Washing machine cheapest setting?

k_man

matelodave said:

If you really want to get more info, you dont need a smart meter, get one of these and you can test not only your washing machine but have endless fun testing everything else https://www.amazon.co.uk/plug-energy-meter/s?k=plug+in+energy+meter

For instance, I now know that my toaster uses around 35wh to toast either one or two slices of bread taken from the freezer or 28wh when it's not frozen. So it's more economical to toast two slices at a time but straight from the packet. However, we dont waste as much bread when we freeze it because we only take out as much as we need.

The Tassimo machine uses 23wh to make a cup of black americano coffee (or hot chocolate) but around 30wh if we have a coffee that uses a second capsule for milk/creamer. It also uses around 0.5w if we dont turn it off.

Our airfryer uses around 300-500w/h for fishfingers and chips compared with around 2kwh when we use the oven.

One day when I'm really bored I'll set up a spreadsheet and test everything 

But only on a day when you will be using everything anyway - otherwise it would be wasteful 😉

Norman_Castle

Reducing the spin speed will make no practical saving. From memory my older machine uses about 270w when spinning regardless of the spin speed. Once up to speed it takes little effor to maintain that speed.

Ultrasonic

k_man said:

Ultrasonic said:

Generally quick washes are the least efficient but the manual should hopefully give some more advice. You could try contacting the manufacturer if not. 

If the temperature is the same (or lower) what else makes a quick wash less efficient (unless it uses more water)?
Unless we consider how well it cleans as part of it.

I make no claims to be a washing machine expert but my guess is that longer cycles include far more time for clothes to simply sit still and let the detergents do their thing, whereas quick cycles try to achieve similar (but generally worse) results by more aggressively moving the clothes more. They may use less water as you suggest too - I don't know.

k_man

Ultrasonic said:

k_man said:

Ultrasonic said:

Generally quick washes are the least efficient but the manual should hopefully give some more advice. You could try contacting the manufacturer if not. 

If the temperature is the same (or lower) what else makes a quick wash less efficient (unless it uses more water)?
Unless we consider how well it cleans as part of it.

I make no claims to be a washing machine expert but my guess is that longer cycles include far more time for clothes to simply sit still and let the detergents do their thing, whereas quick cycles try to achieve similar (but generally worse) results by more aggressively moving the clothes more. They may use less water as you suggest too - I don't know.

That could be part of it, reduce agitation/motor use.

My understanding was that ECO uses time rather than temperature, for equivalent wash quality.

Time for the energy monitor to do it's stuff.

maman

Obviously, I don't know your circumstances but would you be able to cut down on the number of washes per week?  🤔

Ultrasonic

Ultrasonic said:

Generally quick washes are the least efficient...

Doing a spot of Googling I'm actually less sure this is true now. I'm sure that's what I'd heard before but the truth seems complicated. It looks like quick cycles likely use less energy but the load size is intended to be smaller than a regular wash meaning there's more to a proper comparison than simply this.

Muppet_194

Wow thanks everyone, yes I need to get the manual out to check. I can’t get an energy monitor in it as the plugs behind it, too heavy for me to pull out and if I remember rightly the plug socket is in an awkward corner too. 

I think I could do fewer washes a week but they’d be larger so I’d have to do a different cycle, more costly to get it all fully clean. 

Hey ho! 

Mstty

Ultrasonic said:

Ultrasonic said:

Generally quick washes are the least efficient...

Doing a spot of Googling I'm actually less sure this is true now. I'm sure that's what I'd heard before but the truth seems complicated. It looks like quick cycles likely use less energy but the load size is intended to be smaller than a regular wash meaning there's more to a proper comparison than simply this.

Our Bosch adjusts the time of the quick wash. It has a 30 min that when fully loaded is actually 40 min and a 50min that when fully loaded is actually 60 mins.

It will probably vary machine to machine but I agree some programs suggest a half load for the quick washes as our previous machine did.

Ultrasonic

Mstty said:

Ultrasonic said:

Ultrasonic said:

Generally quick washes are the least efficient...

Doing a spot of Googling I'm actually less sure this is true now. I'm sure that's what I'd heard before but the truth seems complicated. It looks like quick cycles likely use less energy but the load size is intended to be smaller than a regular wash meaning there's more to a proper comparison than simply this.

Our Bosch adjusts the time of the quick wash. It has a 30 min that when fully loaded is actually 40 min and a 50min that when fully loaded is actually 60 mins.

It will probably vary machine to machine but I agree some programs suggest a half load for the quick washes as our previous machine did.

I have a Bosch too (by far the best washing machine I've every used) but I've actually never run a quick cycle on it. The longer cycles I use all adjust cycle time based on load too and the longer times to get things optimally clean cause me no issues so I've always used these. I do have an allergy meaning some detergents make my skin itchy so longer cycles to remove as much detergent as possible will be better for me too. I can't for the life of me remember where I've carefully stored the manual for my washing machine though! So no idea if it may give me any helpful relevant info.

Sea_Shell

maman said:

Obviously, I don't know your circumstances but would you be able to cut down on the number of washes per week?  🤔

The cheapest wash is the one you don't need to do 😉