Those with solar - Appliances

70sbudgie

Screwdriva said:

70sbudgie said:

So I went for the second best. Which stopped working within 10 days. 

Which one did you go for that failed in 10 days? Does Miele do a built in washer dryer?

We just sold our 5 year old built in AEG washer dryer on to a home that needed it and purchased a replacement that washes/ drys 8/4kg but is rated at 705 Watts (vs. 1.05 kW of its predecessor). 

We ended up paying only a couple hundred quid at the end of it all. I often wonder if the 30% reduction in rated consumption is real world or the result of some sort of ratings scam. 

Hmm, I left out the make deliberately. It was only one part that failed and that was apparently replaceable. The issue was that they didn't have the part in stock and rescheduled my repair visit to 2 weeks later. Being without a washing machine for more than 3 weeks for a family of 4, was more than I can manage. The retailer's customer service was what pushed me away from a straight replacement. So I'm reluctant to tattle on the manufacturer, as I'm not convinced the issue I had was particularly their fault. 

I'm not entirely convinced about the consumption data, but have nothing else to make comparison with. I treated it a bit like the mpg of a car.

70sbudgie

zeupater said:

waqasahmed said:

 
[ ... ]
I'd love to see more efficient TVs too. Samsung is getting there but HDR is still really quite inefficient. That's around 150w which is a lot imo

Hi

Changed our main TV from a plasma to ~50" LED about a decade ago mainly on energy efficiency grounds and, despite it's age, that only uses ~45W after setting up properly so I'm surprised that 150W would be considered typical nowadays ...

The published power consumption for TVs is based on test conditions utilising a standardised screen panel brightness which is probably considered too bright for typical domestic room settings, particularly in artificial lighting conditions when TVs are in most use .... although this figure is useful for comparing efficiencies between different models when purchasing, the only way to know what your TV typically consumes after being set-up for your own preferences is to measure consumption with something like an accurate in-line plug monitor and averaging power (energy/time), especially so if efficiency measures such as automated brightness control using eco-sensors etc are being employed ....

HTH - Z  

We changed our >10 year old plasma tv for an LED one last year. I didn't need an energy plug monitor to see the difference in consumption. It was no longer visible on our smart meter data when we had a movie night. 

1961Nick

70sbudgie said:

My new Miele washer dryer arrived this morning. It's lower energy consumption made it my wishful choice, but I didn't feel I could justify the cost. So I went for the second best. Which stopped working within 10 days. The ensuing customer services pain to getting that sorted pushed me back to the Miele (and a different retailer). Based on the standard data published, the reduction in running costs of the Miele should pay back the difference in purchase price within a couple years.

Our Miele washer & dryer are costing peanuts to run. The actual performance of the dryer (0.78kWh/cycle) is much better than the published energy performance data (1.09kWh/cycle)... and that's despite the kilowatt queen using the extra dry setting for every load rather than the default setting. 

anon_ymous

70sbudgie said:

zeupater said:

waqasahmed said:

 
[ ... ]
I'd love to see more efficient TVs too. Samsung is getting there but HDR is still really quite inefficient. That's around 150w which is a lot imo

Hi

Changed our main TV from a plasma to ~50" LED about a decade ago mainly on energy efficiency grounds and, despite it's age, that only uses ~45W after setting up properly so I'm surprised that 150W would be considered typical nowadays ...

The published power consumption for TVs is based on test conditions utilising a standardised screen panel brightness which is probably considered too bright for typical domestic room settings, particularly in artificial lighting conditions when TVs are in most use .... although this figure is useful for comparing efficiencies between different models when purchasing, the only way to know what your TV typically consumes after being set-up for your own preferences is to measure consumption with something like an accurate in-line plug monitor and averaging power (energy/time), especially so if efficiency measures such as automated brightness control using eco-sensors etc are being employed ....

HTH - Z  

We changed our >10 year old plasma tv for an LED one last year. I didn't need an energy plug monitor to see the difference in consumption. It was no longer visible on our smart meter data when we had a movie night. 

I've already got a newer Philips Ambilight. It'll probably be about five years before we'll see A rated TVs at a decent size and decent spec however 

anon_ymous

1961Nick said:

70sbudgie said:

My new Miele washer dryer arrived this morning. It's lower energy consumption made it my wishful choice, but I didn't feel I could justify the cost. So I went for the second best. Which stopped working within 10 days. The ensuing customer services pain to getting that sorted pushed me back to the Miele (and a different retailer). Based on the standard data published, the reduction in running costs of the Miele should pay back the difference in purchase price within a couple years.

Our Miele washer & dryer are costing peanuts to run. The actual performance of the dryer (0.78kWh/cycle) is much better than the published energy performance data (1.09kWh/cycle)... and that's despite the kilowatt queen using the extra dry setting for every load rather than the default setting. 

I also find that I'm using less power than quoted. Interestingly enough, my Miele washing machine does end up using more power than my tumble dryer 

zeupater

waqasahmed said:

70sbudgie said:

zeupater said:

waqasahmed said:

 
[ ... ]
I'd love to see more efficient TVs too. Samsung is getting there but HDR is still really quite inefficient. That's around 150w which is a lot imo

Hi

Changed our main TV from a plasma to ~50" LED about a decade ago mainly on energy efficiency grounds and, despite it's age, that only uses ~45W after setting up properly so I'm surprised that 150W would be considered typical nowadays ...

The published power consumption for TVs is based on test conditions utilising a standardised screen panel brightness which is probably considered too bright for typical domestic room settings, particularly in artificial lighting conditions when TVs are in most use .... although this figure is useful for comparing efficiencies between different models when purchasing, the only way to know what your TV typically consumes after being set-up for your own preferences is to measure consumption with something like an accurate in-line plug monitor and averaging power (energy/time), especially so if efficiency measures such as automated brightness control using eco-sensors etc are being employed ....

HTH - Z  

We changed our >10 year old plasma tv for an LED one last year. I didn't need an energy plug monitor to see the difference in consumption. It was no longer visible on our smart meter data when we had a movie night. 

I've already got a newer Philips Ambilight. It'll probably be about five years before we'll see A rated TVs at a decent size and decent spec however 

Hi

From the number of recent debacles related to alphabetic ratings it's pretty obvious that the process is flawed and those involved in developing/administrating the schemes have absolutely no clue towards what they're doing or where current current appliance energy requirements sit within what's technically or even scientifically possible .... this being evidenced by the need to add A+,A++,A+++ etc categories to a scale where A was recently considered the best & ultimate achievement, in some cases even necessitating the re-basing of full product categories completely (eg LED lighting) ...

I tend to look beyond the efficiency hype based on standardised test regimes & typical standardised annual usage patterns and simply compare either the power requirements or typical cycle energy requirements, depending on the class of goods ...

Think of it this way, you could go out & buy an A rated TV thinking that you're paying a premium to save the environment, then later discover that the slightly smaller, cheaper alternative with as good sound & picture quality that you passed over because of it's B, C, or lower alphabetic rating would actually consume less electricity .... makes no sense to me other than a purely marketing led system designed to dumb down the decision making process for the average consumer ...

HTH - Z