Energy savings of a ' fridge

[trader4]

I have to agree with Richard on this one. There is no way anyone can say that, because the EPA test standards as Richard provided, do not test the refrigerators anywhere near to how they are actually used. Rkichard noted that one big and obvious issue is the refrigerators are tested with THE DOORS CLOSED AND NEVER OPENED.

I think we can all agree that opening the doors is a big factor in how much energy is going to be used. So, per your example, let's say model A according to the EPA test uses $200 a year to operate and unit B uses $100. But that's without opening the doors. Now we don't know exactly how opening and closing the doors is going to affect both refrigerators. It could very well be that model A now uses $275 to operate, while unit B uses $150. So, model A is actually only a factor of 1.8 better.

And I think this only gets worse when you're trying to figure out the virtues of one with a sticker that says it uses $150 vs another one that says $175. I would think the unknown effects of ice makers, opening and closing the doors, having it actually loaded with food, etc, could skew that quite a bit. In other words, it seems a bit of stretch to think that because of this labeling, the unit with the alleged $150 energy cost is worth much more than the unit with the $175 cost.

Ask yourself this. If you were trying to determing how much energy a refrigerator actually uses, would you test it with the doors kept closed during the test, no food inside, and no ice maker? And why exactly does the govt test call for them to be tested this way? These tests were not arbitrarily made by the govt, but were done in collaboration with the industries involved. There may not be some ulterior motive involved, but it is a bit suspicious as to how they don't test them anywhere near to how they are used.

om

[dpb]

That's not really particularly relevant -- the point is that two units, _if used the same way_, will have a _relative_ efficiency factor between each other that is reasonably well approximated by the test. The absolute values aren't significant; it's the relative change between the two that is compared. And, that variability is precisely why the testing doesn't make some arbitrary cycling patter--it isn't really that important for the purpose of the test.

--

[ransley]

$52 a year savings, thats at todays electric price, in 5-10 years it will be double the way oil is at over 100 a barrell . Its really do you want to fix an old unit, or get one more efficient.

[ransley]

It worked for me, with a KAW meter, 30$ a month household is it, the KAW meter showed under 5$ a month at 0.125 kwh single use on a Sears

19.5cu ft frige, you cant diffute that, its fact. Pay as you wish, pay now or continue at high kwh consumption

[ransley]

Gees then why is my bill 30$ or so a month in winter , when you educated folks cant save a penny and pay near 100 bucks a month in winter!

[ransley]

room

I looked at the gov tests years ago, I fell they are real life set. I did not follow his link, but looked at the Test. My cost is Lower than the test, as low as a super the super efficient Sunfrost. What we are dealing with here is people who have no concept of Energy Conservancy and upgrading anything. Saving Energy costs money, and to many are ignorant of this and costs 10 years out into the future or 30 years. its called shortsightnesses

[cshenk]

wrote

I think based on my web page reading they do in fact test door openings etc on all of them as a standard.

[me]

I've got to get a Kill A Watt

Where is cheapest place to get one? And which model to get?

[Dave Martindale]

Yeah, I'm not inclined to throw out something that's still working OK.

But when our 20-year-old refrigerator wouldn't hold temperature in the summer any more, the energy consumption ratings were one of the things we considered when looking for a new one. I expect that's their major purpose - not to convince people to discard older working equipment.

Dave

[ransley]

room

Trader has always been logical here. My old reading of the test was it was Real Life, My savings are real, my tests of old to new are Real Time since I own apt Buildings. Get a KAW meter, put it on a new unit at a store and see for yourself, The mandates were plain and simple as I reviewed them and they worked for us. Id say 50% savings is easy, I have a 16 unit building with 18 cfls, pump , boiler and condensing boiler WH, using 32$ a month , and house using the same, it CAN be done... Cant is BS, we Can save energy.

[Edwin Pawlowski]

I think we can all agree that opening the doors is a big factor in how much energy is going to be used. So, per your example, let's say model A according to the EPA test uses $200 a year to operate and unit B uses $100. But that's without opening the doors. Now we don't know exactly how opening and closing the doors is going to affect both refrigerators. It could very well be that model A now uses $275 to operate, while unit B uses $150. So, model A is actually only a factor of 1.8 better.

*********************************************

Richard makes good point, but I'm not in total agreement. No matter how (in)efficient a refrigerator is, opening the same size door is going to result in about the same heat gain. Making ice in one over the other is not going to vary a hell of a lot. You still have to remove the same amount of heat from the water. The energy consumption may not be totally linear, but so what? Comparing a unit that is $100 a year versus one that is $200 by EPS testing will still be within a reasonable range under

The yellow stickers are guide lines, not absolute facts. Consumers still need to think and use some brain power. Besides, I'm still going to buy the model I want no matter what the sticker says.

[ransley]

ENERGY STAR tests do include open door tests...Go to Energy Star.

[Richard J Kinch]

No. I cited the CFR earlier in the thread: No doors (that is, they're never opened during the tests), no contents, no ice making or storage. A thoroughly absurd set of conditions that was chosen to make the testing easy and way optimistic.

[Richard J Kinch]

I have actual engineering instrumentation and tests, not that toy.

Typical is $1/day.

[KD]

2/3's

n room

I just had my new fridge delivered today. While I'm hoping to find some energy savings, I'm happy with it regardless- the fridge that came with my house was 60 inches tall, probably 20 years old, a bit rusty and I'm glad to see it gone! I had to have the cupboard above it cut out to accomodate it, but so be it. The new one is over 18 cubic feet, probably a good three or four cubic feet bigger than the old one. No coils on the back which is kind of cool, means the new fridge won't stick out the additional five inches I had anticipated. But on the not so good side, the cupboard I had my handyman build above the fridge won't be nearly as useful for proofing bread dough, since newer fridges don't give off nearly as much heat. The compressor is on the bottom apparently, so not so toasty up above. New fridge here, middle of the road freezer on the bottom model sells for just over $1000 on sale here in Atlantic Canada.

Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on how you look at it), I won't be able to measure actual power savings - my new washer and dryer were also delivered today, also replacing models that were probably 20 years old. Didn't go for the more energy efficient front load washer; as much as I wanted to, a mid-priced model here would have been more than my new washer and dryer combined.

KD

[Edwin Pawlowski]

Considering that electric rates can vary from about 5¢ to 18¢ a kWh, your $1 figure is as accurate as the refrigerator testing.

[Richard J Kinch]

Where? The CFR I cited sez otherwise.

[Richard J Kinch]

Define "accurate". I said $1/day is typical and it is for typical electric pricing. The DOE figures are way off the low end and not typical of anywhere. Their 10 cents/day figures are fantasy.

Where do they charge 5 cents for a KWH? Iraq? Our fuel surchage alone is more than 5 cents.

[Edwin Pawlowski]

Define "typical"

Some places in the Midwest are that cheap. I recently did a check of rates where our competitors did business and found rates as low as .045. I don't have the links at home, but I was shocked at the rates available.

[nicksanspam]

Like the 1 cent/day Mt. Best chest fridge conversion? :-)

Nick