On Friday, 29 August 2014 15:30:19 UTC+1, Tim Watts wrote:
On 29/08/14 15:27, Clive George wrote:



That's not a buggered market, that's simply one particular type becoming
unavailable. You wasted your own time with your particular requirements.



No. The EU wasted my time.



My requirements were a Miele upright. Not even too fussed which model.


http://www.miele.co.uk/vacuum-cleane...PowerLine-535/

2-3 days delivery .


http://www.leekes.co.uk/invt/375834?...FRHHtAoduDgAig

On 29/08/14 16:19, Clive George wrote:
On 29/08/2014 16:03, Tim Watts wrote:
On 29/08/14 15:40, Clive George wrote:

No, you wasted your own time. The EU requirements have been known about
for a long time.

Nope. Don't agree.

You don't agree with what? They really have been known about for a long
time.

Don't agree with your saying it's *my* fault. It's not.

It's a pointless change. And I needed a vac *now* not 3 months ago.

Your opinion, and it's not necessarily an important one.

It is a pointless change. So they want to knock a few hundred watts off
a vacuum. Let's say it's used for (an average) of 30 mins per week (bit
more than my usage - am factoring in office cleaning too). And they
reduce the average vac by 300W (generous). That amounts to 0.15kWh saved
per week per household.

The same amount that would be saved by boiling 72ml of water *less* in
your kettle over 20 occasions in the same week.

It's an irrelevant amount.

If they wanted to do something useful, then could make businesses (in
particular shops) turn off most of their lights at night.

Who knows - but it's outside of my control and if the EU stayed out of
it, it would not have been a problem...

It's not "who knows", it's definitely retailers/miele cocking up.

That's like saying it's Granny Smith's fault for getting mugged because
she should have stayed at home instead of every going outside.

On 29/08/14 16:45, Tim Streater wrote:

It wasn't his *opinion* that he needs a vac now and not three months
ago. And it's important to *him*. He's a customer, you may have heard
of them.


Thank you

On 29/08/2014 16:45, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Clive
George wrote:

On 29/08/2014 16:03, Tim Watts wrote:
On 29/08/14 15:40, Clive George wrote:
On 29/08/2014 15:30, Tim Watts wrote:
On 29/08/14 15:27, Clive George wrote:

That's not a buggered market, that's simply one particular type
becoming
unavailable. You wasted your own time with your particular
requirements.

No. The EU wasted my time.

No, you wasted your own time. The EU requirements have been known
about
for a long time.

Nope. Don't agree.

You don't agree with what? They really have been known about for a
long time.

It's a pointless change. And I needed a vac *now* not 3 months ago.

Your opinion, and it's not necessarily an important one.

It wasn't his *opinion* that he needs a vac now and not three months
ago. And it's important to *him*. He's a customer, you may have heard
of them.

And his preferred manufacturer has failed him, but Tim is blaming
somebody else rather than the people who actually cocked up.

On 29/08/14 16:54, Clive George wrote:

And his preferred manufacturer has failed him, but Tim is blaming
somebody else rather than the people who actually cocked up.

I refer the honourable gentleman to the Granny Smith analogy.

The manufacturer has been meeting a reasonably predictable demand quite
happily for years.

Then someone in the EU does something both unnecessary and stupid and
causes a run on product.

Vacuum manufacture is not something that traditionally needs production
line capacity to be run up to meet an artificial demand.

Maybe the manufacturer could have stockpiled better, but the root cause
is the EU being dicks. And no amount of debate is likely to change my
mind on the issue. But you are welcome to try.

On 29/08/2014 16:59, Tim Watts wrote:
On 29/08/14 16:54, Clive George wrote:

And his preferred manufacturer has failed him, but Tim is blaming
somebody else rather than the people who actually cocked up.

I refer the honourable gentleman to the Granny Smith analogy.

The manufacturer has been meeting a reasonably predictable demand quite
happily for years.

Then someone in the EU does something both unnecessary and stupid and
causes a run on product.

No, look harder.

Miele list 4 upright models on their website. 1 is over the limit, 3 are
under it. None of those three are sold by John Lewis. None of them are
sold by Argos. That's the cockup.

Vacuum manufacture is not something that traditionally needs production
line capacity to be run up to meet an artificial demand.

Maybe the manufacturer could have stockpiled better, but the root cause
is the EU being dicks. And no amount of debate is likely to change my
mind on the issue. But you are welcome to try.

It's not a stockpiling issue, they've failed to supply the models which
meet the new requirements.

The current run is on old stock, not new - they need to shift that ASAP.
That's why they've got such large discounts on them, and why they have
sold out.

On 29/08/14 17:12, Clive George wrote:
On 29/08/2014 16:59, Tim Watts wrote:
On 29/08/14 16:54, Clive George wrote:

And his preferred manufacturer has failed him, but Tim is blaming
somebody else rather than the people who actually cocked up.

I refer the honourable gentleman to the Granny Smith analogy.

The manufacturer has been meeting a reasonably predictable demand quite
happily for years.

Then someone in the EU does something both unnecessary and stupid and
causes a run on product.

No, look harder.

Miele list 4 upright models on their website. 1 is over the limit, 3 are
under it. None of those three are sold by John Lewis. None of them are
sold by Argos. That's the cockup.

I must admit - I did not recall seeing all those models the other day
when I was looking at the Miele site. Wonder if they just came on?

I'm sure I saw the older series (S7xxx) of which there's one left there now.

Reason I wanted Miele is kids have some allergies including asthma and I
*know* from previous experience that the HEPA filters on Mieles is near
perfect combined with the best suction I have ever had from a hoover (my
old VAX coming a close second, but before I made it work with plaster
dust[1]). I can't be bothered to risk finding out if some other make is
any good in this respect.

[1] My VAX dates back to about 1995 - it's relegated to building works
as it's nigh on impossible to break it.

In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
So they want to knock a few hundred watts off
a vacuum. Let's say it's used for (an average) of 30 mins per week (bit
more than my usage - am factoring in office cleaning too).

We seem to have some very dirty people on here. Or have very small
dwellings. Or perhaps simply are out when the wife does the cleaning.

--
*Women who seek to be equal to men lack ambition.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
Maybe the manufacturer could have stockpiled better, but the root cause
is the EU being dicks. And no amount of debate is likely to change my
mind on the issue. But you are welcome to try.

Sensible types will wait for the latest more efficient makes to come on
stream - or buy one which already meets the spec. But of course that
wouldn't give people anything to moan about.

--
*To err is human. To forgive is against company policy.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 29/08/2014 17:19, Tim Watts wrote:
On 29/08/14 17:12, Clive George wrote:
On 29/08/2014 16:59, Tim Watts wrote:
On 29/08/14 16:54, Clive George wrote:

And his preferred manufacturer has failed him, but Tim is blaming
somebody else rather than the people who actually cocked up.

I refer the honourable gentleman to the Granny Smith analogy.

The manufacturer has been meeting a reasonably predictable demand quite
happily for years.

Then someone in the EU does something both unnecessary and stupid and
causes a run on product.

No, look harder.

Miele list 4 upright models on their website. 1 is over the limit, 3 are
under it. None of those three are sold by John Lewis. None of them are
sold by Argos. That's the cockup.

I must admit - I did not recall seeing all those models the other day
when I was looking at the Miele site. Wonder if they just came on?

They may well have done. Miele may have been trying to shift old stock
by not releasing their new ones while keeping the old ones at full price.

The new models will have existed for a while though - it takes time to
develop and release a new model, and this will have been planned since
before the new regulations were even confirmed.

They've apparently failed to get the new ones into the shops. That's
their failure, and it's one which needn't have happened. It just needed
a bit of planning to prepare normal stock to be delivered a few days
before the cutoff, round about the time the old stock was always going
to be discounted to shift it. The discounts are heavy, so the new stock
won't shift until it's the only choice, but it does mean it would have
been there for people like you who really want it.

On 29/08/2014 17:28, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
Maybe the manufacturer could have stockpiled better, but the root cause
is the EU being dicks. And no amount of debate is likely to change my
mind on the issue. But you are welcome to try.

Sensible types will wait for the latest more efficient makes to come on
stream - or buy one which already meets the spec. But of course that
wouldn't give people anything to moan about.

To give Tim some credit, it does appear that Miele were being very
unhelpful in that regard by failing to release stuff which does meet the
spec in time. But that's Miele's fault, not the EU's.

"Clive George" wrote in message
o.uk...

On 29/08/2014 16:59, Tim Watts wrote:
On 29/08/14 16:54, Clive George wrote:

And his preferred manufacturer has failed him, but Tim is blaming
somebody else rather than the people who actually cocked up.

I refer the honourable gentleman to the Granny Smith analogy.

The manufacturer has been meeting a reasonably predictable demand quite
happily for years.

Then someone in the EU does something both unnecessary and stupid and
causes a run on product.

No, look harder.

Miele list 4 upright models on their website. 1 is over the limit, 3 are
under it. None of those three are sold by John Lewis. None of them are sold
by Argos. That's the cockup.

Vacuum manufacture is not something that traditionally needs production
line capacity to be run up to meet an artificial demand.

Maybe the manufacturer could have stockpiled better, but the root cause
is the EU being dicks. And no amount of debate is likely to change my
mind on the issue. But you are welcome to try.

It's not a stockpiling issue, they've failed to supply the models which
meet the new requirements.

The current run is on old stock, not new - they need to shift that ASAP.
That's why they've got such large discounts on them, and why they have sold
out.

And that happened because...

On 29/08/14 17:25, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
So they want to knock a few hundred watts off
a vacuum. Let's say it's used for (an average) of 30 mins per week (bit
more than my usage - am factoring in office cleaning too).

We seem to have some very dirty people on here. Or have very small
dwellings. Or perhaps simply are out when the wife does the cleaning.


Why? Once a month we do a deep hoover (behind the TV, under chairs,
round the cornice) but it's simply unnecessary to do mode than push a
hoover around quickly every week on average.

On 29/08/14 17:28, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
Maybe the manufacturer could have stockpiled better, but the root cause
is the EU being dicks. And no amount of debate is likely to change my
mind on the issue. But you are welcome to try.

Sensible types will wait for the latest more efficient makes to come on
stream - or buy one which already meets the spec. But of course that
wouldn't give people anything to moan about.


Or live in a pigsty for 2-3 months because they don't have a working vac?

On 29/08/14 17:37, Clive George wrote:
On 29/08/2014 17:28, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
Maybe the manufacturer could have stockpiled better, but the root cause
is the EU being dicks. And no amount of debate is likely to change my
mind on the issue. But you are welcome to try.

Sensible types will wait for the latest more efficient makes to come on
stream - or buy one which already meets the spec. But of course that
wouldn't give people anything to moan about.

To give Tim some credit, it does appear that Miele were being very
unhelpful in that regard by failing to release stuff which does meet the
spec in time. But that's Miele's fault, not the EU's.



I hereby mandate you shall wear hi-viz shoes to reduce road accidents.

What - it's not my fault you cannot find any such shoes in time?

On 29/08/14 18:09, Tim Watts wrote:
On 29/08/14 17:37, Clive George wrote:
On 29/08/2014 17:28, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
Maybe the manufacturer could have stockpiled better, but the root cause
is the EU being dicks. And no amount of debate is likely to change my
mind on the issue. But you are welcome to try.

Sensible types will wait for the latest more efficient makes to come on
stream - or buy one which already meets the spec. But of course that
wouldn't give people anything to moan about.

To give Tim some credit, it does appear that Miele were being very
unhelpful in that regard by failing to release stuff which does meet the
spec in time. But that's Miele's fault, not the EU's.



I hereby mandate you shall wear hi-viz shoes to reduce road accidents.

What - it's not my fault you cannot find any such shoes in time?

I must add - I'm amazed by how anyone can actually support the EU for
such a hare brained scheme.

On 29/08/2014 18:09, Tim Watts wrote:
On 29/08/14 17:37, Clive George wrote:
On 29/08/2014 17:28, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
Maybe the manufacturer could have stockpiled better, but the root cause
is the EU being dicks. And no amount of debate is likely to change my
mind on the issue. But you are welcome to try.

Sensible types will wait for the latest more efficient makes to come on
stream - or buy one which already meets the spec. But of course that
wouldn't give people anything to moan about.

To give Tim some credit, it does appear that Miele were being very
unhelpful in that regard by failing to release stuff which does meet the
spec in time. But that's Miele's fault, not the EU's.



I hereby mandate you shall wear hi-viz shoes to reduce road accidents.

What - it's not my fault you cannot find any such shoes in time?

If you have the authority to produce such a mandate, and give due notice
of the new requirement, then no, it's the market's failure.

This particular regulation was signed off in July 2013. It'll have been
planned for rather longer than that, and the manufacturers will have
been aware of that. It's not something which has suddenly been sprung on us.

Clive George wrote:
On 29/08/2014 17:19, Tim Watts wrote:
On 29/08/14 17:12, Clive George wrote:
On 29/08/2014 16:59, Tim Watts wrote:
On 29/08/14 16:54, Clive George wrote:

And his preferred manufacturer has failed him, but Tim is blaming
somebody else rather than the people who actually cocked up.

I refer the honourable gentleman to the Granny Smith analogy.

The manufacturer has been meeting a reasonably predictable demand quite
happily for years.

Then someone in the EU does something both unnecessary and stupid and
causes a run on product.

No, look harder.

Miele list 4 upright models on their website. 1 is over the limit, 3 are
under it. None of those three are sold by John Lewis. None of them are
sold by Argos. That's the cockup.

I must admit - I did not recall seeing all those models the other day
when I was looking at the Miele site. Wonder if they just came on?

They may well have done. Miele may have been trying to shift old stock
by not releasing their new ones while keeping the old ones at full price.

The new models will have existed for a while though - it takes time to
develop and release a new model, and this will have been planned since
before the new regulations were even confirmed.

They've apparently failed to get the new ones into the shops. That's
their failure, and it's one which needn't have happened. It just needed
a bit of planning to prepare normal stock to be delivered a few days
before the cutoff, round about the time the old stock was always going
to be discounted to shift it. The discounts are heavy, so the new stock
won't shift until it's the only choice, but it does mean it would have
been there for people like you who really want it.




I think you have missed the point, it is an unnecessary piece of
regulation. Let the market decide.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In ,
Tim wrote:
Maybe the manufacturer could have stockpiled better, but the root cause
is the EU being dicks. And no amount of debate is likely to change my
mind on the issue. But you are welcome to try.

Sensible types will wait for the latest more efficient makes to come on
stream - or buy one which already meets the spec. But of course that
wouldn't give people anything to moan about.


Sensible types will simply buy an industrial version where the new
unnecessary rules don't apply.

On 29/08/14 18:20, Clive George wrote:

If you have the authority to produce such a mandate, and give due notice
of the new requirement, then no, it's the market's failure.

Even if the very act of saying you must wear hiviz shoes is in fact
completely insane?

I am criticising a pointless bit of regulation. I don't complain about
pointless regulation unless it bites me. This did. As did Part P (though
that has slackened off).

Ditto lamps but that has more or less reversed itself.

On 29/08/2014 18:45, Tim Watts wrote:
On 29/08/14 18:20, Clive George wrote:

If you have the authority to produce such a mandate, and give due notice
of the new requirement, then no, it's the market's failure.

Even if the very act of saying you must wear hiviz shoes is in fact
completely insane?

That's a different question. I don't believe the new vacuum regs are
completely insane, and the fact that it seems that most if not all the
manufacturers have been able to produce models which comply in time
supports that belief.

I am criticising a pointless bit of regulation. I don't complain about
pointless regulation unless it bites me. This did. As did Part P (though
that has slackened off).

It bit you because although it was an easy bit of regulation to comply
with your preferred manufacturer failed to do so. Plenty of their
competitors managed it, and Miele aren't notorious for being this
useless normally, so why did they get it wrong?

I'll agree with you about Part P though.

In article ,
Capitol wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In ,
Tim wrote:
Maybe the manufacturer could have stockpiled better, but the root cause
is the EU being dicks. And no amount of debate is likely to change my
mind on the issue. But you are welcome to try.

Sensible types will wait for the latest more efficient makes to come on
stream - or buy one which already meets the spec. But of course that
wouldn't give people anything to moan about.


Sensible types will simply buy an industrial version where the new
unnecessary rules don't apply.

If you must have an inefficient device, yes. Do you throw your money away
on other things too?

--
*Cover me. I'm changing lanes.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 29/08/2014 19:04, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Capitol wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In ,
Tim wrote:
Maybe the manufacturer could have stockpiled better, but the root cause
is the EU being dicks. And no amount of debate is likely to change my
mind on the issue. But you are welcome to try.

Sensible types will wait for the latest more efficient makes to come on
stream - or buy one which already meets the spec. But of course that
wouldn't give people anything to moan about.


Sensible types will simply buy an industrial version where the new
unnecessary rules don't apply.

If you must have an inefficient device, yes. Do you throw your money away
on other things too?

Though the additional energy cost for eg a 1.8kw vs 1.5kw device, 30
mins/week, is only a quid or two a year. 8 Kwh or so. Say 150 million
households, that's 1200 gwh/year in the EU.

I think the more important part of the new rules is preventing the
escalation of power consumption, which has definitely been happening.
Many examples of how older devices consumed less have been mentioned in
this thread. It's also been fairly obvious that manufacturers have been
pushing the higher power consumption as a good thing - bigger numbers
must be better, right, and they have been prominently displayed. Without
regulation to check this, I think the average power of these devices
would have continued to rise.

Of course what would have been better all-round would have been for
these regs to have been introduced a few years ago, before higher power
ones became popular. That way none of the problems we've seen would have
happened.

Clive George wrote:

the additional energy cost for eg a 1.8kw vs 1.5kw device, 30
mins/week, is only a quid or two a year. 8 Kwh or so. Say 150 million
households, that's 1200 gwh/year in the EU.

So ~1TWh out of 20PWh of all EU energy consumption, a 0.005% reduction
well done the EU.

Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In articleaNOdnZAfEYKwJ53JnZ2dnUVZ8vqdnZ2d@brightvie w.co.uk,
wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In ,
Tim wrote:
Maybe the manufacturer could have stockpiled better, but the root cause
is the EU being dicks. And no amount of debate is likely to change my
mind on the issue. But you are welcome to try.

Sensible types will wait for the latest more efficient makes to come on
stream - or buy one which already meets the spec. But of course that
wouldn't give people anything to moan about.


Sensible types will simply buy an industrial version where the new
unnecessary rules don't apply.

If you must have an inefficient device, yes. Do you throw your money away
on other things too?


Yes, I've even been known to buy petrol.

On 28/08/2014 07:40, harryagain wrote:

The Romans made drinking vessels out of lead.
Also lead pipes for water.



The Roman empire fell because of the dangerous lead in the pipes.
They really should have used plastic.

On 29/08/2014 15:30, Tim Watts wrote:
On 29/08/14 15:27, Clive George wrote:

That's not a buggered market, that's simply one particular type becoming
unavailable. You wasted your own time with your particular requirements.

No. The EU wasted my time.

My requirements were a Miele upright. Not even too fussed which model.

My Sebo meets the new limits and it works well. I doubt if a Meile would
be better.

On 29/08/14 20:50, Dennis@home wrote:
On 29/08/2014 15:30, Tim Watts wrote:
On 29/08/14 15:27, Clive George wrote:

That's not a buggered market, that's simply one particular type becoming
unavailable. You wasted your own time with your particular requirements.

No. The EU wasted my time.

My requirements were a Miele upright. Not even too fussed which model.

My Sebo meets the new limits and it works well. I doubt if a Meile would
be better.

What's the filtration on the exhaust air like?

On 29/08/2014 20:58, Tim Watts wrote:
On 29/08/14 20:50, Dennis@home wrote:
On 29/08/2014 15:30, Tim Watts wrote:
On 29/08/14 15:27, Clive George wrote:

That's not a buggered market, that's simply one particular type
becoming
unavailable. You wasted your own time with your particular
requirements.

No. The EU wasted my time.

My requirements were a Miele upright. Not even too fussed which model.

My Sebo meets the new limits and it works well. I doubt if a Meile would
be better.

What's the filtration on the exhaust air like?

Its a HEPA filter, I don't have figures for what particle size it goes
down to.

On 29/08/2014 20:58, Tim Watts wrote:
On 29/08/14 20:50, Dennis@home wrote:
On 29/08/2014 15:30, Tim Watts wrote:
On 29/08/14 15:27, Clive George wrote:

That's not a buggered market, that's simply one particular type
becoming
unavailable. You wasted your own time with your particular
requirements.

No. The EU wasted my time.

My requirements were a Miele upright. Not even too fussed which model.

My Sebo meets the new limits and it works well. I doubt if a Meile would
be better.

What's the filtration on the exhaust air like?

Forget the last post.

from the sebo site

All SEBO domestic vacuum cleaners either come with S-CLASS filtration,
or can be easily upgraded to S-CLASS. To meet the S-CLASS standard the
filtration system has to remove a minimum of 99.97% of particles of 0.3
microns. The SEBO S-CLASS system will remove 100% of particles of 1
micron and above. Dust mite faeces are approx. 10 microns.

On 29/08/14 16:37, Tim Watts wrote:
If they wanted to do something useful, then could make businesses (in
particular shops) turn off most of their lights at night.

And their PCs.


--
Everything you read in newspapers is absolutely true, except for the
rare story of which you happen to have first-hand knowledge. €“ Erwin Knoll

On 29/08/14 18:10, Tim Watts wrote:
I must add - I'm amazed by how anyone can actually support the EU for
such a hare brained scheme.

Well that's Cameron for you.

He has the sort of cleaning equipment we used to call a blackomatic in S
Africa.

Thaimatic, probably, in his case.


--
Everything you read in newspapers is absolutely true, except for the
rare story of which you happen to have first-hand knowledge. €“ Erwin Knoll

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Clive George wrote:
Blame Miele and the retailers then. They've known about this change for
really quite a long time. Miele appear to make three models which comply
with the new leglislation. Why have the retailers failed to ensure
they're in stock? (yes, John Lewis don't mention them).

They want to clear their old stock at full price. Nothing like this sort
of scare story for doing that. If the story had been reported more
sensibly, they'd have had to discount any stock left before the deadline.

no they wouldn't

because (as I have already posted) the deadline is a date for the stopping
of importing/manufacture

It isn't deadline for stopping sales

(FWIW - exactly the same as the rule for light bulbs - which increased in
price after the were "banned")

tim

"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...
... if we've now got to start shaving a few watts off the motor of an
appliance that these days is probably used no more than 15 minutes a week,
in order to save power. I refer of course to the new vacuum cleaner motor
power directive from our chums at the EU ...

Eco-bollox at its most ludicrous ... :-\

Kettles to be next

does no-one at the EU understand the laws of physics :-(

tim

On 29/08/14 22:52, Dennis@home wrote:
On 29/08/2014 20:58, Tim Watts wrote:
On 29/08/14 20:50, Dennis@home wrote:
On 29/08/2014 15:30, Tim Watts wrote:
On 29/08/14 15:27, Clive George wrote:

That's not a buggered market, that's simply one particular type
becoming
unavailable. You wasted your own time with your particular
requirements.

No. The EU wasted my time.

My requirements were a Miele upright. Not even too fussed which model.

My Sebo meets the new limits and it works well. I doubt if a Meile would
be better.

What's the filtration on the exhaust air like?

Its a HEPA filter, I don't have figures for what particle size it goes
down to.

Oh - HEPA is good (for my use).

I stick with Mieles because I had one before (long time back) and the
HEPA filter was impressive - so I trust them to work.

On 29/08/14 23:25, tim..... wrote:
does no-one at the EU understand the laws of physics :-(

A bureaucrat is busy rewriting them as a directive as we speak...


They literally are a bunch of Cnuts. Thinking that what they do affects
reality.

Or its simply in Peter Principle terms am massive display of Final
Placement - the utter irrelevancy syndrome.

Some bureaucrat has arrived at the Office of Energy Conservation And
Sustainability and has to actually Do Something. And this, friends, is
what he has done...

--
Everything you read in newspapers is absolutely true, except for the
rare story of which you happen to have first-hand knowledge. €“ Erwin Knoll

On 29/08/2014 23:23, tim..... wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Clive George wrote:
Blame Miele and the retailers then. They've known about this change for
really quite a long time. Miele appear to make three models which comply
with the new leglislation. Why have the retailers failed to ensure
they're in stock? (yes, John Lewis don't mention them).

They want to clear their old stock at full price. Nothing like this sort
of scare story for doing that. If the story had been reported more
sensibly, they'd have had to discount any stock left before the deadline.

no they wouldn't

because (as I have already posted) the deadline is a date for the
stopping of importing/manufacture

It isn't deadline for stopping sales

(FWIW - exactly the same as the rule for light bulbs - which increased
in price after the were "banned")

Ok, so why is all the stock of those over the limit being heavily
discounted then? Who's got it wrong, the retailers, the manufacturers or
both?

(not disupting that they have got it wrong, just wondering why)

"Clive George" wrote in message
o.uk...
On 29/08/2014 23:23, tim..... wrote:

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Clive George wrote:
Blame Miele and the retailers then. They've known about this change for
really quite a long time. Miele appear to make three models which
comply
with the new leglislation. Why have the retailers failed to ensure
they're in stock? (yes, John Lewis don't mention them).

They want to clear their old stock at full price. Nothing like this sort
of scare story for doing that. If the story had been reported more
sensibly, they'd have had to discount any stock left before the
deadline.

no they wouldn't

because (as I have already posted) the deadline is a date for the
stopping of importing/manufacture

It isn't deadline for stopping sales

(FWIW - exactly the same as the rule for light bulbs - which increased
in price after the were "banned")

Ok, so why is all the stock of those over the limit being heavily
discounted then? Who's got it wrong, the retailers, the manufacturers or
both?

If it's anything like light bulbs, it is the retailers.

All of the majors stopped ordering up 100W bulbs months before the deadline
so that they wouldn't be stuck with stock (that they thought) they weren't
allowed to sell (and by the time the press announced that they were to be
banned in a few weeks time, no-one had any left)

So all of the wide boys on market stalls took advantage of this and were
selling them at a pound each for months afterwards (when previously I was
buying 5 for a quid in a shed)

tim

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Arfa Daily wrote:


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Arfa Daily wrote:
In case you still don't get it, my point was that 'energy saving' is
the vehicle that this pup is being sold to us on. I don't believe for
one moment that anyone who might be responsible for introducing this,
can have arrived at the conclusion that for the expense and disruption
to the industry that will be involved, the power saving will be
worthwhile IN THE GRAND SCHEME OF THINGS.

Right. So you're making a political point. Why not just say so rather
than try and dress it up?

The only place that it's being 'dressed up' is in your silly head.
Please just wind your neck in and shut up if you don't have anything
useful to add.

Well, I've tried to start a discussion about vacuum cleaner design. but
you apparently aren't interested. Which leads me to conclude your reasons
for starting this thread. Of course if you'd like to say how much you like
the EU and want to continue being a member...


I don't and I don't and have never made any secret of that ...




And if it *really* is, and EU departments honestly believe (or know)
that power saving levels such as this are going to be needed, then we
really *are* in the **** ...

That can be said about any energy saving measure.

No. It can only be said about ones that are stupidly small for the
potential disruption, such as this one. You really do come out with
ever dumber crap by the day ...

The potential disruption? Isn't that rather over the top even for you?


What do you mean by that ? Talk sense, man.




And I don't "ignore the rest". They are by-products of the basic
legislation, and largely immaterial to it. If you reduce the size of
the motor, it's going to get quieter or and / or suck less. If you
shift less air through the cleaner, then it's also likely, if you
keep the same level of filtering, that dust emissions back into the
air will be reduced.

You seem determined not to discuss whether it is possible to make a
vacuum
cleaner more efficient. Which would at least me on topic for here.

Where have I refused to discuss it ? All I have said is that I don't
believe that there is much power saving to actually be had, without
compromising the performance of the machine.

You must have missed the point I made earlier. Of the three vacuum
cleaners I have here, the most powerful one as regards suction - and by
quite some margin - has an 800 watt motor. The least powerful an 1800 watt
motor. The latter also being the newest one. But my conclusion that the
power consumption of a vacuum has little to do with its performance
doesn't seem to fit in with your ideological rant.


No. I didn't miss it, but examples to prove a point either way can always be
found. I wouldn't dispute that some designs are bad. That's true of any
complex item. Assuming that you are comparing apples with apples with apples
in your three-cleaner example, and not just fruit, then your 1800 watt one
is probably an example of poor design. But you can't conclude from that that
input power has little to do with performance, or that all vacuum cleaners
must have poor enough efficiency that it is necessary to legislate to cut
their input power. And ideological rant ? Pot, kettle and black come to mind
....




Most that have entered the
discussion seem to be largely of the same opinion. Vacuum cleaners
*may* have been more 'efficient' in the past with their motors of
lesser power than we have now. But by the same token, the motor / fan
was only sucking through a cloth or paper bag, and typically up a
fairly straightforward air path. Since the manufacturers have
introduced all the high level filtering, that is no longer the case,
and is probably why motor power had to increase.

BTW, have you read the entire EU document on the subject?

Yes

So give a summary of all it says. Not just the Mail version.

Oh do grow up, you childish person ...

Arfa



--
*Any connection between your reality and mine is purely coincidental

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Richard" wrote in message
...
"harryagain" wrote in message ...


"Arfa Daily" wrote in message
...


"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Adrian wrote:
Except, of course, the problem for those people is not the regulation
per se - nor even any of the implications or reasons for it. It's pure
and simple the _source_ of the regulation. Given that source, they'll
pick holes in ANYTHING. Black is white. Today is Wednesday.

Quite. If the EU regulated to abolish income tax they'd still complain.

Sometimes Dave, you make the silliest of comments ...

Arfa

No, he's right.

Arfa! Stand in the corner! You know harry holds that title.


Well, from what he's just said, I think it now has to be a joint title
shared between him and Dave. I'd forgotten how silly Harry can also be at
times ... :-)

Arfa