Dehumidifier energy usage, is it worth the extra upront cost?

chris112

I live in a one bedroom flat asnd im thinking of buying a dehumidifier to manage/control the mould buildup
it will predominantly be used in the living room/kitchen which is (6.5m x 5m)

i'm currently thinking about two dehumidifiers one is energy-efficient but the other cost £40 less and I was curious whether you felt the lower output/what used would make a considerable difference?


or is anyone aware of a cheaper alternative that is energy efficient

Power usage 180W:

https://www.appliancesdirect.co.uk/ct/heating-and-air-conditioning/dehumidifiers?fts=dehumidifier

 or this cheaper one but uses 300W:
https://www.diy.com/departments/blyss-16l-dehumidifier/3663602459316_BQ.prd

Or do You think a smaller dehumidifier would be adequate?
if so any suggestions?

thanks

Astria

I bought one from Amazon and I think it's a brilliant piece of kit well worth the price, draws 140W so you could effectively leave it on for almost 10 hours for ~30p

Just don't buy one which is a peltier effect, they are utter ****

I put one by the side of a clothes horse, really shocked at the amount of water it pulled out of the washing.

Aylesbury_Duck

Whilst dehumidifiers are good, they are treating the symptom rather than the cause.  Perhaps you should investigate why mould is or might be building up, and address that.  Then a dehumidifier comes in if it's not enough.

Mould will occur whenever there is insufficient ventilation and heating.  Some ventilation (e.g. trickle vents or periods on dry days when you can open the windows for a while) and possibly a slight increase to room temperature might remove the problem entirely.  It might cost a little more in heating, but you'll save the £100 plus running costs on the dehumidifier.

wittynamegoeshere

I've just bought a proper one from Toolstation, not some cheapo Amazon rubbish(!).  This...

https://www.toolstation.com/midea-20l-dehumidifier/p58437

I'd recommend it.  Its smart mode is excellent, it maintains 50-odd% humidity and switches completely off when not needed, even the fan goes off, not just the compressor.  So it actually consumes a lot less than its rated power over time.

I also have a peltier one that cost about £20 in a very small room and it works brilliantly, it's definitely not utter ****, it's just a different, lower power way of doing things.  It's probably lower efficiency than a compressor one but quieter and any other would be overkill for the tiny room it's in.  But it does the job, I empty the tank every few days and all that water comes from somewhere.

The toolstation one consumes 440W, the peltier one 30W.  The peltier one collects much less than the big one but uses a fraction of the power.

I'd suggest that the comparison being made in the first post of this thread isn't really valid, there isn't any correlation between price and efficiency.  You may (or may not) get higher power and capacity for more money, but efficiency is a different thing altogether, you'd need to dig into the specs to find out and even then it's probably hard to compare.

So horses for courses, you may or may not save power by spending more, and plenty of places sell similar performance or worse ones at higher prices than others, so price isn't the means to use to compare anything.

Snwps

I have a dehumidifier and wouldn't be without it. In the winter I'm drying indoors on airers (saving on using the tumble) and between that and cooking it can get quite humid especially when its cold outside and don't want to open the windows fully. I find it helps dry clothes, I don't have condensation on the windows plus I find that when it's on, the air in the room is warmer as its dryer so I don't need to put the heating on. It helps to keep the downstairs around 19-20 degrees. 

wittynamegoeshere

Fundamentally, and possibly controversially, they don't really "use" much (or any!) power at all.  We use electric heating, so almost all of the power used will end up as heat in the room anyway, so we'll use slightly less power for the heating.  All energy ends up somewhere, heat is usually the default anyway.

Obviously this is a little over-simplified, and for those who use gas or other means to heat then it's still a more expensive form of heat.  But my point is that this power used doesn't vanish into space, it makes your house warmer.

dealyboy

I don't know that that's true. My humidifier (condenser Electriq CD12LE) alternates between warm and cold air outflow according to the ambient temperature. User manual states heating effect neutral. 

QrizB

dealyboy said:

I don't know that that's true. My humidifier (condenser Electriq CD12LE) alternates between warm and cold air outflow according to the ambient temperature. User manual states heating effect neutral. 

Do you mean humidifier? That's a very different product to a dehumidifier, which this thread is discussing.

Astria

wittynamegoeshere said:

I've just bought a proper one from Toolstation, not some cheapo Amazon rubbish(!).  This...

https://www.toolstation.com/midea-20l-dehumidifier/p58437

I'd recommend it.  Its smart mode is excellent, it maintains 50-odd% humidity and switches completely off when not needed, even the fan goes off, not just the compressor.  So it actually consumes a lot less than its rated power over time.

Sounds exactly like my Amazon rubbish, but more expensive, less features and draws more power

Peltier dehumidifiers cost significantly more in energy because of how insufficient they are - I suppose if you want something running 24/7 it could be better to have one of those than a motor, pump and compressor turning on and off all the time though.

dealyboy

QrizB said:

dealyboy said:

I don't know that that's true. My humidifier (condenser Electriq CD12LE) alternates between warm and cold air outflow according to the ambient temperature. User manual states heating effect neutral. 

Do you mean humidifier? That's a very different product to a dehumidifier, which this thread is discussing.

No ... dehumidifier, sorry.

wittynamegoeshere

Astria said:

wittynamegoeshere said:

I've just bought a proper one from Toolstation, not some cheapo Amazon rubbish(!).  This...

https://www.toolstation.com/midea-20l-dehumidifier/p58437

I'd recommend it.  Its smart mode is excellent, it maintains 50-odd% humidity and switches completely off when not needed, even the fan goes off, not just the compressor.  So it actually consumes a lot less than its rated power over time.

Sounds exactly like my Amazon rubbish, but more expensive, less features and draws more power

Peltier dehumidifiers cost significantly more in energy because of how insufficient they are - I suppose if you want something running 24/7 it could be better to have one of those than a motor, pump and compressor turning on and off all the time though.

Now you're getting confused and confusing.  The toolstation one is a compressor dehumidifier.  It uses more (peak) power than the one from the american tax-dodging monopoliser because it's more powerful, i.e. it does a better job.

I'm not sure what features a dehumidifier needs.  You switch it on, it pulls water out of the air.  Smartphone apps are a fun gimmick until the company running their server decides to shut down, then the app stops working or sometimes the appliance stops working completely as it's reliant on it.

My other one is a peltier one, which is way less powerful but definitely not a load of ****.

Getting a little serious for a moment, the thing we're probably missing here is a meaningful measure of the dehumidifying power of each.  They quote figures in litres per 24 hours, but I don't know how accurate or comparable these are.  E.g. the amazon one is 12L, the toolstation is 20L.  So according to these numbers the second is almost twice as capable as the first.  But I don't know if this is a real comparison or not.  I don't know if these are as comparable as say the Lux figures for lightbulbs or if they're more of a guide.  The amount you'll collect over 24hr will depend on lots of other factors such as temperature and humidity among others, perhaps the figures given are for a room that's 100% humidity that doesn't actually reduce while the thing is running, so it's definitely not achievable.  But is it a comparable measure between them?  If so then I suppose the efficiency is this number divided by the power rating, plus/minus whatever eco settings are available, e.g. if it switches off if it gets dry.