Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

Nevertheless, thinking on rising costs for household electricity just about everywhere in the country, do you think we're ready to seriuosly contemplate a move toward vacuums that work well but require less power draw?  We learned this back in the day with cars and came to accept that six-cylinders or even less could be as much fun as eight -- especially because it left more cash in the wallet.

As well, if a trend toward real energy efficiency in vacuums and other appliances were to come about, how long do you think it would take OR would not take to be relected ecologically?

Venson

Hi Carmine,

I changed over to the "curly-cues" (compact fluorescent bulbs) and actually saw my electric bill drop noticeably.  These days their pricing is reasonable at least at Home depot and similar venues and the bulbs do last a long time.  (So long that you may easily forget the last time you had to replace it.)

Yes, there are some people who may take issue regarding fluorescent over incandescent light but there are bulb styles that also claim to provide "warm" light.  That said, bottom line, a main pursuit of myself and many here is not over-funding Con Edison.  Apartment dwellers as opposed to home owners are hard pressed for alternate solutions other than sitting around in the dark.  If I could hang solar panels outside my windows I would.

As I stated before, LED bulbs are claimed to have even less power draw but the ability to provide light comparable to incandescent and fluorescent.  I think it's worth a try and the investment is only in the device itself.  No alterations have to be made nor special fixtures added to your dwelling to gain the saving.

By now I think you know that I'm all for new invention as long as it does some good all around for the user and the environment in and outside its place of use.  If I make mention the good old days it usually more so due to seeing the same work getting done just about as well and quickly as at present with less fuss and power needs.

Good automatic dishwashers are now designed to clean well but use less power and water.  The dishwasher I had in the 1980s used about 11 gallons of water per heavy wash cycle and machines now can do the same with about six.  The dishwasher of course is undeniably a real labor saver.  Needless to say, so is the washing machine.

Regarding vacuum cleaners, the only good news has been robotic models and those that employ transmissions to make pushing easier.  The filtration issue over HEPA or no HEPA or bagged over bagless has more to do with an individual’s "religion" than anything else I feel. Save for the robotic types, I strongly maintain that vacuuming is just as labor intensive as it was in the 40s, 50s and prior.  It still takes the same time to do a sofa or rug in need of a good cleaning now as then.  And I think in reality only so much power can be applied before risk of damage may overshadow the picture.

With vacuums the end justifies the means.  Vacuums, by way of type and power requirements, only can be rationalized in logical assessments by way of the environment that they are used in situation to situation.  Not everyone has home traffic and litter issues that are the same or equal.  Nor does everyone have the same approach to use.  As an instance, the habitually neat and fastidious may require high-power vacs much less than the Saturday-only chore doers because they vacuum frequently and thus may not at any one given point in time have a great cleaning burden.  (That opinion stems from my good old Aunt Lucy's tried and true cleaning theory -- take care of it as you see it during the week and you'll be far less likely to find yourself stuck in the house on Saturdays.)

Makers of things and sales folks love to play on our phobias regarding dirt and ever present germs.  The end solution set forth always comes up, "You've gotta have power".  However, useful, cost effective solutions are there though a matter of choice.  For diversity's sake, you might have a high-powered machine with multiple speeds that allows for less power use when cleaning situations don't call for it. Or, a buyer might opt for a machine with more oomph if there's actually a continual and heavy duty cleaning challenge going on in his or her personal environment.  Yet, there is also the perfectly sane option of efficient but lower power consuming machines for those who vacuum often or just do not have a lot of cleaning challenges.  Even in homes with decent vacuums, maybe even some of the manual or battery-operated sweepers might lessen the power need factor too.

Nonetheless some sensibility needs to come into play.  As an instance, the issue of the recent oil spill probably serves well.  Despite the continuing chatter of environmentalists, consumers are still being romanced toward power consuming issues.  I don't have the stats immediately at hand but the foods we've learned to love to eat out of season can't be brought to our tables without fuel consumption.  The demand continues to grow, thus the demand for petroleum products from anywhere also continues to grow.

Last but not least is just plain old spending power in a shaky economy.  Can't spend what you don't have and basics first. 

Save for a blessed few, many of us are going to have to think of ways to trim the fat at home, like it or not.  When we walk into our kitchens, we'll be thinking of what we can easily make ourselves over processed or convenience foods -- maybe not a bad thing.  We'll be thinking of ways not to have to overly alter our light usage but still save where possible.  As for cleaning, when we venture out for a new or replacement vacuum we'll be more prone to think about what we actually have real use of instead of the sexy allure of high-power.  Such lines of thought may actually lead to a worthwhile legacy as regards those we leave behind us.

Venson

Hi Venson:

The curly que bulbs are great for outdoors.  Provide lower lighting power but enough for the dark areas on garage aprons, home entrances, and patios.  Plus the changes in temps and winds are less troublesome for these bulbs than the conventional bulbs. 

LED's for vacuums are ideal in part because they withstand the shocks and jerks of vacuum hits and bumps better than conventional vacuums bulbs.

Washers, both dish and clothes, offer users full and short cycles with hot and cold water choices and degrees in between.  Consumers get the choice to use/pay for their preferences as they see fit.

Vacuum daily and a straight suction/low amp/watt vacuum is all that is needed to pick up surface dirt and dust.  Wait 4-5 days after walking on the mess and more power is needed to clean and groom rugs/carpets.  Letting consumers decide their choices and requirements.  Robotics are a good addition to any household for many reasons, least of which is the small energy usage.  Tho, I can see iRobot making this point a feature if the need arises.  Morely likely, consumers figure it out without the need for a government agency to tell them so.

Environmentalist rights end where human rights begin.  I don't want a government regulator telling me what's the best and right thing for me/mine.  I can make those decisions for myself, whether it's what kind of food I eat, bulbs to use, or vacuums to buy.  The EPA was established over 30 years ago to wean Americans off foreign oil.  Did it and does it work?  No.  The oil spill in the Gulf is an excellent example of government and industry gone amuck.  Keep government out.  The world will be a better place because people want it that way, not because they need to be told to do it.

Carmine D.

Good luck with your problem.

Carmine D.

True for the USA too.  As Venson says the large household appliances made the push for energy and resource efficiency years ago and its worked.  No need for gov't intervention.  Not the same for full size vacuums which many like Venson would say went to the other extreme, less energy efficient.  Look at the 2000 Watt MIELE in the Europe.  That's high amp pull especially if used daily.  With about 20 MILLION new vacuums sold each year and year over year in the USA since 2000, the industry is an an easy and target rich venue for gov't regulators to eye in the cross hairs.  Get's alot of favorable publicity and the appearance of big gov't doing its job to conserve the planet's resources.  Gov has the momentum now too especially with most large appliances going the energy efficient route with a few vacuum brands starting too.  Gulf oil spill just adds fuel to the gov't fire. 

Carmine D. 

Some mandates like those that call for car seats for kids and seatbelts for adults save lives.  But that's the government's doing.  Environmentalists, as I see it, advise as opposed to dictate or at least that's what they shoud be doing.  Their advice sometimes is not welcome but often addresses real issues.  No one can tell anyone what to eat, imbibe or buy but, as an example, someone should be offering cautionary info or fact-based opinion.

The same applies for vacuums, there should be information that advises realistically per general cleaning and use situations.  I don't necessarily expect to get that from manufacturers or vendors.

Venson

Hi Venson:

Valid points.  Yet, we've seen over the years that medical, gov't, and university studies have contradicted each other and themselves on foods/drinks to eat and not to eat.  It's a dilemma for consumers.  If Congress has its way, and looks like it will, the curly cue lights will be mandated in a few years at the expense of the conventional bulbs.  The only road block to date is the proper and "regulated" way to dispose of the dangerous materials used to make the new bulbs.

Consumer Reports, Carpet and Rug Industry, ASTM and others serve useful purposes for overseeing the industry's improvement.  Which gets back to the article you posted about the ASTM.  My concern is big government involvement.  Leave it to the industry, market place, and private sector with the vested interests and the entities and authorities over such matters.  Not big brother.

Carmine D. 

I don't know what to say except that I'm a cynic regarding the matter.  When "big government" gets its hands on things "big business" is usually somewhere in the wings prompting its cues.  (Here we are back the oil spill.)

That's why I also feel the need for accurate information from unbiased sources is essential.  Industry reacts faster to what the public will not buy but the public can't always decide that without a regular flow of info.

Took a trip to a P.C. Richard store to look at the new LG uprights.  There was a very nice guy handling the vac department.  Turned out that he'd been there three whole weeks but hadn't a clue as to the function of either machine.  It was obvious that the floor model(LuV200) had been heavily demoed as its collection bin was quite full.  When I inquired if the "kompressor" feature did its job well all I got was a very quizzical look.  At that point I walked over to cleaner and flipped open the maker's info tag that hung on it so that he could read about what I was asking.  I fiddle around with the LuV200 and LuV300 but walked away more than sure the salesman would probably not take time to bone up on any of the product in a department that carried several brands of vacs all the way to Miele.  Definitely not confidence building but definitely not new.  I've seen enough of this same thing to have learned to take a grain of salt along with any information I'm being fed by vendors or manufacturers.

P.S. -- regarding the curly-cue bulbs lupus sufferers should take a look at the following: http://www.lupus.org/webmodules/webarticlesnet/templates/new_magazineback.aspx?articleid=884&zoneid=67

Venson

Thanks Venson.  Not surprisng that the vacuum department gets the least qualifed.  Often times part timers and students.  Curious if any of the indies are planning to stock and sell the latest LG models?  If so, why?

The article about the potential risks of the new bulbs to lupus sufferers is interesting.  Adding a color shroud to the light given off, further reduces the light provided. 

Big business takes a back seat to gov't involvement.  Figured out long ago that there is no partnering with bureacrats.  It's a losing proposition.  Rare is the time and occurrence for good to come out of such a partnership.  Big business prefers IMHO to step aside, let big gov't go its merry way then follow the path of least resistance to conform.  usually through political donations to the right organizations and people.  Most agree that the laws in place were sufficient to prevent the deepwater rig from exploding.  But oversight and approvals were lax and blameworthy.  I would agree.  Hence my concern whenever the gov't gets involved to "help." 

Carmine D.