Vacuum Cleaners Discussions

It's been debated that vacuum cleaners  -- good ones of course -- that use high power draw can help you clean faster and better.  Having used both high-amp and low-amp machines, I have yet to see my actual work time significantly decreased or increased either way. 

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 Venson:

If Big Brother has its way sooner than later.  Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac workers [government employees] tasked with ways to think outside the box patented an electrical outlet cover that prevents home dwellers/intruders from plugging in high amp appliances.  It's a gem of a story.  It uses a typical electrical outlet cover but one solid piece with no outlet openings.  A screw and molly bolt screws into the existing outlet into one of the ground openings.  Vacuum cleaners [not brands] are specifically mentioned by name as the violators and abusers of energy usury.  The question is how will they know which households and outlets are the culprits.  Think Thomas Orwell and Ayn Rand.  They were right.  But now its called by a new name: Cap and Trade.

Carmine D.

Thanks Carmine,

Here's an article I've just come across: http://www.astmnewsroom.org/default.aspx?pageid=1611

Venson

Thanks Venson:

Interesting article.

I wonder if vacuum makers will hike its retail prices for R&D to develop energy efficient vacuums.  It's an enormous task.  I'm betting Federal and State governments will levy a new VAT on the current vacuums to penalize the transgressors who continue to produce wasteful energy usury vacuums.  There goes the USA 2000 Watt MIELE S5 series.  Dead in the water.  I forsee bans on consumers vacuuming with alternate days assigned for such similar to the gas rationing of the 70's and today's current water restrictions banning watering/washing of cars on days and hours of the day.  I see a brand new government bureacracy in the making with a new government czar and thousands of energy police employees to enforce the new energy laws.  I have to dust off and update my resume.  I see growth potential for the vacuum  industry.

Carmine D.

Hello Venson:

In mulling over the already redesigned household items, under the name of energy/resource efficient, I have to pause and ponder.  Are the energy bulbs really as good or better for lighting?  Most find themselves straining their eyes and turning on another light close by to see better.  The energy toilets which use less water per flush really as good or better?  As a rule, one flush is never enough.  Takes two or more.  Vacuums?  I'm sure thecurrent vacuum industry will argue and rightly so that the past push for more amps and watts lessens daily/weekly clean up times because one pass back and forth gets more dirt out and up than the lower motor ratings of years past.  Not to mention that the higher ratings allow for larger dirt capacity bags while granting the same/better prolonged suction.  We already know about the tower fan/air cleaner with a feather duster on top that was rated by the EPA and or another such government agency as Energy Star worthy.  It was a hoax to game the regulators and it worked.  Of course, this doesn't deter government regulators in their mission to make the planet inhabitants resource conscious.  It just gives them more resolve.

Carmine D.

CarmineD wrote:

CarmineD wrote:

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

Venson wrote:

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.

In the U.K there isn't much made of appliances in terms of their energy UNLESS you take into consideration large appliances like cookers, ovens, dishwashers and washing machines/tumble driers. Vacuum cleaners aren't that much of a power drain either, even though some companies are making a big play on ECO friendly appliances by lowering the wattage/amps.

HARDSELL:

Good luck with your problem.

Carmine D.