Powerful vacuum cleaners to be outlawed imminently

[Pengi]

From September 1, manufacturers will be unable to make or import vacuum cleaners with a motor that exceeds 1,600W and in 2017 the limit will be lowered to 900W. Article

The power rating may not equate to cleaning efficiency though. I bought a Henry vacuum cleaner in March which is 600W and 1200W in high power mode. I find that 600W setting is a vast improvement on my previous more powerful cleaner  and rarely have the need to use the high power setting.

[Tom U]

I decided to sell my vacuum cleaner - well, it was only gathering dust 

[4x2]

From September 1, manufacturers will be unable to make or import vacuum cleaners with a motor that exceeds 1,600W and in 2017 the limit will be lowered to 900W. Article

The power rating may not equate to cleaning efficiency though. I bought a Henry vacuum cleaner in March which is 600W and 1200W in high power mode. I find that 600W setting is a vast improvement on my previous more powerful cleaner  and rarely have the need to use the high power setting.

well that sucks.....

[Agrippa]

My Vax is 2,000 Watts. I use it to strip lead from church roofs.

Can anyone beat that?

[daveg]

My Vax is 2,000 Watts. i use it to strip lead from church roofs.

Can anyone beat that?

I trust that's your day job rather than another hobby! 

Dave G

[Tom@Crewe]

I hope that means lower prices for less efficiency But I doubt it......................

[petercharlesfagg]

With our world literally tearing itself apart at the roots and people dying all over the world through lack of food or water!

ALL the MEP's are concerned about is bloody vacuum cleaners!

[Bob Tidbury]

I agree Peter after all how long do you have a vacuum cleaner on for, In tests they recon you save £5 a year on your electric  bill .While talking about electricity I can't understand the  idea of electric cars  giving less pollution yes the car does BUT what about the pollution caused by generating the electricity to charge it up.
Sorry that should be in the angry thread.
Bob

[d-a-n]

I agree Peter after all how long do you have a vacuum cleaner on for, In tests they recon you save £5 a year on your electric  bill .While talking about electricity I can't understand the  idea of electric cars  giving less pollution yes the car does BUT what about the pollution caused by generating the electricity to charge it up.
Sorry that should be in the angry thread.
Bob

£5 - is that it for less dust in the floor? I'll take 2 and it's still cheaper than getting a cleaner in...

As for the greenwash which surrounds electric cars, you are absolutely right at the electricity having been produced from less than environmentally friendly ways. You also have to consider how labour/energy/CO2 intensive they are to make, how much CO2/pollution goes into getting all that lithium, shipping it about the globe, the process if turning it into the battery and then still making the car around it (plastics, aluminium etc). Then the car will be designed to have a lifespan of 10 years and then you have the recycling nightmare of dealing with it all. Despite putting out a bit more pollution over it's lifetime there is a whole argument for older cars being more environmentally friendly rather than going down the "this car's old, it could break down and be an embarrassment in front of the neighbours; lets bin it and buy a new one" route.

[Rabs]

While talking about electricity I can't understand the  idea of electric cars  giving less pollution yes the car does BUT what about the pollution caused by generating the electricity to charge it up.
Sorry that should be in the angry thread.
Bob

This is very true in the UK with our backwards attitude to energy generation where idiots believe that it's better to have a coal or gas power station that will definitely destroy the planet than a nuclear plant that only might destroy a small bit of the planet, and then only in a very unlikely set of circumstances. 
Burning gas at a power station is slightly more efficient than burning fuel directly in a car but nearly all of the benefit is lost in the transmission losses of getting that electrical power to your garage. 

However, if you have a power system like France's (80% nuclear) then the benefit of electric vehicles over burning fossil fuels is enormous.

[blue touch paper lit... stepping away!] 

[Malc]

What really hoses me off is that no matter what the EU dictates re vacuums, light bulbs etc, China and India are still pumping millions of tons of CO2 in to the air from their heavy industry and power stations. The US wouldn't sign up to the Kyoto agreement either.

[sparky]

Better tell the missus to pull her finger out and make use of the one we have already.......oh god she is looking over my shoulder with a scowl....ouch that hurt....... :'(

[NeMo]

What really hoses me off is that no matter what the EU dictates re vacuums, light bulbs etc, China and India are still pumping millions of tons of CO2 in to the air from their heavy industry and power stations. The US wouldn't sign up to the Kyoto agreement either.

Of course it sounds crazy when you phrase it like that.

But perhaps you'd be less offended if you saw the EU's actions as being about setting an example. As Gandhi said, "Be the change you want to see in the world".

Also, by pushing industries towards greener technologies, you hasten progress in those fields, meaning EU-based businesses will be better able to supply markets with clean technology.

Don't for a moment suppose China and India are ignoring the pollution in their backyards; they can't. The thing with ecological damage is that it can't be ignored. If water is filthy, people get stick. If the air is polluted, people get sick. If the seas are overfished, people lose their jobs as well as their dinners. There is progress in China and India, as well as the United States. It's slow, to be sure, but it's there, and if anything, the toxic nature of the environment in many big Chinese and Indian cities only accentuates the need for improvement. As the Economist phrased in recently, "China is the world's worst polluter but largest investor in green energy".

So, if British, German and other companies come up with home-grown technologies they can sell, they'll find massive markets for them in China and Asia generally.

Oh, and do let's drop the "EU dictates" idea. The EU Commission is appointed by the governments we elect, and the EU Parliament is directly elected by us. In and of itself the EU doesn't come up with anything that hasn't first been proposed and then carried by a majority of member states, whether directly through its parliament or via the commissioners our national governments have sent there on our behalf. It's no better or worse than the US federal government system and just as remote from the individual. If you don't like this approach, then getting out of the EU is absolutely what you should be advocating. But there'd be an economic and geopolitical price to pay, and a pretty stiff one at that.

Unfortunately our governments at home like to take the credit for popular laws while blaming unpopular laws on the EU. That's easier for them, and for the most part the British electorate has fallen for it hook, line and sinker. In reality it's far more complicated than this, and statements like 75% of laws come from Brussels are extremely difficult to justify, any more than the opposite statement that barely 7% of them do. There was a terrific Radio 4 programme on this topic by the FT's stats analyst Tim Harford.

Cheers, NeMo

[Malc]

Very well argued NeMo, are you thinking of standing for election? You would get my vote.

[sparky]

Whilst this adult Kyoto debate rages...I am still banished by the missus in the cold garage for my childish quip about the hoover....now where did I leave that coal fired heater....