Ordinary people vs the elite/establishment

wotsthat

kinger101 wrote: »

The isn't the equation though. For a start, every person in Europe isn't using the vacuum cleaner for 1 hour every day. There would be a lot of terrified cats if they were. Most vacuum cleaners were already under the limit anyway.

And unfortunately, it doesn't measure performance at all. Just how much power the machine draws when it's empty. So the energy ratings are deceptive say compared to a light bulb or TV, where performance doesn't degrade during use.

An hour a day or week makes no odds - we're still talking about big numbers.

Light bulbs are a good example too. How quickly would low energy light bulbs have been adopted without legislation?

kinger101

wotsthat wrote: »

An hour a day or week makes no odds - we're still talking about big numbers.

Light bulbs are a good example too. How quickly would low energy light bulbs have been adopted without legislation?

I have no problem with the lightbulb one. Lightbulbs improved because of new innovations anyway. Not because the EU decided the make the filament bulb dimmer.

But the vacuum cleaner rules are based on power consumption of the same technology, the electric motor. And they don't actually measure the efficency anyway. And it doesn't take into account the performance degrades until the bag is emptied and the filters cleaned.

They haven't banned cars with 2 litre engines. Instead they tell you how much carbon dioxide is emitted. They could at least have calculated litres per minute (per kw) for the vacuums. That's how vacuum pumps are usually rated.

The crux of the point is, if they don't know how to measure the performance, they shouldn't really be setting the standards.

cells

kinger101 wrote: »

Someone asked to give an example of a pointless piece of EU legislation. Clearly you don't care about the power of vacuum cleaners, like 99% of the rest of the population. So why on Earth should the EU?

All electrical and gas products should have typical use costs over a typical lifetime to allow users to make informed decisions about cost of ownership.

There is scope for governments to go further and make certain products illegal or regulate their use. For instance it makes perfect sense to regulate away incandescent to be replaced by LEDs. Not only do they save energy and money to the consumer directly but also indirectly ib the power grid system.

It makes sense for larger entities like the EU to take up this type of role. Even without an EU it would make sense for the UK to do this sort of thing for itself.

Regulating vacuums power or other electrical items power would be done on a cost benefit analysis. Something probably beet done by one group and shared amongst 28 members rather than 28 groups

cells

kinger101 wrote: »

I have no problem with the lightbulb one. Lightbulbs improved because of new innovations anyway. Not because the EU decided the make the filament bulb dimmer.

But the vacuum cleaner rules are based on power consumption of the same technology, the electric motor. And they don't actually measure the efficency anyway. And it doesn't take into account the performance degrades until the bag is emptied and the filters cleaned.

They haven't banned cars with 2 litre engines. Instead they tell you how much carbon dioxide is emitted. They could at least have calculated litres per minute (per kw) for the vacuums. That's how vacuum pumps are usually rated.

The crux of the point is, if they don't know how to measure the performance, they shouldn't really be setting the standards.

Maybe they do know and have done the cost benefit analysis but we don't because we really aren't that interested. I doubt very much some EU minister randomly picked a power level. Also these things tend to have feedback over time to improve regulations. So you night start with a crude power level then move onto other metrics like airflow and pressure or noise etc.

A lot of these regulations are benefical as consumers haven't the time or understanding to make fully informed decisions. They can't be expected to get a degree on vacume cleaners and eletrocoty grids before they make their choices to purchase a or b. So regulators try to play that role by limiting the range of parameters manufacturers can make products

CLAPTON

cells wrote: »

Maybe they do know and have done the cost benefit analysis but we don't because we really aren't that interested. I doubt very much some EU minister randomly picked a power level. Also these things tend to have feedback over time to improve regulations. So you night start with a crude power level then move onto other metrics like airflow and pressure or noise etc.

A lot of these regulations are benefical as consumers haven't the time or understanding to make fully informed decisions. They can't be expected to get a degree on vacume cleaners and eletrocoty grids before they make their choices to purchase a or b. So regulators try to play that role by limiting the range of parameters manufacturers can make products

love the logic even if you don't actually know anything about this and its all made up nonsense;

but they did a great job with diesel engines

kinger101

cells wrote: »

I doubt very much some EU minister randomly picked a power level.

No, it would have taken a whole committee several weeks to randomly pick the power level.

cells

CLAPTON wrote: »

love the logic even if you don't actually know anything about this and its all made up nonsense;

but they did a great job with diesel engines

In principle do you not think a nation eg the UK or a block like the EU should do cost benefit analysis on behalf of consumers?

And if sometimes they make a mistake is it better to correct it and carry on or abandon the idea of cost benefit analysis on behalf of consumers?

stator

I must be very sad because I found the new EU labelling system extremely useful when buying my last vacuum cleaner. The dust re-emission rating is particularly revealing.