jerrod6
Well-known member
If the machine was made with 2018 EPA regulations in mind you won't be able to modify anything to get more hot water, or water into the machine
water temps in "energy efficient" washers....?
- Thread starter firedome
- Start date
Help Support :
2018 DOE regulations
If the machine was made with 2018 regulations in mind you won't be able to modify anything to more hot water or water into the machine.
Well, maybe not by making different selections, but there is no way to stop anyone from modifying the machine in any way one wants.
If the machine was made with 2018 regulations in mind you won't be able to modify anything to more hot water or water into the machine.
Well, maybe not by making different selections, but there is no way to stop anyone from modifying the machine in any way one wants.
in just about any given newer HE machine, its usually the NORMAL cycle that is the most stringent on water savings....
I doubt a machine made a year ago would have restrictions for upcoming 2018 just yet...
most of us have found ways around the lower water usage and dubbed down temps...
any other option would be to look into returning to an older traditional washer and dryer...theres still plenty to find on CL
I doubt a machine made a year ago would have restrictions for upcoming 2018 just yet...
most of us have found ways around the lower water usage and dubbed down temps...
any other option would be to look into returning to an older traditional washer and dryer...theres still plenty to find on CL
warmsecondrinse
Well-known member
Someone I know (here on AW?) had this problem. Here's how he solved it:
Put a Y-valve with individual taps on the hot water in flow. One leg of the Y outflow went to the machine. The other went to the second Y-valve.
The second Y-valve was installed inverted, i.e. 2-into-1. One leg of the inflow was hot water (see above) and the second leg of inflow was from the cold water tap. The outflow of this second Y-valve went to the machine's cold water inlet.
He set the machine to 'warm' so both inlets would open and he regulated the incoming temps by opening and closing the taps of the Y-valves. Since this worked, I assume that this machine dumbed down the temps through the use of timers (see Yogi's comment in reply #1) with no actual temp sensing involved.
Granted this is complicated. If I had a sink adjacent to the machine I'd first try adding hot water with a hose from the sink. If that didn't work, I'd try the Y-valve option once I;d determined that timers controlled all.
Heads up: Owner's manuals sometimes lie. The washer-that-shall-not-be-named that brought me into AW had an instruction guide that clearly stated water levels were determined by 'sensing' the load. However, the REPAIR manual emphasized the importance of keeping the filter screens of the inlet hoses clear at all times because initial water fill was timer controlled so clogged screens could lead to insufficient water fill. I do know that I was able to manually add water and the machine seemed not to notice either the temp or quantity added.
If a company would print contradictory info on water levels, why not on water temps?
Jim
Put a Y-valve with individual taps on the hot water in flow. One leg of the Y outflow went to the machine. The other went to the second Y-valve.
The second Y-valve was installed inverted, i.e. 2-into-1. One leg of the inflow was hot water (see above) and the second leg of inflow was from the cold water tap. The outflow of this second Y-valve went to the machine's cold water inlet.
He set the machine to 'warm' so both inlets would open and he regulated the incoming temps by opening and closing the taps of the Y-valves. Since this worked, I assume that this machine dumbed down the temps through the use of timers (see Yogi's comment in reply #1) with no actual temp sensing involved.
Granted this is complicated. If I had a sink adjacent to the machine I'd first try adding hot water with a hose from the sink. If that didn't work, I'd try the Y-valve option once I;d determined that timers controlled all.
Heads up: Owner's manuals sometimes lie. The washer-that-shall-not-be-named that brought me into AW had an instruction guide that clearly stated water levels were determined by 'sensing' the load. However, the REPAIR manual emphasized the importance of keeping the filter screens of the inlet hoses clear at all times because initial water fill was timer controlled so clogged screens could lead to insufficient water fill. I do know that I was able to manually add water and the machine seemed not to notice either the temp or quantity added.
If a company would print contradictory info on water levels, why not on water temps?
Jim
warmsecondrinse
Well-known member
Another Thought:
If you are averse to depending on a vintage machine, I believe at least one of the Avanti (and clones) machines Yogi's discovered does NOT dumb down temps. Yogi, please verify.
I've used these machines and am a devoted cheerleader.
Jim
If you are averse to depending on a vintage machine, I believe at least one of the Avanti (and clones) machines Yogi's discovered does NOT dumb down temps. Yogi, please verify.
I've used these machines and am a devoted cheerleader.
Jim
Sad thing is
These "energy saving" regulations do not save that much on average. Maybe between ten to thirty dollars per year (if that), depending upon how one heats water. That is the fly across behind of Obama/USA government when these rules were thought up. Oh and the cost of energy for drying laundry in a clothes drier.
Given the ever increasing costs of these "energy saving" machines, it would take perhaps nearly two decades to recoup any savings on energy. When you consider the average lifespan for most new washing machines is barely ten years you can see whole thing is a con.
These "energy saving" regulations do not save that much on average. Maybe between ten to thirty dollars per year (if that), depending upon how one heats water. That is the fly across behind of Obama/USA government when these rules were thought up. Oh and the cost of energy for drying laundry in a clothes drier.
Given the ever increasing costs of these "energy saving" machines, it would take perhaps nearly two decades to recoup any savings on energy. When you consider the average lifespan for most new washing machines is barely ten years you can see whole thing is a con.
Energy Savings Of New Energy Star Washers
Are HUGE compared to machines built only ten or more years ago, Newer machines use just 1/4 the water on average [ filtering and supplying and cleaning water afterwards uses a HUGE amount of energy ]
Newer machines consume less than 1/2 the electricity to run them.
Newer ES washers use as little as 5 gallons of hot water compared to over 50 gallons of hot water, which is a 10 fold improvement.
New ES washers can extract twice as much water from clothing which saves a lot of electricity drying the clothing.
Hopefully there will be a standard encouraging consumers to switch to Natural gas dryers, doing so would save a HUGE amount of carbon dioxide emissions going into the atmosphere.
There is no going back, most consumers love their new ES washers, AND washers are lasting longer than ever before in automatic washer history, ask the guys that repair machines.
John L.
Are HUGE compared to machines built only ten or more years ago, Newer machines use just 1/4 the water on average [ filtering and supplying and cleaning water afterwards uses a HUGE amount of energy ]
Newer machines consume less than 1/2 the electricity to run them.
Newer ES washers use as little as 5 gallons of hot water compared to over 50 gallons of hot water, which is a 10 fold improvement.
New ES washers can extract twice as much water from clothing which saves a lot of electricity drying the clothing.
Hopefully there will be a standard encouraging consumers to switch to Natural gas dryers, doing so would save a HUGE amount of carbon dioxide emissions going into the atmosphere.
There is no going back, most consumers love their new ES washers, AND washers are lasting longer than ever before in automatic washer history, ask the guys that repair machines.
John L.
"Hopefully there will be a standard encouraging consumers to switch to Natural gas dryers, doing so would save a HUGE amount of carbon dioxide emissions going into the atmosphere."
Well, while I admire the sentiment, I hope people will *not* press so it comes true.
It may have been true in the past that generating electricity consumed a huge amount of oil/coal, but it's not anymore, particularly in places where they use the exhaust heat.
And also, at least around here, there are plenty of homes whose solar panels generate more than enough electricity to power the electric dryers and still sell energy back to the utilities.
I would prefer a more balanced approach, where people say things along the lines of "if your situation is like this, a gas dryer makes more sense, but if your situation is more like that one, an electric dryer will cause the least amount of pollution".
Well, while I admire the sentiment, I hope people will *not* press so it comes true.
It may have been true in the past that generating electricity consumed a huge amount of oil/coal, but it's not anymore, particularly in places where they use the exhaust heat.
And also, at least around here, there are plenty of homes whose solar panels generate more than enough electricity to power the electric dryers and still sell energy back to the utilities.
I would prefer a more balanced approach, where people say things along the lines of "if your situation is like this, a gas dryer makes more sense, but if your situation is more like that one, an electric dryer will cause the least amount of pollution".
One is always leery whenever anyone throws around superlatives like "Huge", or "Bigly" and so forth.
Energy savings a household will experience is directly tied to how it produces hot water and heats the clothes dryer and costs for said fuel.
Here in NYC aside from multifamily housing (apartments) where connections are not possible, a majority of dryers run on natural gas. Given the rather dear rates in this state and especially city that is no surprise.
Hot water supplies are a mixed bag; larger buildings with steam heating often get their hot water from a coil in boiler. That boiler more often than not as oil, but many are converting to natural gas. Again it varies by location and what is available but in NYC most homes use gas or oil for hot water (where it does not come from a side arm off boiler).
Federal government "Energy Star" website speaks in terms of "average" and savings that "can" be reached. Even then an energy efficient washing machine is only rated to save on "average" $45 per year on utility bills.
https://www.energystar.gov/products/appliances/clothes_washers
Average life span of new washing machines sold in USA is between 7-14 years, with between 10 to 11 most common.
In order for an energy efficient appliance to "pay for itself" the savings must be reached during if not well before the thing requires major service/wants rubbishing.
Forty-five dollars over course of one year is only $3,75 per month. IMHO not nearly enough motivation to bother with wash times measured in nearly two hours or more, machines that require "cleaning" cycles to keep mould and whiff at bay, and most of all being forced into being led and managed like a child who does not know how to do laundry.
Energy savings a household will experience is directly tied to how it produces hot water and heats the clothes dryer and costs for said fuel.
Here in NYC aside from multifamily housing (apartments) where connections are not possible, a majority of dryers run on natural gas. Given the rather dear rates in this state and especially city that is no surprise.
Hot water supplies are a mixed bag; larger buildings with steam heating often get their hot water from a coil in boiler. That boiler more often than not as oil, but many are converting to natural gas. Again it varies by location and what is available but in NYC most homes use gas or oil for hot water (where it does not come from a side arm off boiler).
Federal government "Energy Star" website speaks in terms of "average" and savings that "can" be reached. Even then an energy efficient washing machine is only rated to save on "average" $45 per year on utility bills.
https://www.energystar.gov/products/appliances/clothes_washers
Average life span of new washing machines sold in USA is between 7-14 years, with between 10 to 11 most common.
In order for an energy efficient appliance to "pay for itself" the savings must be reached during if not well before the thing requires major service/wants rubbishing.
Forty-five dollars over course of one year is only $3,75 per month. IMHO not nearly enough motivation to bother with wash times measured in nearly two hours or more, machines that require "cleaning" cycles to keep mould and whiff at bay, and most of all being forced into being led and managed like a child who does not know how to do laundry.
HE / EnergyStar washers are all fine and well ... but the dumbed-down temperatures are not. Hot water usage should not be limited being that the machines are by design saving many gallons of water over old-style, non-HE toploaders.
firedome
Well-known member
getting hosed...
well it turns out swmbo seems to actually like filling it via hose from the sink tap, it saves time since she likes to let the washer fill up somewhat before adding Sears Ultra Plus powder and bleach. The tap water is steaming hot and the whites are coming out so much cleaner and fresher now.
As far as gas vs elec drying, the most efficient is hanging outside, which we can do March/April to November, even in central NY. Nothing can beat that fresh-air smell and we love scratchy towels - yymv.
well it turns out swmbo seems to actually like filling it via hose from the sink tap, it saves time since she likes to let the washer fill up somewhat before adding Sears Ultra Plus powder and bleach. The tap water is steaming hot and the whites are coming out so much cleaner and fresher now.
As far as gas vs elec drying, the most efficient is hanging outside, which we can do March/April to November, even in central NY. Nothing can beat that fresh-air smell and we love scratchy towels - yymv.
"As far as gas vs elec drying, the most efficient is hanging outside, which we can do March/April to November, even in central NY. Nothing can beat that fresh-air smell and we love scratchy towels - yymv."
Mileages definitely vary, yes. Because around here, for most people, there's no space for hanging laundry outside -- in fact, it took me a very long time to understand why people even like the smell of laundry dried outside, because it takes enough space for the place the laundry is hanging from to be away from trees and the flight path of birds, not to mention anything to do with car traffic.
Between the dirt from cars and the birds pooping on clothes, I would be spending an awful lot of more energy and money rewashing a significant amount of laundry.
And let's not forget the folks (me included) who are allergic to pollen, grass etc.
I don't want to take anything away from people who *have* room outside to dry their clothes and do not need to rewash them and also do not have allergies.
But I do want to avoid the situation where people are *shamed* into drying stuff on the line even if it would need to be rewashed -- just like for decades people shamed others into hand washing the dishes despite the fact that in the last 2-3 decades it has been true that a dishwasher can do the job better using less water and energy than hand washing.
Mileages definitely vary, yes. Because around here, for most people, there's no space for hanging laundry outside -- in fact, it took me a very long time to understand why people even like the smell of laundry dried outside, because it takes enough space for the place the laundry is hanging from to be away from trees and the flight path of birds, not to mention anything to do with car traffic.
Between the dirt from cars and the birds pooping on clothes, I would be spending an awful lot of more energy and money rewashing a significant amount of laundry.
And let's not forget the folks (me included) who are allergic to pollen, grass etc.
I don't want to take anything away from people who *have* room outside to dry their clothes and do not need to rewash them and also do not have allergies.
But I do want to avoid the situation where people are *shamed* into drying stuff on the line even if it would need to be rewashed -- just like for decades people shamed others into hand washing the dishes despite the fact that in the last 2-3 decades it has been true that a dishwasher can do the job better using less water and energy than hand washing.
firedome
Well-known member
nobody's shaming...
merely stating the simple fact that it's more efficient to sun/air dry, obviously, and that we happen to like the smell and scratchy towels, exactly why we said yymv... sheeesh. In 40 yrs of outside drying 1/2 of the year never had a bird poop on it, but maybe we're just lucky.
merely stating the simple fact that it's more efficient to sun/air dry, obviously, and that we happen to like the smell and scratchy towels, exactly why we said yymv... sheeesh. In 40 yrs of outside drying 1/2 of the year never had a bird poop on it, but maybe we're just lucky.
Roger:
Sorry, I did not mean to make anyone feel bad, in fact I thought I had been rather explicit in saying that I did not want to take away anything from people who *can* and *like* to hang dry their clothes.
And I do not know if you were lucky that birds did not poop on your laundry.
I am very happy for you, honestly.
But I still remember one home we've lived when I was a kid, it took us a while to be able to install the hook up for the dryer (the home did not have one), and my mother was rewashing more than half the clothes she'd hang on the lines. The lines themselves were not under any trees, but they could not be moved and they were under the flight path for birds.
Our cost for detergent, water and energy fell a whole bunch as soon as the electric dryer was installed, and even after paying for the energy to machine dry the clothes, it was still way cheaper than line drying in that location.
I feel like when talking about costs one should consider the entire system/situation. For example, I have friends now who are using an electric dryer (and lots of other electric equipment, for that matter) for free because their home roof is situated in such a way that most days they sell excess energy back to the electric company using the solar panels. Sure, one must consider how much solar panels cost in resources and energy to manufacture. Then again, if we do that, we need to consider the total costs to produce the natural gas (drilling equipment, drilling itself, environmental impact and mitigation, pumping the gas to our homes), because the price we consumers pay per therm of natural gas is heavily subsidized and you can't count on that price to cover the full costs.
Cheers,
-- Paulo.
Sorry, I did not mean to make anyone feel bad, in fact I thought I had been rather explicit in saying that I did not want to take away anything from people who *can* and *like* to hang dry their clothes.
And I do not know if you were lucky that birds did not poop on your laundry.
I am very happy for you, honestly.
But I still remember one home we've lived when I was a kid, it took us a while to be able to install the hook up for the dryer (the home did not have one), and my mother was rewashing more than half the clothes she'd hang on the lines. The lines themselves were not under any trees, but they could not be moved and they were under the flight path for birds.
Our cost for detergent, water and energy fell a whole bunch as soon as the electric dryer was installed, and even after paying for the energy to machine dry the clothes, it was still way cheaper than line drying in that location.
I feel like when talking about costs one should consider the entire system/situation. For example, I have friends now who are using an electric dryer (and lots of other electric equipment, for that matter) for free because their home roof is situated in such a way that most days they sell excess energy back to the electric company using the solar panels. Sure, one must consider how much solar panels cost in resources and energy to manufacture. Then again, if we do that, we need to consider the total costs to produce the natural gas (drilling equipment, drilling itself, environmental impact and mitigation, pumping the gas to our homes), because the price we consumers pay per therm of natural gas is heavily subsidized and you can't count on that price to cover the full costs.
Cheers,
-- Paulo.
firedome
Well-known member
solar...
can be utilized in 2 ways, directly on a clothes line, if one has the appropriate spot, or with PV panels. We do the former now when weather permits, and are in the process of adding the latter... 4.2 kW to start. Yes, pretty expensive, but nowadays the up-front cash investment for PV solar gives a far better monthly return at current interest rates than the alternatives.
can be utilized in 2 ways, directly on a clothes line, if one has the appropriate spot, or with PV panels. We do the former now when weather permits, and are in the process of adding the latter... 4.2 kW to start. Yes, pretty expensive, but nowadays the up-front cash investment for PV solar gives a far better monthly return at current interest rates than the alternatives.
Economical and Environmentally Responsible Clothes Drying
Hanging up clothing to dry is obviously the most economical and responsible way to dry clothing, I fully support anyone that wants to do so.
However using an electric dryer 1/2 the year instead of a natural gas dryer all year still does more harm environmentally in terms of using oxygen from the atmosphere and the amount of carbon dioxide you put into the atmosphere.
Like wise it makes no sense to use an electric dryer even though your roof is covered with solar panels, if again you have natural gas available. As long as you are connected to the grid it is better to let the excess power go back into the grid and dry your clothing in an environmentally better way with a NGD.
My home has 42 collector panels on the roof and they generate as much power as my home uses per year, but it is much better for me to use the gas dryer, as long as any power in the grid is produced by burning any type of fuel it will always make more sense to use the NGD. I is very unlikely that we will ever see a time in any of our lifetimes when all electricity will be generated by solar, wind and maybe nuclear power.
John L.
Hanging up clothing to dry is obviously the most economical and responsible way to dry clothing, I fully support anyone that wants to do so.
However using an electric dryer 1/2 the year instead of a natural gas dryer all year still does more harm environmentally in terms of using oxygen from the atmosphere and the amount of carbon dioxide you put into the atmosphere.
Like wise it makes no sense to use an electric dryer even though your roof is covered with solar panels, if again you have natural gas available. As long as you are connected to the grid it is better to let the excess power go back into the grid and dry your clothing in an environmentally better way with a NGD.
My home has 42 collector panels on the roof and they generate as much power as my home uses per year, but it is much better for me to use the gas dryer, as long as any power in the grid is produced by burning any type of fuel it will always make more sense to use the NGD. I is very unlikely that we will ever see a time in any of our lifetimes when all electricity will be generated by solar, wind and maybe nuclear power.
John L.
John:
I am not disagreeing with you.
I am, however, *encouraging* you and everyone else to make more helpful and productive statements in the future.
I remember when Steve (Toggleswitch) would talk at length about how electric drying was bad and gas drying was good. He and I had a few conversations and it became clear to him that all his notions about how electricity is generated were not only antiquated, they were very localized. His info, for example, was that every Kwh of electricity needed at least 3 to 4 Kwh of energy (gas, coal etc) to be generated. Newer generators are using less than 2X the gas, and the plants that use the exhaust heat and tilt the equation even further are now common.
We, here in the Northeast part of US tend to think everybody else shares the same infrastructure. It should be clear we don't just by observing the price structure of utilities.
There are plenty of places in US where the cost of electricity is *much* lower than around here because the power is not coming from any thermoelectric power plants, but, for example, from hydroelectric power plants.
Also, please keep in mind that as far as I am aware, there are *no* natural gas infrastructure burning gas in engines to pump the gas (that would in any case be just about as inefficient, given that the problem is that regular internal combustion engines are usually less than 30% efficient) -- they are *all* powered by electric motors. That part is essentially invisible to customers, all they see is that they have a hookup from their homes to the electric and gas utilities, and usually we only care, as customers, about how much things cost us to run. Someone is generating electricity to run very powerful pumps to send natural gas our way.
Natural gas also leaks from old infrastructure, some cities are worse at keeping up with maintenance than others. Natural gas that leaks poses risks to plants nearby, and even though most of the time it doesn't ignite and causes problems (although some buildings around the Boston area have exploded in the last 25 years due to NG leaks from the utilities thru the soil into the buildings' basements), methane (Natural Gas) is *also* a problem that increases global warming thru the Greenhouse Effect.
If we consider the *entire* system, and we should, we should avoid sentences like "it's always better to use a gas dryer" because there are times when an electric dryer will be causing less pollution and less environmental damage.
Cheers,
-- Paulo.
I am not disagreeing with you.
I am, however, *encouraging* you and everyone else to make more helpful and productive statements in the future.
I remember when Steve (Toggleswitch) would talk at length about how electric drying was bad and gas drying was good. He and I had a few conversations and it became clear to him that all his notions about how electricity is generated were not only antiquated, they were very localized. His info, for example, was that every Kwh of electricity needed at least 3 to 4 Kwh of energy (gas, coal etc) to be generated. Newer generators are using less than 2X the gas, and the plants that use the exhaust heat and tilt the equation even further are now common.
We, here in the Northeast part of US tend to think everybody else shares the same infrastructure. It should be clear we don't just by observing the price structure of utilities.
There are plenty of places in US where the cost of electricity is *much* lower than around here because the power is not coming from any thermoelectric power plants, but, for example, from hydroelectric power plants.
Also, please keep in mind that as far as I am aware, there are *no* natural gas infrastructure burning gas in engines to pump the gas (that would in any case be just about as inefficient, given that the problem is that regular internal combustion engines are usually less than 30% efficient) -- they are *all* powered by electric motors. That part is essentially invisible to customers, all they see is that they have a hookup from their homes to the electric and gas utilities, and usually we only care, as customers, about how much things cost us to run. Someone is generating electricity to run very powerful pumps to send natural gas our way.
Natural gas also leaks from old infrastructure, some cities are worse at keeping up with maintenance than others. Natural gas that leaks poses risks to plants nearby, and even though most of the time it doesn't ignite and causes problems (although some buildings around the Boston area have exploded in the last 25 years due to NG leaks from the utilities thru the soil into the buildings' basements), methane (Natural Gas) is *also* a problem that increases global warming thru the Greenhouse Effect.
If we consider the *entire* system, and we should, we should avoid sentences like "it's always better to use a gas dryer" because there are times when an electric dryer will be causing less pollution and less environmental damage.
Cheers,
-- Paulo.
I Am Going To stick With My Statement That It Is
Always Cheaper and More Environmentally Sound To Use A Natural Gas Dryer Over An Electric Dryer In The US For Homes Already Supplied By Natural Gas Service.
[ The only exception would be homes that are totally off the grid ]
Hi Paulo, you have made some good points and some that have nothing to do with this discussion. But none of your points bring the efficiency of using 6 KW of power to run an electric dryer even close to being as sensible as using less than a 1/2 KW of electric power to run a NGD.
Even if electric power plants are now 50% efficient that does not come close to 100% efficient heat use in a NGD. You must remember that around 30% of electricity is wasted in transmission lines and transformers alone. Even the 10 Ga. copper wire in your home [ after your power meter ] gets warm when the dryer is running wasting more power.
Leaks in gas transmission lines are a problem, but the lines are going to leak whether you use a gas dryer in your home or not. Also the amount of electricity used to pump NG through pipelines is extremely small. There is for example is no measurable heat build-up in the gas pipe running to your dryer caused by the friction of the gas flowing through it when the dryer is in operation.
If the day ever comes that an electric dryer makes more sense to use than a NGD people would have also abandoned NG furnaces, gas water heaters, gas pool heaters and NG all together in their homes, as a NG clothes dryer is the most efficient gas appliance built for use in the home.
John L.
Always Cheaper and More Environmentally Sound To Use A Natural Gas Dryer Over An Electric Dryer In The US For Homes Already Supplied By Natural Gas Service.
[ The only exception would be homes that are totally off the grid ]
Hi Paulo, you have made some good points and some that have nothing to do with this discussion. But none of your points bring the efficiency of using 6 KW of power to run an electric dryer even close to being as sensible as using less than a 1/2 KW of electric power to run a NGD.
Even if electric power plants are now 50% efficient that does not come close to 100% efficient heat use in a NGD. You must remember that around 30% of electricity is wasted in transmission lines and transformers alone. Even the 10 Ga. copper wire in your home [ after your power meter ] gets warm when the dryer is running wasting more power.
Leaks in gas transmission lines are a problem, but the lines are going to leak whether you use a gas dryer in your home or not. Also the amount of electricity used to pump NG through pipelines is extremely small. There is for example is no measurable heat build-up in the gas pipe running to your dryer caused by the friction of the gas flowing through it when the dryer is in operation.
If the day ever comes that an electric dryer makes more sense to use than a NGD people would have also abandoned NG furnaces, gas water heaters, gas pool heaters and NG all together in their homes, as a NG clothes dryer is the most efficient gas appliance built for use in the home.
John L.
lordkenmore
Well-known member
Hopefully there will be a standard encouraging consumers to switch to Natural gas dryers, doing so would save a HUGE amount of carbon dioxide emissions going into the atmosphere.
I won't necessarily argue against gas dryers. But I will admit I get a little concerned with the thought of a "push" for gas dryers. A gentle push/encouragement is fine. But I worry about something getting jammed down people's throats, like it or not. Using a gas dryer is attractive on a number of levels. But there may be places and times where gas is not a viable choice. Indeed, there is zero gas service where I live. Past that, there are houses that don't have gas installations. Installing gas may be a painful cost and hassle for many "normal" Americans, such as the people barely holding on. "You'll save in utility bills!" may be true, but slightly higher utility bills per month might be more financially palatable than trying to find the $$$ for gas installation. (Particularly if it comes at the same time as buying a new dryer.)
I won't necessarily argue against gas dryers. But I will admit I get a little concerned with the thought of a "push" for gas dryers. A gentle push/encouragement is fine. But I worry about something getting jammed down people's throats, like it or not. Using a gas dryer is attractive on a number of levels. But there may be places and times where gas is not a viable choice. Indeed, there is zero gas service where I live. Past that, there are houses that don't have gas installations. Installing gas may be a painful cost and hassle for many "normal" Americans, such as the people barely holding on. "You'll save in utility bills!" may be true, but slightly higher utility bills per month might be more financially palatable than trying to find the $$$ for gas installation. (Particularly if it comes at the same time as buying a new dryer.)
There's no natural gas in my rural neighborhood. Only choice for anything gas would be propane.
Similar threads
