Hacker News Reader

Comment by thewebcount | Hacker News Reader

This reminds me of a trend I've seen in home appliances in recent years. Appliances that have "energy saving" features that save energy by not actually doing their job.

For example, we had a window air conditioning unit in our previous house that had an efficiency feature. Instead of recirculating the air, it would cool to the temperature you asked for, then set itself a few degrees higher. So it cooled down to the right temperature, and then just changed the temperature so it wouldn't remain as cool as you wanted. THat's not more efficient — that's just not doing its damn job.

Likewise, our dryer has settings that amount to "almost dry," "not actually dry," and "can't even tell you put it in the dryer." Who are these settings for? When I dry my clothes, I need them to be completely dry every time. I can't hang a shirt that's still damp in the closet or it will get all musty. WTF?

View on HN

This is a common misunderstanding of dual flush toilets. I don't know if you missed it, but the article was concerned with them leaking as opposed to their designed operation, which in fact does save water.

They "work" because the most common form of evacuation for humans is urination. And that is easily cleared with a lower volume of water. The math is that even if you have to flush three times after you poop to get everything gone, you've saved water because most of the time you only peed and that took less water than it did before. The math checks out.

That said, washing is a different story. That is because washing is a chemical process, not a mechanical one. Regulation has simultaneously cut phosphates[1] (EDIT: per wikipedia the phosphates chelates the water which allows the detergent to be more effective) and reduced water (which is required for chemical action) and as a result the effectiveness of washing units (dishwashers and clothes washers) has in some cases stopped being effective.

Regulation itself has become less effective (in my opinion) because it continues to attack the symptom and not the problem. For example, it would have been just as effective to upgrade waste water treatment plants to remove all phosphates rather than ban them from detergents, however that solution creates a tax burden which can be resisted by a population whereas restricting the sale of products the consumer wants cannot be countered by the consumers directly.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phosphates_in_detergent

Good points, it makes you wonder how many day to day things could have vastly improved user experience if government efforts were targeted at underlying problems instead of symptoms (borrowing your definitions of those two things).

But plastics recycling comes to mind as a bit of a counter example, where all the effort has been put on dealing with the end problem, when perhaps they should be targeting the symptom (regulating unnecessary plastics and packaging, and taxing the producers instead of the consumers). Currently plastic producers have incentive to generate more plastics, and consumers are left trying to deal with the waste.

Absolutely agree. If the actual cost to use plastic packaging was related to the externalized costs of plastic disposal it would immediately cause change and innovation in packaging.

Finally!

I’ve said this for years. It’s always been ignored or downvotes to oblivion, but maybe it’s finally catching on?

It’s not an end-consumer problem, because the further down the manufacturing and delivery chain you go the more difficult it becomes to recycle.

I used to work for a chemical plant that made their own detergent. sodium tripolyphosphate is where it’s at for clean dishes.

Right, but what’s the probability of a leak? And average amount of water lost, before it’s repaired?

A complex mechanical product is more likely to have problems, which is something that can’t be ignored.

I've read somewhere that it can create problems for the canalization because more buildups of "fat-balls" because of less water. OTOH, that shouldn't be the case when it leaks, so "shrug"?

The EU actually attempted to do the right thing when regulating dishwashers, and it actually made rules that it has to not just be efficient, but also get the dishes to a certain cleanliness standard.

Either their standard was too lenient or their testing procedure unrealistic though, because my dishwasher has the "EU mode" (which has to be selected by default by law), and then 4 other modes that will actually clean the dishes.

I'm surprised that the manufacturers didn't label the EU mode as such to make clear to customers who they have to thank for that.

Such experiences sour consumers for future eco initiatives (compare e.g. early CFLs and LEDs leading to people hoarding incandescent bulbs and refusing to touch the technology to this day).

Vacuum cleaners are the EU's most recent victim.

> Either their standard was too lenient or their testing procedure unrealistic though, because my dishwasher has the "EU mode" (which has to be selected by default by law), and then 4 other modes that will actually clean the dishes.

In the US these newish dishwashers drive me crazy. They don’t have a heating element on the bottom (efficient!) and anything plastic is absolutely dripping wet, even after it’s been drying overnight (or rather, actively drying for a couple hours and then just sitting there). You’re supposed to top them up CONSTANTLY with Jet Dry (drying agent), but it barely does anything. Parent was spot on in describing the efficiency gains as being a result of not doing the damn job.

> You’re supposed to top them up CONSTANTLY with Jet Dry

THANK YOU, I had no idea why my dish washer seems to go through jetdry like it was water!

What's jet dry? Literally never heard about the term.

For anyone else who was confused - it seems to be a different name for rinse aid.

It is a surfactant (breaks surface tension). I am not an American and I had to Google it a few months ago to figure out what it was. I think it is avaliable here in New Zealand but I have never ever seen anyone use it.

Yeah, it's called rinse aid elsewhere - I'm surprised anyone still uses it, as multitabs have replaced all the separate detergents used(remember having to add salt to your dishwasher?). In fact my dishwasher has a separate setting that you need to enable if you aren't using multitabs, then it will start consuming rinse aid from a separate container. By default it doesn't use any.

I think this depends on the model as we just had to replace our dish washer and we got one without the heating element and it does a better job drying than our previous one with the heating element.

Also they still make both and the models with the heating element aren't hard to find.

> anything plastic is absolutely dripping wet, even after it’s been drying overnight (or rather, actively drying for a couple hours and then just sitting there)

How is that possible? Even when I hand wash plastic items they'll usually dry within a few hours, at worst overnight.

Because the water stays on these items, the inside of the dishwasher stays very humid, and basically none of the moisture can actually dissipate. So unless you leave the dishwasher cracked half-open after its done, all your plastic items end up still wet the next day. And even if you do leave it half-open, without active circulation, it can still take a very long time to dry items.

Our solution: Put away the dry porcelain/glass/stoneware pieces, and let the plastic cups and containers dry in a drying rack.

This is why I will never ever again have another Bosch dishwasher. I don’t care what Consumer Reports says about it being the quietest dishwasher and therefore the best, it doesn’t fucking get the dishes clean and then properly dry.

Never ever again.

I have the exact opposite experience. Got the Bosch Series 6 dishwasher few months ago and it's the best dishwasher I've ever had. Everything is always perfectly clean no matter which program I pick, and if you select "Extra Dry" then everything is actually dry - apparently it's the moisture absorbing zeolite that they are using.

This is more or less what I do -- I leave the door cracked open for an hour or two, and then put away all the actually dry dishes. Everything else goes into the drying rack for a finishing dry.

The biggest problem with this is some of the not dry items have so much water on them they end up getting everything wet again when you even so much as slide out the dishwasher racks.

But mine is a cheap samsung dishwasher provided by the landlord, so I don't expect it to be terribly effective. Mainly I use the dishwasher when I forgot to do the dishes and need to start cooking and need the sink. It's basically an overflow sink for me.

Ahhh, yeah, I do crack the dishwasher open a bit after it's done to let the steam out and get some drier air in there. I -- perhaps incorrectly -- assumed this was a normal thing to do!

Just use white vinegar instead of jetdry. It works as well and is much cheaper.

I've read this is bad for the seals. Use citric acid (the main component of jetdry) dissolved in water instead. Haven't tested this effect but it's plausible, given that acetic acid is itself a solvent and can diffuse into some rubbers.

I mean, you can legislate/regulate whatever you want, but if that's not realistically (physically and economically) attainable then you'll get wink-wink-nudge-nudge "compliance". See the VW cheating scandal.

They certainly are going the right direction but manufacturers will always find a way to cheat. E.g. my Samsung washer (never again!) has an eco mode that runs 4 1/2h. No idea what it's doing during that time, but I guess it maximises on some criteria that are regulated. It would be absurd to prohibit other modes, so they exist and we use them fairly often as we just want to get laundry done...

On vacuum cleaners - i would hazard a guess that you are in the UK where this has been a major talking point e.g. during the brexit referendum. Truth is that there are plenty of studies showing that new vacuums are as good as old ones and just use less energy. Regulating vacuums was a huge success in that sense. Of course if you get a 40£ tesco vacuum they fared better before they were obliged to try and be efficient, but by a proper brand and you shouldn't notice any difference (except where the brand maybe decided to reduce cost e.g. Dyson has gone downhill for years and recently decided to move HQ to Singapore...).

I know it's anecdata, but in my brand new Bosch dishwasher the "EU" mode is clearly the selected by default ECO mode - and yeah, it takes 3.5 hours, but it uses about 1kWh of energy and only 9 litres of water. And I have never, not even once, had it not clean something perfectly. And I've been using it on burnt oven trays and dishes stained with egg or cheese based meals - it's perfect every time. If I do need dishes back quickly, then I just press "VarioSpeed" and the same program is done in an hour - with the same results.

It must be a quality thing I guess? Cheaper/worse dishwasher will never clean dishes as well as a better one without using least efficient programs.

And what's wrong with vacuums? I got the good old Henry hoover(if you're in UK you might know the brand) just a year ago and it's as good as ever.

I also have a Bosch dishwasher with the ECO mode. It cleans basically everything I put in there, even years of grime on my kitchen exhaust fan.

It’s quiet too, which I love.

When the measure becomes the goal, it ceases to be a good measure.

The energy saving has become goal, not an efficient outcome.

Dryers can absolutely be made to be more energy efficient! They just need to use reverse-cycle airconditioners to efficiently heat the air and dehumidify it instead of simply using a resistive heater. These are much more complex to make and are expensive.

Blowing lots of cool air through clothes will also dry them eventually, which is cheap and "energy efficient". Of course, this doesn't work well in humid climates and damages clothes. It's probably overall a net loss for the environment, as making new clothes takes a lot more resources than drying them.

> They just need to use reverse-cycle airconditioners to efficiently heat the air and dehumidify it instead of simply using a resistive heater. These are much more complex to make and are expensive.

I've seen these in apartments in Europe; I presume this is because it's a PITA to route a dryer exhaust vent to the outside in a 400-year-old building with 2-foot thick stone walls. Such dryers work well; you just have to dump the accumulated water out of them every so often. But I've never seen one for sale in the US.

Even more impressive are the combination washing machine and drier machines that dry and then drain the accumulated water via the washing machine plumbing without you having to ever empty it.

At least that's what I think my Hotpoint does.... it does get mighty hot and release a rubbery sort of smell when it's drying; my wife can't smell it but to me it stinks.

Clever equipment though.

Search on “condensing” or “ventless” dryers.

https://www.abt.com/product/140010/Bosch-24-800-Series-White...

I have a set in my California home made by Miele. I think they're becoming more common. Bosch also makes them, but I found the Miele's to be more efficient - so much so that they run on a standard 110v outlet instead of 220. Highly recommended.

There are "Condenser" dryers that pump the water into a drain hose or water tub (that you need to empty) instead of into the air - that are still otherwise resistive.

Then there are "Heat Pump" dryers that operate with a compressor the same as a reverse-cycle air conditioner. "Heat Pump" dryers are always "Condenser" dryers.

Do you have a source for tumble drying damaging clothes?

I've read the opposite, that heat can damage clothes.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/1999/08/990831080157.h...

Tumble drying, just like any normal use, contributes to wear and tear on fabrics and seams. If it takes 45 minutes to get a load of laundry dry with heat, but three hours to get it dry without heat, the wear from tumbling would occur four times as quickly.

Heat may confound this, suggesting an equilibrium that minimizes both wear from excessive heat and from excessive tumbling.

That could be tested rather simple, I think. Clean every (fluff) filter until it shines like new. Then wash 10 brand new t-shirts and dry them, repeat a few times. Check the filters, the more fluff, less shirt. Change procedure according to your needs/results.

"Heat Pump Dryers" which you describe have come way down in price in the last few years. Under $1000 AUD / $715 USD now.

Note for the other commentators that there are also "Condenser" dryers that pump the water into a hose or water tub instead of into the air - that are still otherwise resistive and not "Heat Pump" dryers though "Heat Pump" dryers are always "Condenser" dryers.

I have overhead fans which I use with the reverse cycle AC on heat in winter to dry my clothes (heating is for the occupant's not the clothes).

So I use the heat I warm my room with the extra airflow of the fans works well with my apartment

> When the measure becomes the goal, it ceases to be a good measure.

Unless the measure is page-load time, in which case it's a damn good measure.

As we joked about in my previous job, error pages are very quick to render!

If you can hang your clothing in a somewhat ventilated space, it is usually nicer to not completely dry your clothing, but hang it up slightly damp. This saves not only some energy, but gives you less wrinkles.

Also, if you want to iron something, it better be not completly dry or you have to wet it a little bit for ironing.

These are good tips but are likely dependent on the humidity of where you live. Here in the UK, since the air can be so damp, it's difficult to dry clothes without leaving it in direct sunlight for the 3-4 days per year that we get it, particularly the further north you go...

If the air inside is cold and humid you may want a dehumidifier, it will save heating costs and reduce mold and mildew.

Here in Germany it can be quite wet too, but in a heated room, even clothes directly out of the washer, without running the dryer, would dry over night. But yes, hanging up damp clothing assumes it would dry reasonably quick :)

Dishwashers are my pet peeve. Visiting family, they all have these dish rinsers that can't actually clean dirty dishes so we hand wash everything then put them in? I have a dishwasher from the 80s that actually washes dishes. I don't think I will replace it when it dies with a new one. Granted, it may never die since they used to make them last too.

It's that there's a lot of variation in dishwasher quality.

I used to live in an apartment with a landlord-installed $200 cheapie dishwashers that never worked.

Then I moved to an apartment without a dishwasher, so I bought a $500 one that I could plug into the sink. Worked much better.

After that apartment, I moved into one that had the same dishwasher that I bought, but installed. Worked great! Then I moved into another apartment with a cheapie dishwasher that was so loud I'd only run it when I left.

Anyway, the lesson is that you need to be a savvy consumer... And skip the cheapest models!

The expensive ones don't work that well either. My kitchenaid cost $1k and it sucks. Maybe a Miele or Bosch will work better.. they are more but honestly I just want one that cleans reliably.

New toilets are awful.. just terrible.

Just purchased a 30 year old house... with older plumbing. Ugly color, but compared to the newer ones we put into our former house - they work incredibly well when sinking the Bismarck.

My relatively new Bosch (about 2.5 years old) cleans better than any dishwasher I can remember having. And it's near-silent, too.

New models can be good!

Yeah I think Bosch is the better choice. What model?

I got the 500 version based on this article from Wirecutter. Works well, but does require that we leave the door open for a while to let the plastic dry. Silent though. Most of the time, I can only tell it is running by the light on the ground.

https://www.nytimes.com/wirecutter/reviews/the-best-dishwash...

I _just_ ordered a Bosch 500 series because my (barely 4 year old) GE model died over the weekend. I was told by a friend who owns the same Bosch model that they go through a lot of Jet Dry, though... But if it actually cleans well and doesn't break in a few years I'll be happy.

Had mine 6 years. It doesn't "need" the jet dry, but it certainly helps.

Also just bought the same model, hoping to replace a terrible Whirlpool.

Whatever Bosch you get, avoid the ones with membrane buttons for the controls. I have one and it is horrible. The lettering is completely worn off, the buttons are not sensitive, and you have to keep pressure on them for more than a second to register your touch.

They have otherwise nearly identical models with physical buttons. If I were buying it over again, I would definitely get one of those.

My parents had bad luck with Bosch. It didn't clean, and then it leaked.

But the Ikea dishwasher we bought, it was loud but it worked

Ikea's are mostly Whirlpools I believe... Whirlpools tend to be a little more reliable but noisier.

I never imagined I would have any feelings for an appliance, but I love my Bosch (800 series and it was just under $1K; third rack is great as well).

My Bosch dishwashers were less than $1k and work great. I put one in my old house, and liked it so much that, when I moved and had to pick out another, I just bought the same one!

> so loud I'd only run it when I left.

I lived in a studio apartment with this kind of dishwasher for five years.

I refused to run it since it was so obnoxious.

Now I just treat the dishwasher as a drying rack. Works great.

a cheapie dishwasher that was so loud I'd only run it when I left

I'm not sure that's a good idea.

I had a dishwasher that had the failure described in the article linked below. The electronics circuitry (top of door) caught fire. Opening the door didn't stop the smoke, and also caused water to spew uncontrollably into the kitchen.

Fortunately I made a quick dash out to the garage and turned off the breaker so there was no damage to the kitchen.

But if I wasn't home .... what would have happened? If we were all sleeping upstairs while the fire was downstairs .... what would have happened?

https://www.consumerreports.org/dishwashers/whirlpool-settle...

There are smoke alarms for that.

Are you in the USA? Here in the UK I don't think I have ever seen a dish rinser! We have dishwashers aplenty. The one issue is that if you think the dishwasher is a food disposal unit, you'll likely clog it up. Some people put dishes in with lumps of food on them, or don't put salt in the dishwasher (depends on the tablets you use) and the lifespan of the dishwasher will be impacted.

When my old one failed to drain and filled up, I was amazed at how much water came out of it when I shimmy'd it to the back door and released the kraken over the back garden. It was like a tsunami.

I think "dish rinser" was meant as a put-down for "bad dishwasher" — I live in the US and I haven't heard of "dish rinsers" either.

Commercial dishwashers are better described are just sterilizers and would be called dish risers if you don't put clean dishes in. They work fast to get dishes ready for safe reuse.

Anyone who cares about the environment does not use a dishwasher.

I'd need to see some estimates for handwashing, but it looks like a modern dishwasher uses 4-6gal (15-23l) of water[1]. That's about 1/10th of a bath (sure, if you're conserving water and energy you take showers instead, so it's about 1/3 of a shower).

1: https://www.consumerreports.org/dishwashers/energy-efficient...

It's not just the power and water use, but the quite harsh and caustic nature of the dishwasher detergent that is a concern in some areas

I would imagine dishwashing water use varies a lot depending on habits. I have refined my dishwashing over the years to this procedure:

0. use aerating faucet head to increase spread of water.

1. Short splash of cold water to remove stuck-on food, letting it sit if needed.

2. Wash with detergent on wet sponge, no added water.

3. Rinse with cold water, low water volume, with stacked dishes below faucet so that water from the rinse is rinsing dishes below as well.

I've never measured how much water is used, but I would think that it's fairly competitive against a dishwasher.

The Miele dishwasher I used to have in my old flat used around 7 litres per wash. My current, not quite as fancy one, uses around 9 litres.

That's like just over a minute of the tap being on full blast for an aerated tap.

I am sure you could compete with that if you really tried, but from what I've seen a lot of people simply leave the tap on for the majority of the time they are washing the dishes.

Yeah, I had to break myself of the habit of leaving the water running. When I was younger and less patient, I would soap and rinse each item in sequence, so that I got the sense that I was making progress. But as I got older, I switched to batching the soaping and rinsing as it is more efficient that way.

Also, an additional difference between handwashing and using a dishwasher is the environmental impact of the manufacturing of the dishwasher, if the main concern is the environment. If the main reason is reducing work, then the dishwasher comes out ahead.

Or do it like a normal human: fill the sink with hot water and a tiny bit of detergent, wash glasses and less greasy things first and for later dirty items (e.g. frying pan) rinse them off at the end. If you're doing a big load and the water is already cold/dirty just drain and fill the sink a second time. Saves time, saves water and detergent, no splashing, ...

I actually don't recall ever seeing a human do dishes that way except on TV. I'm also not sure that it saves water if you are filling the sink and then still using water to rinse the dishes, at least as compared with my method.

Finally, there has been very few times where it has been necessary for me to use hot water instead of cold. Unless I had burned the food, almost everything will come off after a good soak and scrub, even in cold water.

> I actually don't recall ever seeing a human do dishes that way except on TV.

I have an unusual interest in this topic. I grew up in the UK, and that's just how people do the dishes. Or at least, the people in my orbit. So when I see that on TV, it's completely normal.

But, I now live in Mexico and everybody uses some variation of your method (again, everybody with a "people I've observed washing the dishes" qualifier). I find it completely bizarre.

I got a miele recently and it uses 1.2kwhr and 12L of water if it's completely packed or down to 6L of water if it's relatively clean dishes. over time I think it uses way less energy and water than manual washing would ever achieve.

> Who are these settings for?

These are actually useful if you're ironing your clothes, which, admittedly, is not very popular these days. But yes, there should be "completely dry" option too.

Yeah we noticed an interesting change in the hybrid Toyota's. I've had two in my life so far, the Prius and the hybrid Camry. In both of those, the display that shows the battery charge can go from no bars to full bars.

In the NEW versions of the hybrids, they never go to no bars or full bars, and a toyota rep told us they made that software change because new owners were ringing up and asking if they need to do something to stop the car over charging (because it was showing full bars).

This sort of "presumptive tail wagging the dog" bullshit needs to stop. Manufacturers need to show us real data not the Fischer Price data.

Yes real data, but also real controls. Day to day it should do a partial charge, like 90-95% of most cells. There should also be a 'road trip' or similar charge mode that intentionally goes to 100% full charge on everything in concurrence with planning to actually drive for a long distance that might need the full capacity. It should be made more clear that this road trip mode spends battery life.

I mean.. in a hybrid I dont care. I want the car to control it, but I want to know that it's being controlled.

If the car fuel economy is getting worse I will use the data feedback to collate anecdotal evidence to deliver to my mechanic.

I might pay a visit to my mechanic sooner if I see strange behavior. I t might save me money, it might save a life.... but with a fake ass dashboard feeding me bullshit readings It's not in the slightest bit useful.

We got new toilets at home last year. Without fail, I have to full flush at least twice for solids. They simply aren't strong enough to do the job in one go like the old ones were. Such a waste of water.

That's exactly what I've said and done for years. I now even double-flush old toilets out of habit.

The older style toilets I remember as a kid just worked. One flush would properly and fully clear out anything that didn't clog the darned thing.

The new toilets barely flush properly with two flushes, and I still wonder how much is left behind in the backwash.

I had the opposite experience. Old huge tank toilets got clogged and the new high efficiency ones don't.

Quality matters. Cheap toilets don't do the job, but I spent a little extra for the best flush model and it flushes better than our old toilets.

Exact opposite experience for me. The traditional toilets in my childhood home (mid-90s) were (still are) slow, took several flushes for solids, and clogged constantly. The modern low-flow toilet in my current home flushes quickly, never needs more than one flush and never clogs.

Anecdata is anecdata. It's most likely that some toilets are just bad and some are good, regardless of flow amount.

Yeah I think we picked poorly (the plumber recommended this one). Maybe there's a valve we can tweak a bit somewhere, I should look into it.

Water saving toilets came out (or just were mandated) in the 90s and quickly earned a bad reputation. Over time manufacturers have learned to make good toilets that use less water. Note that water savings in the 90s was a major savings over the toilets of before then, but is more than twice as much water as toilets today, even though good toilets today work better than the best of the 90s.

The modern ones are slightly asymmetrical, and give the water a spiral/swirl. Probably less bend internally also. And maybe teflon-like "anti-stick" coating.

> For example, we had a window air conditioning unit in our previous house that had an efficiency feature. Instead of recirculating the air, it would cool to the temperature you asked for, then set itself a few degrees higher.

Because of humidity that actually might be the right behaviour in some cases-- drop the temp lower then let it go back up a bit to lower the humidity level... but not in others. :)

Like anything, you get what you measure.

If you're only measuring energy usage, then actually doing the job is irrelevant.

This gives me a great idea for an energy-saving air conditioner. It's just a white noise generator chip, a power amp, and a speaker. It'll be super lightweight to boot!

Don't make it super lightweight - people won't think they're getting a good value if they buy it.

I know this because long ago when we retired our old cheapie house phone, I took it apart and it had two lead weights in the base and handset.

To have a similar "heft" compared to the old "ma bell" phones - which are made of actual durable materials - they removed lightness.

There's a practical reason for this. If you're accustomed to quickly lifting a hefty handset to your ear, then the first time you lift one that's significantly lighter you might bash yourself in the temple with the handset.

But because of the flimsiness and light weight, little energy would be imparted! :)

There's an episode of The Office (US) that features a prank based on this.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GfGN7bfohms&t=13m51s

Many old Bell-provided phone models also had metal weights inside.

(Assuming you are talking about a corded desk phone.)

This is not the reason for the weights. Remove them from the base, and the phone ceases to stay put when you pick up the receiver (which is attached by a springy cord). Remove them from the receiver, and it is not heavy enough to keep the buttons on the hook depressed when hung up.

(Source: I did exactly this in college, with exactly these results.)

Or the home thermostat that sets itself to "away" mode because you've gone all of 30 minutes without walking in front of it.

The last two dryers I had ignored what you set and used their "dryness detection." It works ok for most things, but larger things like towels and sheets are still damp. Run the dryer a second time and it auto shuts off within literally a few minutes. Now the towels are mildewy I haven't found a lot of options.

I wonder about this with dishwashers. Mine, in the manual, recommends running the hot water in the sink to pre-heat the water in the pipes "for best results." How much worse would its energy & water efficiency ratings be if that were included?

Then there are efficiency ratings for electric heaters.

Unless it's a radiant heater by the window, it gives exactly as much energy as it consumes. An "energy efficient" heater is a useless one.

I've talk to people who said sometimes the benchmarks/tests are the problem.

For example, I recall there was some computer EPA energy saver test - you ran the test and compared energy used to energy used at idle. Thing is the computer was so efficient that running the test was done mostly in hardware and took very little energy. So the ratio of benchmark energy to idle energy was pretty much 1:1.

It is much more efficient for the air conditioner to allow a gap between the target temperature and the trigger temperature. Without that, it just has to run constantly to make sure that it isn't 0.01 degrees warmer than requested. And that may be what you want it to do, but it's an incredibly pointless waste of energy.

It could cool slightly beyond the set temperature, just like heating usually goes slightly hotter than thermostat setting.

or the vacuum cleaners in the EU...limited to 800 watts, so now I have to spend 2-3 the time it used to take, when a single pass was enough. Why not just allow me to buy a 2-3000W machine and do a single pass? Better for the environment and better for my time

Higher power consumption does not necessarily imply higher suction. Cheap brands did just decrease the motor power and their vacuum cleaners are terrible as a result.

Higher-quality brands like Miele still suck as good as ever, they just use less power thanks to improved designs.

The sensor dry on ours is a joke. Thankfully I have options to set the time and temp manually.

I haven't seen any machine where the sensor dry worked.

On the other hand, I've had a dryer that didn't have a sensor and the timed dry was hard to get right. You could destroy clothes because they would go past dry to 400 degree annihilate.

What you really want is "sensor dry + 10 minutes" or some other offset.

we really need open appliances (with some safety features)

When I bought my house it came with a dryer and indeed the sensory dry never seemed to work.

A year later, I decided to look into it. It occurred to me that there should be an exhaust somewhere on the exterior of the house where the dryer is blowing air out of. I went looking for it, and couldn't find it! This was crazy.

After a lot of searching, I finally found it - the previous owner(s) had blocked the vents - they were covered. I removed the block, and air could flow freely again.

And suddenly the sensor dry worked perfectly.

If yours is not working, do some debugging.

Woah! That sounds really dangerous! I've had to get properly ventilated dryer vents cleaned out a few times. I've been told they can cause fires if they get too clogged.

I have a bosch one and yeah when it stops most clothes are damp feeling. If you trust it and hang it up it's actually quite ok. I just set it to go for 90mins and everything's dry. I do really like it though, the filters are so good I mix all my clothes in one wash and i don't see any lint.

Same thing with the "leaf" icon on the Nest thermostats, although I do like the occupancy detection shut-off feature.

I had to turn all the fancy features off and just use it for the app.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com