This is why we should all leave the EU

[PChi]

I think that more useful legislation would be to mandate vacuum cleaner air flow versus pressure data and have independent verification and policing which could help the consumer make an informed choice and encourage better design with motor power being used efficiently.
The Galileo project is hoovering up a lot of cash at the moment. If the cost is devided by the number of EU tax payers it seems expensive. Couldn't a deal have been done with the USA or Russia to share systems and spread the cost?

[zapta]

I think that more useful legislation would be to mandate vacuum cleaner air flow versus pressure data and have independent verification and policing which could help the consumer make an informed choice and encourage better design with motor power being used efficiently.

+1

Disclosure is good. Banning products is oppressive.  Have the information in the open and let each free citizen to decide for himself.

[Richard Head]

I cannot believe this topic justifies 12 pages (so far) of comments.

[Rufus]

I regularly check comparison sites and being 100% green costs me about 1-2% more a year compared to a similar standard tariff.

Green energy is considerably more than 1 or 2% more expensive than conventional energy so you are not buying green electrons any more than I am on a standard tariff. You are not 100% green.

You are just putting money into the pocket of the clever middle men who realized there are people out there who will to do it.

Perhaps you think being able to flaunt your green credentials here and elsewhere is worth a 1 or 2% premium on your electricity bills in which case you are dishonest. Perhaps you think you really are being green in which case you are stupid.

[nctnico]

I think that more useful legislation would be to mandate vacuum cleaner air flow versus pressure data and have independent verification and policing which could help the consumer make an informed choice and encourage better design with motor power being used efficiently.

Disclosure is good. Banning products is oppressive.  Have the information in the open and let each free citizen to decide for himself.

The modern free citizen is unable to do that because manufacturers obscure product information so it is impossible to make a meaningful product comparison. Manufacturers think you are stupid so they try to make you choose based on beads and mirrors and impressive meaningless numbers. We in EU don't allow manufacturers to think we are stupid (who wouldn't?) so we put a halt to obfustigated product descriptions.

[IanB]

Also refining oil into petrol uses approx 5kWh per gallon

Have you a source for that? Certainly oil refineries have energy costs, but that number seems very high for a single gallon of petrol (refineries produce millions and millions of gallons of the stuff).

[BFX]

I think that the most effective policy would be as a slimmed down bureaucracy. 

[zapta]

It's not about science or engineering, it's about personal liberty. The fact that X is electrically more efficient than Y doesn't give the government  the right to punish people that do Y.

If Y harms people's health or the environment we live in then the government has right to regulate it.

Oppression always comes with an excuse.

http://www.aestheticrealism.net/poetry/Wolf-Lamb-LaFontaine.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wolf_and_the_Lamb

[jancumps]

There may be lots of things happening in the EU, but  not oppression.

[zapta]

There may be lots of things happening in the EU, but  not oppression.

Well, you will get punished if you will sell a vacuum with more than 1600w. That's not freedom.

[Tinkerer]

The only proper thing to do here would have been to raise electricity prices to make people demand more efficient stuff across the board. Not ban the sale of a particular item.

[jancumps]

There may be lots of things happening in the EU, but  not oppression.

Well, you will get punished if you will sell a vacuum with more than 1600w. That's not freedom.

I admit defeat. We are oppressed

[rolycat]

It's not about science or engineering, it's about personal liberty. The fact that X is electrically more efficient than Y doesn't give the government  the right to punish people that do Y.

If Y harms people's health or the environment we live in then the government has right to regulate it.

Oppression always comes with an excuse.

Hallelujah, I have seen the light. It's so obvious now - all government regulation is part of an evil socialist plot. Let's smash the FAA, the FDA and all those other useless regulatory bodies.

All the people who die due to adulterated food, fake drugs and unsafe transport should do so proud in the knowledge that they are helping to uphold the noble principle of freedom without responsibility.

God Bless America!

[LukeW]

Let's suppose everybody currently owns a 2200W vacuum, and immediately throws it in the bin and buys a new 1600W model. (Note that this is unrealistically optimistic... people will continue using the existing vacuums that they own with higher power ratings until they break, and they are allowed to do this.)

How often do you use a vacuum for? Let's say 1 hour per week.

The power difference is 600W, one hour per week, so each household will save 31.3 kWh per annum. (Or about $6.20 per year assuming 20c/kWh, assuming no cost to buy a new vacuum - maybe the government energy fairy just brings it to you for free.)

This also assumes, of course, that vacuuming time remains constant with the lower-powered unit.

OK, how many households are there in the EU? I'd guess maybe 100 million?

Total annual energy saved across the whole EU will be about 3.13 TWh per year (assuming immediate replacement of all vacuums, no increase in cleaning time.)

That's about the equivalent of 350MW of generation - so about 1/3 of a typical fairly large coal-fired or nuclear power plant.

In other words, if the entire EU can build just one more nuclear power plant to replace a coal-fired plant, that contribution to replacing coal use will be about 3 times greater than this entire vacuum cleaner mandate.

[jancumps]

That nuclear plant will also add nuclear waste. What to do with that? Hover it up?

[zapta]

All the people who die due to adulterated food, fake drugs and unsafe transport should do so proud in the knowledge that they are helping to uphold the noble principle of freedom without responsibility.

"Freedom without responsibility"?   Now you are making things up.

God Bless America!

Thanks.

[zapta]

I admit defeat. We are oppressed

That's a start. Don't trade your freedom for connivence.

[tom66]

The only proper thing to do here would have been to raise electricity prices to make people demand more efficient stuff across the board. Not ban the sale of a particular item.

Most people aren't engineers. Any government that does that will be voted out next year. There's no easy way to compare vacuum cleaners, etc. like you can compare cars for mpg. Hopefully, this new legislation will change it, maybe they should not have limited what could be produced, but I don't really see why we need 2000W to clean carpets. It's awfully inefficient.

That being said, I can't stand how the EU basically killed off  plasma HDTV in these markets by requiring ridiculously low energy consumption that only LED-LCD TV could achieve. It doesn't matter how low-power LED-LCD TVs are, if the picture quality is no good, it may as well be junk to me.  I only watch my plasma TV 10 hours a week. My computer and fridge use more power on their own.

[Hydrawerk]

Fuck EU. They banned old Edison's bulbs. But you can still buy them and there is a notice: Only for industrial use. Not suitable for household use.
I expect the same thing to happen with vacuum cleaners.
In 10 years I will buy an industrial 2000W vacuum cleaner. LOL. 

[JoeO]

"I'll give you my 2KW vacuum when you pry it from my cold, dead hands"  Moses

[jancumps]

"I'll give you my 2KW vacuum when you pry it from my cold, dead hands"  Moses

and my 72 watt solder iron

[nctnico]

All the people who die due to adulterated food, fake drugs and unsafe transport should do so proud in the knowledge that they are helping to uphold the noble principle of freedom without responsibility.

"Freedom without responsibility"?   Now you are making things up.

No. You say you want to be free to buy whatever you want. In order to do that there have to be no rules/legislation on what manufacturers put on the market. History has proven over and over again that manufacturers will put products on the market which are at least unsafe and possibly lethal. In the US it has taken until the late 70's to ban lead although the negative effects of lead have been known for centuries. And banning lead is the work of a few persistant individuals who didn't accept a big check to shut up.

In your 'free world' you would have to check everything yourself:
In order to buy safe food you you'll need to bring a chemistry set to your supermarket to test all your food & drinks for bacteria and toxic contents.
In order to get a financial product which doesn't drive you into bankcrupty you'll need an economics degree from Harvard to figure it out.
In order to buy a safe and reliable car you'll need to buy 5. 3 for crash tests, one for an endurance test/teardown and one to finally drive in (given the other 4 passed the tests).
In order to buy any electronic/electrical appliance you'll need to take it apart first and check for wiring& isolation faults. Maybe buy 2 as well to test it for endurance first.

Do I need to continue?

[dannyf]

Most people aren't engineers.

Thank god for that,

[Rufus]

All the people who die due to adulterated food, fake drugs and unsafe transport should do so proud in the knowledge that they are helping to uphold the noble principle of freedom without responsibility.

"Freedom without responsibility"?   Now you are making things up.

No. You say you want to be free to buy whatever you want. In order to do that there have to be no rules/legislation on what manufacturers put on the market. History has proven over and over again that manufacturers will put products on the market which are at least unsafe and possibly lethal.

In your 'free world' you would have to check everything yourself:
In order to buy safe food you you'll need to bring a chemistry set to your supermarket to test all your food & drinks for bacteria and toxic contents.
In order to get a financial product which doesn't drive you into bankcrupty you'll need an economics degree from Harvard to figure it out.
In order to buy a safe and reliable car you'll need to buy 5. 3 for crash tests, one for an endurance test/teardown and one to finally drive in (given the other 4 passed the tests).
In order to buy any electronic/electrical appliance you'll need to take it apart first and check for wiring& isolation faults. Maybe buy 2 as well to test it for endurance first.

Do I need to continue?

Legislation requiring product to be tested and clearly marked as 'likely to kill you', 'will poison you', 'likely to cause bankruptcy' would result in a level of sales so low that no one would manufacture such products. Legislation banning such products would be superfluous.

There is no need to continue your straw man argument because vacuum cleaners are not going to kill, poison, or bankrupt you because they are fitted with a 1.7kW motor.

[zapta]

In order to buy a safe and reliable car you'll need to buy 5. 3 for crash tests, one for an endurance test/teardown and one to finally drive in (given the other 4 passed the tests).

Why do I need to buy 5 cars? I can read reviews, recommendation, consumer reports, etc and pick whatever fits my needs. Same when I buy solder station or bikes. It's that simple.

Europe has mandatory CE mark and it's useless (just check Chinese products on eBay). US has private  UL mark and it's trustworthy.

Don't confuse government with parents.