unprofitable efficient appliances?

Consumption and sustainable and responsible diet tips daily to reduce energy and water consumption, waste ... Eat: preparations and recipes, find healthy food, seasonal and local conservation information food ...
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79118
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973

unprofitable efficient appliances?




by Christophe » 26/05/10, 16:17

According to: http://www.novethic.fr/novethic/planete ... 129592.jsp

Household appliances: buying ecological is not profitable according to the UFC

According to a survey by the consumer association, the more energy-efficient the devices, the more expensive they are. However, this additional purchase cost is not offset by long-term energy savings. The UFC requests the creation of a bonus / penalty to encourage and reward the consumer in his eco-responsible purchases.

"Not only is the additional cost of the most ecological household appliances high, but it is not offset by the energy savings", denounces the UFC-Que Choisir after a survey carried out in 1 stores spread across the territory. The association has chosen to evaluate all the models for a specific type of fridge-freezer and dryer, these two devices in fact representing 464% of “specific” electricity consumption, that is to say excluding heating and lighting. On average, the additional cost for the purchase of a class A + fridge-freezer compared to class A is 50 euros, and contrary to what many consumers may think, this additional cost is only compensated at the end energy savings of 85 years (10 euros per year, calculated by the UFC). When buying a class A ++ product, the additional cost being 9 euros, compensation is simply not possible.

For dryers, the additional cost is even higher: these devices fall into classes A, B or C, with an additional cost of 532 euros for A, and 220 euros for class B, while the invoice energy is only reduced by 290 euros for one and 140 euros for the other.


"Silly" questions: have the lifespan and especially the embodied energy (both in manufacturing and recycling) and the cost of recycling been taken into account in this study? If, as I believe, this is not the case, then this study is largely misleading!

Gentlemen of the UFC, an uneconomical device which costs 300 € and which lasts 5 years is better or worse than an economical device which costs 600 € and which lasts 10 years? : Lol: : Lol: Indeed; generally price, manufacturing quality and energy class are linked.

UFC engineers who do a very good job, however, should sometimes make an effort to be open-minded and not just see what is good (supposedly) for the consumer in the short term! It was like for the test of fluorescent bulbs: their yield in Lumens / watts was missing in their criteria ... crazy right?

But hey we can not be perfect, the UFC is already doing a hell of a good job.

ps: by the way, does the gray energy concerning recycling only have a specific name?
0 x
Projéthée
I understand econologic
I understand econologic
posts: 77
Registration: 30/10/08, 17:53




by Projéthée » 26/05/10, 19:04

Christophe,
I understand your reasoning and fully agree with you on this.
One of the problems is that the manufacturers to "push to buy" sometimes play cynically with the green fiber. Another is that the devices sold today and able to last 10 years (without repair or specific maintenance) are rather rare. It would therefore be necessary to carry out a reliability study in order to then cross-reference the data with the real efficiencies of said devices. Sacred job in perspective.
And one cannot in addition ignore the financial capacities of the buyers. A fridge, even A +++, even guaranteed for 15 years, at 1000 € is out of reach for me despite the potential for savings.
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79118
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10973




by Christophe » 26/05/10, 19:35

About financial capacity precisely, we can ask the question again on reliability ... It was the baroness of rothschild or I do not remember who said something like: "better to buy 1 object 1 time rather than 2 ; it will cost you less "... or was it the other way around (seller's side?)? I do not remember : Cheesy:

In short, as far as the "job" is concerned, I don't think it is that huge: it suffices to do some retroactive inquiries in the after-sales service ... which gives a good idea of ​​the brand. If so, the UFC has already done it! See in their (huge) archives ...

Otherwise, simpler look at the recycling center yourself. I was surprised to see a lot of almost new Siemens devices ... which shows that the "brand" is not everything ...

After giving the reliability of a device that has just left the design office, it is certain that it is delicate ...
0 x

 


  • Similar topics
    Replies
    views
    Last message

Back to "Sustainable consumption: responsible consumption, diet tips and tricks"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 112 guests