General discussion about efficient laundry

[Aimless]

Since it doesn't belong in the happy thread but is too fascinating for me to leave it alone. I had no idea this top-vs-front thing was a Thing. I have just a vague memory of having seen a top-loaded machine once upon a time in my childhood and had never reflected, until recently, that there may be major differences between top-loaded and front-loaded machines.

GGT's remarks about efficiency etc have been a little puzzling. One thing I find esp. puzzling is the notion that you can't call a product efficient if its efficiency is partly contingent on correct usage.

Another thing I find a little puzzling is the absence of even informal fuzzy maths in the discussion. Surely there is a maximum number of emptying/restarting antics below which a front-loaded machine is more efficient than a comparable top-loaded machine?

Like, let's say you forget something every third time you do the laundry and absolutely HAVE to empty the machine on those occasions. If it's only every third time, then your front-loaded machine may still be more efficient. If it's every OTHER time, then it's less efficient. Bu then maybe you need to replace yourself or teach yourself some patience, maybe wash that single sock by hand or some other time. Or am I missing something?

[Ominous Gamer]

Washing machines are a great example of how useless our energy star ratings are. Nearly everything on offer is energy star rated. There are top loaders that are both cheaper and rated as less costly to run than front loaders. As well as top loaders that can hold a larger load than a front loader, but end up with a slightly higher energy cost rating because the rating is based on the number of loads and not the amount of items being washed.

[Khendraja'aro]

Ominous, that's why our datasheets include consumption of water and energy for a single cycle with maximum load and a yearly average for mixed loads (which is an industry standard).

[Dreadnaught]

One thing I find esp. puzzling is the notion that you can't call a product efficient if its efficiency is partly contingent on correct usage.

Another thing I find a little puzzling is the absence of even informal fuzzy maths in the discussion. Surely there is a maximum number of emptying/restarting antics below which a front-loaded machine is more efficient than a comparable top-loaded machine?

Wait, are you saying you think efficiency can or can't be somewhat decoupled from frequent usage?

But I generally do believe laundry is one of those things whose energy-efficiency is dramatically improved with planning and upfront investment in clothes. EG air drying clothes can take more time, but substantially cut energy use.

[Being]

Tumbling versus agitation is what comes to my mind first. I believe that agitation is much less efficient than tumbling.

[Khendraja'aro]

EG air drying clothes can take more time, but substantially cut energy use.

Fabric conditioners also reduce the time it takes for clothes to dry.

[Hazir]

Fabric conditioners also reduce the time it takes for clothes to dry.

They do? That's something I had no idea of. Can you - in a way that a chemistry challenged person can understand - how that works?

[Khendraja'aro]

Fabric conditioners' most important ingredient are kationic tensides. They remain on the fabric after rinsing as a thin layer, with the hydrophobic part of the tenside showing to the outside, thus repelling water. That's why there's a special part of the washing cycle just for the fabric conditioner.

Additional effects of this arrangement: The fabric feels softer because the tensides prevent tangling of the fibers which also helps when ironing.

[Hazir]

Fabric conditioners' most important ingredient are kationic tensides. They remain on the fabric after rinsing as a thin layer, with the hydrophobic part of the tenside showing to the outside, thus repelling water. That's why there's a special part of the washing cycle just for the fabric conditioner.

Additional effects of this arrangement: The fabric feels softer because the tensides prevent tangling of the fibers which also helps when ironing.

Thanks, funny to know this. I basically haven't used them since I started using a tumble dryer 30 years ago.

[GGT]

Washing machines are a great example of how useless our energy star ratings are. Nearly everything on offer is energy star rated. There are top loaders that are both cheaper and rated as less costly to run than front loaders. As well as top loaders that can hold a larger load than a front loader, but end up with a slightly higher energy cost rating because the rating is based on the number of loads and not the amount of items being washed.

Exactly! Not only that, but some industry safety standards for front-load machines have been incorporated into top-load machines that don't make any sense -- like the lock-out feature.

Ominous, that's why our datasheets include consumption of water and energy for a single cycle with maximum load and a yearly average for mixed loads (which is an industry standard).

US 'datasheets' do the same thing. Every new appliance has an Energy Star rating. Some can be in the HE "High Efficiency" category but still use more water and/or electricity than low-end machines that don't have special cycles like a second rinse, or steam features. My beef (in the other thread) was that new top-load washers dump all the tub water and re-fill again, when cycles are paused/stopped/reset even though they don't have to.

My complaint was that new top-load machines can be called HE, and have Five Star Energy ratings, even though their design *wastes water*. Manufacturers added safety features that should only apply to front-load machines, because of where the door is situated, and how water fills the machine.

[GGT]

Wait, are you saying you think efficiency can or can't be somewhat decoupled from frequent usage?

But I generally do believe laundry is one of those things whose energy-efficiency is dramatically improved with planning and upfront investment in clothes. EG air drying clothes can take more time, but substantially cut energy use.

This is where American and European consumers (and cultures) diverge. It's common to find front-load washing machines tucked in with kitchen "fittings" in European apartments or homes, while the US has shared laundry facilities in apartments (usually in a basement), or separate laundry rooms in homes. Europeans commonly air/hang dry their clothes, while Americans expect an automatic dryer. Washer/dryers are sold as pairs in the US, with deep discounts.

I have little doubt that Americans are "less efficient" at doing laundry than our European counterparts. But the US appliance industry hasn't "fixed" our water or electricity consumption....they've just made machines that look shiny in stainless steel (or pose as HE) with a 10 year lifespan.

[earthJoker]

This is where American and European consumers (and cultures) diverge. It's common to find front-load washing machines tucked in with kitchen "fittings" in European apartments or homes, while the US has shared laundry facilities in apartments (usually in a basement), or separate laundry rooms in homes. Europeans commonly air/hang dry their clothes, while Americans expect an automatic dryer. Washer/dryers are sold as pairs in the US, with deep discounts.

Shared laundry facillities are very common here. I was lucky that I always got my own in the basement, but that's rather the exception.

[Khendraja'aro]

My beef (in the other thread) was that new top-load washers dump all the tub water and re-fill again, when cycles are paused/stopped/reset even though they don't have to.

Maybe, just maybe, you should start thinking: "Why on earth do I have to add things mid-cycle?" and thus STOP wasting energy, water and detergent? There's absolutely no frickin' reason to add something mid-cycle as I've tried repeatedly to show you.

NO FRICKIN' REASON. None. Zip. Zilch. Nada. Rien. Niente.

It actually makes perfect sense to lock out / pump out all the water due to there being no actual purpose for a machine to stop mid-cycle. Again, you're blaming the machines for your shoddy housekeeping. I mean, I myself if I had forgotten something important for the 2nd time would ask myself: "How can I prevent myself from forgetting again?" instead of going "RA RA RA BLARGL HERP DERP! STUPID MACHINES!"

Shared laundry facillities are very common here. I was lucky that I always got my own in the basement, but that's rather the exception.

Yepp. My appartment complex also has shared laundry facilities.

[earthJoker]

A whole book, named about the biggest issue of shared laundry facilities. Der Waschküchenschlüssel (The laundry room key).

[LittleFuzzy]

Shared laundry facillities are very common here. I was lucky that I always got my own in the basement, but that's rather the exception.

*nods* We had a laundry/dryer in our garage, growing up, but my grandmother's are fitted into a closet in the kitchen. Still a top-loading washer though.

[GGT]

Maybe, just maybe, you should start thinking: "Why on earth do I have to add things mid-cycle?" and thus STOP wasting energy, water and detergent? There's absolutely no frickin' reason to add something mid-cycle as I've tried repeatedly to show you.

NO FRICKIN' REASON. None. Zip. Zilch. Nada. Rien. Niente.

You're confusing needs with wants....and you're not understanding the comparisons b/w machine designs and how people want to use them, without wasting water/detergent/electricity. There are plenty of reasons to want to add or remove items mid-cycle -- particularly when doing household laundry. Infants spittle, diapers fail, toddlers wet the bed, teenagers/athletes are their own special laundry category, cooking/dining means spills on aprons and tablecloths, cats puke fur balls on throw rugs, rain and dogs make muddy messes, the list goes on.

It actually makes perfect sense to lock out / pump out all the water due to there being no actual purpose for a machine to stop mid-cycle. Again, you're blaming the machines for your shoddy housekeeping. I mean, I myself if I had forgotten something important for the 2nd time would ask myself: "How can I prevent myself from forgetting again?" instead of going "RA RA RA BLARGL HERP DERP! STUPID MACHINES!"

Shoddy housekeeping, WTF? The only reason a washing machine has to dump a completely filled tub of water....is to open a vertically positioned door. I used a front-load machine for 12 years, appreciated the early pause function on occasion, and knew there was a point of no return when it was all locked down, end of story. No problem.

When the machine's rubber gasket seal cracked and failed, repair estimates from the manufacturer (Maytag), an independent appliance servicing company, and a plumbing company all exceeded $300. I began looking for a replacement, comparing HE "five-star energy" top-loaders with front-loaders, trying to find a machine that fit my budget, lifestyle, and personal preferences. Front load machines cost ~ $1,000, and aren't ergonomically friendly to anyone with back problems unless they're put on pedestal bases, another added cost. They also twist and mangle clothing, turning anything with a drawstring into a tourniquet, and require extra steps (separating, detangling, flapping) before putting into the dryer. I didn't need or want to buy another dryer with special de-wrinkling features, since my dryer is working just fine.

Long story short, I was elated to find a used Kenmore top-load machine that's a work-horse for $225. It had everything I wanted and needed --- it was back-friendly, user-oriented, without digital components that are expensive to repair/replace.....and didn't have the lock-out-and-dump water feature the industry has put into new top-load machines that waste water.

[Khendraja'aro]

You're confusing needs with wants....and you're not understanding the comparisons b/w machine designs and how people want to use them, without wasting water/detergent/electricity. There are plenty of reasons to want to add or remove items mid-cycle -- particularly when doing household laundry. Infants spittle, diapers fail, toddlers wet the bed, teenagers/athletes are their own special laundry category, cooking/dining means spills on aprons and tablecloths, cats puke fur balls on throw rugs, rain and dogs make muddy messes, the list goes on.

Did you train your cat to always puke on the rug only when the machine is washing? In case of your kids: "Well, sure, the guys are coming back in 30 minutes but the machine has to be started NOW!" Not to mention that if you're such a klutz that you have to wash your apron after every meal - why don't you wait a little bit with starting the machine until after you have cooked dinner? And so on.

Everything you just listed is not a reason. As I said, my own family consisted of 4 boys and we had probably MORE messes due to having a (muddy) forest, (muddy) river and (sandy) playground directly behind my house. Two of my brothers did play soccer, I had my Karate training.

And still my mother somehow magically managed to cope without this weird notion of yours that you absolutely have to add something mid-cycle.
Last time I looked, stuff that has to be washed NOW and cannot wait for even a second is pretty rare.


I'm also a bit dubious on the virtues of adding shitty diapers mid-cycle. Or a rug the cat puked on. Because mid-cycle means that a large part of the actual washing cycle has already passed and now comes rinsing.

My mother would probably give me a piece of her mind if I asked her to do that: "Are you daft? Why do I want to get everything dirty again?" But then I guess nothing beats a freshly washed load smelling of shit.

I mean, if something is soiled so bad that you have to wash it immediately, then it deserves its own washing cycle instead of stuffing that to already almost-clean stuff that was only lightly soiled.

Or do you stuff oily work-rags next to silken underwear? At this point I'm not too sure you wouldn't do that.

[GGT]

BTW, if I had $1,000 to spend on a new washing machine....I'd have bought a commercial grade Speed Queen top-loader that's now available to home retail buyers, and not just laundro-mats or apartment co-ops.

[GGT]

Did you train your cat to always puke on the rug only when the machine is washing? In case of your kids: "Well, sure, the guys are coming back in 30 minutes but the machine has to be started NOW!" Not to mention that if you're such a klutz that you have to wash your apron after every meal - why don't you wait a little bit with starting the machine until after you have cooked dinner? And so on.

Everything you just listed is not a reason. As I said, my own family consisted of 4 boys and we had probably MORE messes due to having a (muddy) forest, (muddy) river and (sandy) playground directly behind my house. Two of my brothers did play soccer, I had my Karate training.

And still my mother somehow magically managed to cope without this weird notion of yours that you absolutely have to add something mid-cycle.
Last time I looked, stuff that has to be washed NOW and cannot wait for even a second is pretty rare.


I'm also a bit dubious on the virtues of adding shitty diapers mid-cycle. Or a rug the cat puked on. Because mid-cycle means that a large part of the actual washing cycle has already passed and now comes rinsing.

My mother would probably give me a piece of her mind if I asked her to do that: "Are you daft? Why do I want to get everything dirty again?" But then I guess nothing beats a freshly washed load smelling of shit.

I mean, if something is soiled so bad that you have to wash it immediately, then it deserves its own washing cycle instead of stuffing that to already almost-clean stuff that was only lightly soiled.

Or do you stuff oily work-rags next to silken underwear? At this point I'm not too sure you wouldn't do that.

I'm making criticisms of the machine designs, but you're too busy lecturing me about how I do laundry. If I'm already doing a load of jeans, and the dog jumped on someone's jeans with muddy paws, it's more efficient to add that pair of jeans, instead of waiting for a new load of jeans.

And I didn't say a damn thing about adding "shitty diapers" mid-cycle.

[Khendraja'aro]

Your proposed design doesn't make sense. Why would that be more efficient? You make everything dirty again, it doesn't get as clean as it would and it wastes energy.

And you did list shitty diapers as a reason for adding stuff mid-cycle, my dear.

[...]diapers fail[...]

[Hazir]

I can tell you that Khen isn't the only one baffled by your desire to add laundry mid-cycle. Actually, the more you expand on your washing method the more disgusting it sounds. I wouldn't want to use a towel washed like that.

Now, I wouldn't be surprised if pink-eye was endemic in your home.

[GGT]

Diapers "failing" means clothes and bed sheets that get soiled with urine (and sometimes feces) leakage, even when using disposable diapers. And baby "spittle" means clothing or burping blankets/pads that get soiled with milk proteins and stomach enzymes. Neither should be left to incubate in a laundry bag....waiting for the next load of laundry.

My "proposed design" makes perfect sense. That's why top-load machines still have consumer demand in the retail/home sector, and rival front-load machines that were originally designed for commercial or shared use, but come up short.

[Hazir]

The items you mention all warrant a full cycle, not half a cycle that only re-contaminates the already washed laundry. You just confirmed the idea that the way you approach doing the laundry is disgusting more than anything else. I think you should seriously consider fretting less about the wasted water and energy than about the fact that your laundry is optically clean at best if you throw in dirty diapers half way through the cycle.

If I were ever to visit your home you shouldn't be surprised if I bring my own drink.

[GGT]

I can tell you that Khen isn't the only one baffled by your desire to add laundry mid-cycle. Actually, the more you expand on your washing method the more disgusting it sounds. I wouldn't want to use a towel washed like that.

Now, I wouldn't be surprised if pink-eye was endemic in your home.

Conjunctivitis isn't passed through laundry.

I like having control over my appliances, not the other way around. I want the ability to add a swim towel to a load of bath towels....without dumping the whole tub of water first. I want the flexibility to add a throw rug in with a load of throw rugs, or another pair of jeans in with a load of jeans.....without the machine dumping 12-30 gallons of water first. I want to make my own laundry decisions, with appliances that make it easier and more efficient. The new appliances on the market don't do either.

[GGT]

I think you should seriously consider fretting less about the wasted water and energy than about the fact that your laundry is optically clean at best if you throw in dirty diapers half way through the cycle.

[Khendraja'aro]

Yeah, Hazir. Mid-cycle means that the actual washing process has almost been finished.

As if "urine and feces leakage" is so much better than a full-blown shitty diaper.

[GGT]

Yeah, Hazir. Mid-cycle means that the actual washing process has almost been finished.

As if "urine and feces leakage" is so much better than a full-blown shitty diaper.

I wash like-things together; towels with towels, jeans with jeans, linens with linens. You're delusional if you think washing machines make those choices instead of human users. Do you bring your own sheets and towels to a hotel, too?

Fact is, those hotel face cloths, bath towels, and linens were washed in the same machines (and wash water), whether they were used on faces, extremities, or dirty butts. Laundered linens are placed on the bed, in the bathroom, or on room-service food carts, regardless of how they were previously used, or soiled.

[Khendraja'aro]

Why on earth would you single out jeans? You need to wash like-fabrics. Cotton, wool and easy-care. Those are the big three. Linen can usually be lumped in together with cotton. If it's newer stuff which still might leak dye, you sort by colour as well. With older stuff you needn't bother.

Which means that it makes absolutely no sense to wash jeans and towels separately. Both are cotton.

And you didn't understand mine and Hazir's point AT ALL. If you put stuff mid-cycle into the machine, IT DOESN'T GET ACTUALLY WASHED. Because the washing cycle is almost done at that point. Geeze, you really are dense.

[Hazir]

It's funny that she has problems putting jeans and towels together, but no problems throwing dirty laundry in with the clean.

[GGT]

Why on earth would you single out jeans? You need to wash like-fabrics. Cotton, wool and easy-care. If it's newer stuff which still might leak dye, you sort by colour as well.

Which means that it makes absolutely no sense to wash jeans and towels separately. Both are cotton.

Jeans are a fabric, commonly known as denim. After its first wash (to account for shrinkage or color bleeding) denim jeans falls into a heavier duty wash, that doesn't necessarily correspond with cotton bath or swim towels. But you're actually confirming my laundry 'principle', where the user can decide to add a pair of slightly soiled jeans in with a load of dirty towels mid-cycle, and still clean all the items *without dumping gallons of water*.

And you didn't understand mine and Hazir's point AT ALL. If you put stuff mid-cycle into the machine, IT DOESN'T GET ACTUALLY WASHED. Because the washing cycle is almost done at that point. Geeze, you really are dense.

I understood what you and Hazir were trying to say....but I think it's total crap. If I have a slightly soiled item, it can get washed (thoroughly cleaned) just as well by adding it to a load already in progress, without needing a new, dedicated load. It's not like I add items after the wash cycle has completed, and shifts to the rinsing process.