeps having so much fun baiting you senile Yanks on ahr with
silliest baits? BG

On 1/2/2019 7:45 AM, Commander Kinsey wrote:
On Wed, 02 Jan 2019 00:53:48 -0000, Clare Snyder
wrote:

On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 16:42:21 -0000, "Commander Kinsey"
wrote:

On Tue, 01 Jan 2019 16:19:36 -0000, danny burstein
wrote:

In "Commander Kinsey"
writes:


How's about starting off the new year with a resolution
to research issues a bit more closely.* Like, in this
case, how much power those motors are drawing when
running today versus 30 years ago.

Which has nothing to do with insulation.

Bzzt. They're all interconnected.

And your rants have nothing to do with reality or
thinking.

Find a five year old to explain basic thermodynamics
to you.

A lower power motor does not affect the R value of the insulation.
Are you quite mad?* Do you really think if you put a more efficient
boiler in your house that your house will magically gain better
insulation and cool more slowly?
* It doesn't affect the R value of the insulation but it may addect
the run time of the compressor which is your only half-baked clue that
your new freezer has no better insulation than your old one.

You've made an invalid assumption.* Every modern freezer I've seen runs
for the same time as older ones, and they cool at the same rate.* So
clearly the compressor outputs the same cooling, but using less
electricity.* All well and good, but I can feel the cold escaping from
the unit.* And I notice the compressor has to keep running just as often
as it used to,.* So obviously the insulation sux.* Oh and also, just
have a look at the energy consumption ratings, which vary by a factor of
4 between different models.* Looks like a a lot of them are rubbish.

You are such a friggin' moron. And you can't even remember your name.