Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Hey all, I have a burning moral issue; I LOVE Miele vacuums, and other bagged machines (Kirby, Electrolux, Sebo, Sweden Electrolux), but HOW MUCH OF AN IMPACT do the bags and filters make on the environment?  ESPECIALLY Miele with all that unecessary plastic and metal on their bags and A LOT of unnecessary plastic on their filters?


What's your guys's opinion on this subject?

Hi,

For the genuinely concerned, the follow link leads to an article with some very useful ideas about recycling your old vacuum.

http://www.ehow.com/how_2386374_recycle-vacuum-cleaners.html

Venson

Hertz wrote:
Lucky you but that doesn't mean you know it all. Having WORKED FOR MIELE, Hertz I CAN ASSURE YOU if Miele wanted to they could still use cardboard collars - but they can't. I also have a degree in Science; biology and engineering. Why not test the theory yourself - buy a cardboard brown paper Miele bag and put it into a current vacuum that has 2000 watts; it won't last. You will find that the bag's collar will weaken and that the brown bag will burst. Trust me! Miele tested their synthetic bags well before Intensive Clean was the known name on the market of higher suction models and found that the material types don't burst due to the high suction and that the plastic grid holders are bonded tightly to the bags. Also Miele's recycling document used to be available to view on their German website and most of the grid holders underneath have the recycling sign on them. Infact most German companies take recycling very seriously and the UK have been one of the last countries in Europe to adopt recycling as much as the Germans, Italians and French.

I can't speak for Sweden's Electrolux bags, but the ones in the UK have cardboard holders and I don't think very much of them. The ones that have cardboard on them have rubber seals on the rim of the dust channel hole and can be used in vacuums with a 1700 watt motor. Here's what the bag looks like:




Having the vacuum that this bag fits to, despite the cardboard holder which bends over time, dust can't be sealed on this type of bag because there isn't a sealer on it. Now, interestingly enough, despite the HEPA filter by the motor Hertz, I can testify that dirt often escapes out of the bag, particularly if the cardboard weakens over time - if the bag had a plastic grid holder I don't think this would be an issue. NUMATIC who make the HENRY tub vacuums (and are also very popular in the UK) have always had double layer filtration bags with cardboard seals. However two years ago they brought out a synthetic dust bag that has a plastic collar - why plastic? Because it ensures that once it meets the dust channel, it stays put and has enough rigidity and flexibility to the plastic, that it ensures no dust ever escapes.

vacmanuk wrote:

Hi vacmanuk,

What's your feeling as regards the advantage of plastic and synthetics for vacuum bags over paper products that rely on natural resources, trees, etc., to be produced?

By the way, I came across this article today -- http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/north-east-news/the-environment/go-green-news/2010/04/30/15-tonnes-of-rubbish-cleared-in-a1-clean-up-72703-26350588/ 

Venson

Infact, if you visit Miele's UK site on : http://www.miele.co.uk/about/environmental/default.aspx and download the Sustainability_Report_pdf. You'll find quite lengthy info on how Miele recycles. This starts on page 23 and boy does it go on!

vacmanuk wrote:

Thanks!  I've just downloaded it and can now read it at my leisure.

Venson

Venson wrote:
The question is Venson, if we're going to be uber-specific and pedantic about it, who's to question the authenticity of 100% recycled cardboard that has been put on a dust bag?

When it comes to dust bags, my main concern is "how clean is it, " in terms of keeping the dust in / sealing it in and secondly, is it clean enough when the bag is pulled off the main housing? Then there's the durability and the longevity of the bag in question. Hoover UK had several different types of high filtration bags on the market for their UK bound Telios models. Yet I found the cheaper thinner layered brown bags performed better than their "white" bags which had a knack of filling up and breaking off the cardboard housing. They were originally called Pure Filt and Hoover after a few years were forced to take them off the market because of their initial expensive prices and poor design,

As for "natural resources," I'm afraid that my mind is swayed on vacuums that have high power - those which have higher powered motors are more damaging based on the use of electricity and the power consumption. It is often a sign of bad marketing when brands claim that products which have "Eco Power," set into their design that the whole proposition is a total con. Take for example "stove kettles," or electric kettles as we have in the UK. There are some major brands here such as Tefal and Bosch claiming that their kettles have lower energy based on their smaller capacities or fangled "instant water" disposal designs. Yet on the base they all have high powered 3.2 kw or 3000 watt elements. Kettles that take longer to boil with lower watts of power have been scientifically proven to use less power and thus be kinder to the environment.

Vacmanuk, not being a fan of ORECK yourself, I'll give it credit and kudos for using a good quality paper bag with a decent cardboard collar and sealer that closes off the dust opening AND a plastic docking bag holder that secures the paper bag.  Simple, inexpensive, and effective. 

BTW, nice work on the academic credentials.  My kind of vacuum expert.

Carmine D.

Venson wrote:

Thanks Venson.  Good information.

Carmine D.

vacmanuk wrote:

As I've said before, the most impressive thing about the Miele high filtration bags is that they do do their job well.  They contain what they capture well and I've yet to see dust coating the walls of the bag chamber in either of mine or any signs of leakage around the bag collar.  I have not put much thought into their impact ecologically as there's so

The escalation of energy consumption, in my books, has more to do with manufacturers depending on consumers to give in to hype. If they can't sell us illusions of total purity, they titilate us with visions of power.  I'm not saying there is no place for it but high power draw has been leaned on to compensate for lack of thought at the drawing board when it comes to vacuums.  There's probably nothing that can be done about it since so many manufacturers are sourcing tools from the same places.  There's nothing new left to sell except extra wattage.

Nonetheless, vacuuming is probably one of home care's shorter tasks.  I can't imagine that even the most fastidious person whom vacuums every day runs his or her cleaner more than a total of five hours in the course of any given week.  A half-hour run daily in the average home should factor far less in the cost picture than the cost to run a frost-free fridge or high heat producing appliances.

Venson

Some good points there Venson. However it's the same adage with cost optional filters. I've recently replaced my "yearly," AAC filter on my Miele S4000 but do you know, I had that filter for 3 years AS OPPOSED to Miele's official "yearly change," suggestion. Over the HEPA filter, I find the cheaper AAC type just as good on sealing odours from the bag/suction air from the room. Companies such as Miele have little to worry about with their suction; Miele models sell based on their reliability, quietness, general performance and usefulness - one of the reasons to why I like the company and in particular go out of their way to make tools that even other brands have tried to copy (like the rather nifty Extender/Flexhose I added on here earlier in other posts).