#### Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Options

# Hans Rosling: The magic washing machine

When replying to Lorenz about global energy usage, I was reminded of this talk by Hans Rosling. Obstensibly about washing machines, it is really about much more, and very relevant to Azimuth.

• Options
1.

Good talk. In another one nearby he says growth to 10 billion is inevitable (if human lifespan remains the same), here he adds only two billion.

So a fair energy solution needs to provide washing machines for 10 billion people.

Next time I bet with John about not using planes I'll go for the not using a washing machine for one year ;-)

Comment Source:Good talk. In another one nearby he says growth to 10 billion is inevitable (if human lifespan remains the same), here he adds only two billion. So a fair energy solution needs to provide washing machines for 10 billion people. Next time I bet with John about not using planes I'll go for the not using a washing machine for one year ;-)
• Options
2.
edited January 2013

I am not very convinced and frankly speaking I found that video a waste of time and energy.

That is Rosling implicitly assumes that the energy and ressource consumption of a modern washing machine is automatically higher then the hand-wash.

Sure the "rubbing"-work of dirty clothes, which is done by handwork is partially taken over by a machine, but like the heating of water, the use of detergents etc may be evenually use less energy and (toxic) ressources than in a handprocess. This depends of course also on aspects as durability, production processes of machines etc. Also important is: how often do you change your clothes, how do you fill your washer etc. Similar things hold for dish washers. There was nothing about this aspect in the video, if he is so convinced about the bad ressource balance of washers then I find there should have been some evidence about that in the talk.

But yes there are clearly "evil" machines in terms of use of ressources like pressing irons and electric dryers. Like a pressing iron is needed for sewing, but it is really to be asked wether people need to run around in ironed clothes all days and electric dryers are also very seldom needed. We don't need one. Moreover we basically almost never iron. For formal occasions Tim and me have iron-free shirts. However I never found the time to check the environmental friendliness of iron-free shirts. On the other hand in an academic context you don't need to run around in suits every day.

John (Baez) is always running around with very ironed-looking shirts. I always wanted to ask him wether these are iron free, or wether he irons them.

Comment Source:I am not very convinced and frankly speaking I found that video a waste of time and energy. That is Rosling implicitly assumes that the energy and ressource consumption of a modern washing machine is automatically higher then the hand-wash. Sure the "rubbing"-work of dirty clothes, which is done by handwork is partially taken over by a machine, but like the heating of water, the use of detergents etc may be evenually use less energy and (toxic) ressources than in a handprocess. This depends of course also on aspects as durability, production processes of machines etc. Also important is: how often do you change your clothes, how do you fill your washer etc. Similar things hold for dish washers. There was nothing about this aspect in the video, if he is so convinced about the bad ressource balance of washers then I find there should have been some evidence about that in the talk. But yes there are clearly "evil" machines in terms of use of ressources like pressing irons and electric dryers. Like a pressing iron is needed for sewing, but it is really to be asked wether people need to run around in ironed clothes all days and electric dryers are also very seldom needed. We don't need one. Moreover we basically almost never iron. For formal occasions Tim and me have iron-free shirts. However I never found the time to check the environmental friendliness of iron-free shirts. On the other hand in an academic context you don't need to run around in suits every day. John (Baez) is always running around with very ironed-looking shirts. I always wanted to ask him wether these are iron free, or wether he irons them.
• Options
3.

I suppose he did some research to be able to conclude that the people above of the washing line use more energy than the ones below.

(Partial aside: I have heard that dishwashers are more efficient than washing dishes by hand, at least, when the amount of water is considered.)

frankly speaking I found that video a waste of time and energy

like the heating of water

If I do a handwash I don't use water hotter than 30 degrees, and I think 40 degrees will be hot even for women's hands. If a machine does a wash at 95 degrees (imagine the worst case), I would find it strange if the machine used less energy for the heating of the water. Ok, burning wood is probably not very efficient, but burning coal to give electricity to power the machine is also around 1/3 of efficiency.

Comment Source:I suppose he did some research to be able to conclude that the people above of the washing line use more energy than the ones below. (Partial aside: I have heard that dishwashers are more efficient than washing dishes by hand, at least, when the amount of *water* is considered.) > frankly speaking I found that video a waste of time and energy your time and his energy? > like the heating of water If I do a handwash I don't use water hotter than 30 degrees, and I think 40 degrees will be hot even for women's hands. If a machine does a wash at 95 degrees (imagine the worst case), I would find it strange if the machine used less energy for the heating of the water. Ok, burning wood is probably not very efficient, but burning coal to give electricity to power the machine is also around 1/3 of efficiency.
• Options
4.
edited January 2013

I suppose he did some research to be able to conclude that the people above of the washing line use more energy than the ones below.

I imagine it actually rather difficult to assess this and in fact I did a quick internet search and couldnt find any studies on that, the Wikipedia page about Hans Rosling cites also no study.

(Partial aside: I have heard that dishwashers are more efficient than washing dishes by hand, at least, when the amount of water is considered.)

I heard the same, but I have no citations for that.

my time and my energy and eventually the energy for videodistribution etc.. OK this sentence sounds a bit hard, since IF washing per hand is really better then by machine (on average) then he at least made people aware of the fact that there may be a big environmental problem ahead. However if this is not the case then I would consider his talk rightous misleading. As said I have doubts and so I have rather mixed feelings about the talk. Apart from this I found the jokes about his grandmother not funny and I also found the fact that he presented washing machines as being mostly a time saver for women also not funny. In principle those women could also save washing time if men would do the handwashing. To present a washing machine as a tool for womens emanzipation is very problematic - mildly speaking.

If I do a handwash I don’t use water hotter than 30 degrees, and I think 40 degrees will be hot even for women’s hands. If a machine does a wash at 95 degrees (imagine the worst case), I would find it strange if the machine used less energy for the heating of the water. Ok, burning wood is probably not very efficient, but burning coal to give electricity to power the machine is also around 1/3 of efficiency.

40 degrees is not so hot I find. I could imagine that there are quite some people who rather boil their clothes in a handwash process, but I don't know much about washing habits around the world. It would have been interesting to hear about such habits. And as said I would really like to see more studies on the question of environmental friendliness.

Comment Source:>I suppose he did some research to be able to conclude that the people above of the washing line use more energy than the ones below. I imagine it actually rather difficult to assess this and in fact I did a quick internet search and couldnt find any studies on that, the Wikipedia page about Hans Rosling cites also no study. >(Partial aside: I have heard that dishwashers are more efficient than washing dishes by hand, at least, when the amount of water is considered.) I heard the same, but I have no citations for that. >your time and his energy? my time and my energy and eventually the energy for videodistribution etc.. OK this sentence sounds a bit hard, since IF washing per hand is really better then by machine (on average) then he at least made people aware of the fact that there may be a big environmental problem ahead. However if this is not the case then I would consider his talk rightous misleading. As said I have doubts and so I have rather mixed feelings about the talk. Apart from this I found the jokes about his grandmother not funny and I also found the fact that he presented washing machines as being mostly a time saver for women also not funny. In principle those women could also save washing time if men would do the handwashing. To present a washing machine as a tool for womens emanzipation is very problematic - mildly speaking. >If I do a handwash I don’t use water hotter than 30 degrees, and I think 40 degrees will be hot even for women’s hands. If a machine does a wash at 95 degrees (imagine the worst case), I would find it strange if the machine used less energy for the heating of the water. Ok, burning wood is probably not very efficient, but burning coal to give electricity to power the machine is also around 1/3 of efficiency. 40 degrees is not so hot I find. I could imagine that there are quite some people who rather boil their clothes in a handwash process, but I don't know much about washing habits around the world. It would have been interesting to hear about such habits. And as said I would really like to see more studies on the question of environmental friendliness.
• Options
5.

I have also to say that I watched the video only because you had recommended it, since your suggestions have been up to now usually rather sound.

Comment Source:I have also to say that I watched the video only because you had recommended it, since your suggestions have been up to now usually rather sound.
• Options
6.

thanks for your comments. I think we both had a completely different look on the talk. Maybe it's simply gender-related, I don't know.

OK this sentence sounds a bit hard, since IF washing per hand is really better then by machine (on average) then he at least made people aware of the fact that there may be a big environmental problem ahead. However if this is not the case then I would consider his talk rightous misleading.

I didn't see his talk about it being an environmental problem. I saw his talk as a claim that everyone should have the right to have a washing machine! And that it's rather a problem for the environmentalists their planning.

As said I have doubts and so I have rather mixed feelings about the talk. Apart from this I found the jokes about his grandmother not funny

I found this very mild humor, and descriptive of the wonder the machine was for his grandmother.

(Let's say, I guess to describe a grandfather as a grumpy old fart, would somebody call this sexist?)

I remember my mother comparing how she washed, with how her mother washed, with how her grandmother washed.

and I also found the fact that he presented washing machines as being mostly a time saver for women also not funny. In principle those women could also save washing time if men would do the handwashing. To present a washing machine as a tool for womens emanzipation is very problematic - mildly speaking.

Well, in an ideal world with identical men and women this is true. But we live in a real biological world where men and women differ and have different specializations: the fact that mainly the women do the washing appears the same in most cultures. I fear here it's erst das Fressen, dann die Moral.

And if the world is like this, I don't see what's wrong with presenting a washing machine as a tool for women's emancipation. I'd like to to a poll amongst women in the third world to ask them if they have an emancipatory problem with people advocating they should have the right to have a washing machine.

About discrimination, when I was in the mixed boys- and girls scouts, there were some (simple) physical tests to attain points for getting a kind of 'degree' (the idea was that everybody could get the degree if you could at least read a map, run for some distance at least etc, and to weigh between different abilities there were points). The physical tests for the girls were much simpler and I think they were also outdated, with the result e.g. that all the girls had the maximum score for running, even the ones that walked. The tests for the boys were more honest, maybe 5% of them managed to get the top scores. Well, I would call this discrimination too.

Comment Source:Hi Nad, thanks for your comments. I think we both had a completely different look on the talk. Maybe it's simply gender-related, I don't know. > OK this sentence sounds a bit hard, since IF washing per hand is really better then by machine (on average) then he at least made people aware of the fact that there may be a big environmental problem ahead. However if this is not the case then I would consider his talk rightous misleading. I didn't see his talk about it being an environmental problem. I saw his talk as a claim that everyone should have the right to have a washing machine! And that it's rather a problem for the environmentalists their planning. > As said I have doubts and so I have rather mixed feelings about the talk. Apart from this I found the jokes about his grandmother not funny I found this very mild humor, and descriptive of the wonder the machine was for his grandmother. (Let's say, I guess to describe a grandfather as a grumpy old fart, would somebody call this sexist?) I remember my mother comparing how she washed, with how her mother washed, with how her grandmother washed. > and I also found the fact that he presented washing machines as being mostly a time saver for women also not funny. In principle those women could also save washing time if men would do the handwashing. To present a washing machine as a tool for womens emanzipation is very problematic - mildly speaking. Well, in an ideal world with identical men and women this is true. But we live in a real biological world where men and women differ and have different specializations: the fact that mainly the women do the washing appears the same in most cultures. I fear here it's *erst das Fressen, dann die Moral*. And if the world is like this, I don't see what's wrong with presenting a washing machine as a tool for women's emancipation. I'd like to to a poll amongst women in the third world to ask them if they have an emancipatory problem with people advocating they should have the right to have a washing machine. About discrimination, when I was in the mixed boys- and girls scouts, there were some (simple) physical tests to attain points for getting a kind of 'degree' (the idea was that everybody could get the degree if you could at least read a map, run for some distance at least etc, and to weigh between different abilities there were points). The physical tests for the girls were much simpler and I think they were also outdated, with the result e.g. that all the girls had the maximum score for running, even the ones that walked. The tests for the boys were more honest, maybe 5% of them managed to get the top scores. Well, I would call this discrimination too.
• Options
7.
Well I think Rosling is giving a talk in the best anglosaxon manner. Of course one could elaborate on the question, if washing by hand is more energy consuming or less than machine washing. For dishwashers that has been done extensivly, and of course it depends on parameters like if the machine is fully loaded or only half, which program you're using etc. This is neither the intention nor goal of Roslings talk.

He also does not discuss the question if it is unjust, that it mostly women doing that washing. Why should he? That would be a talk about religion and cultur then (which mainly determine who is doing which sort of work, aside from soft stiputlations our gender and hormones do add to this. If you don't believe in such, just watch this BBC movie: http://www.spiegel.tv/filme/bbc-secret-sexes-1/

So what is he talking about? Yes: energy consumption in modern industrialized societies. And of course he is convinced that one day all people in the world will live in such societies. Why? B/c they really want to. Just like his mother wanted to have a washing machine. And he rightly points out that we do have to think about how the energy supply then has to look like.

I very well remember a time, when China produced only a small part of the CO2 worldwide, much less then the US did then. Nowadays China is the topmost CO2 producer in the world. Why? B/C they adopted "washing machines", i.e. a "western" lifestyle. That's the message of Roslings talk: we should think about how to satify the world needs of power supply in 2050 - as it then will have doubled. That's his message. And of course, as a side note: education always lay in the hands of mothers, so give mothers more time and you will see better educated children. And despite all our efforts to make the world more just and balance the work between both genders, this will hold true for many generations ahead.

Cheerio, Lorenz
Comment Source:Well I think Rosling is giving a talk in the best anglosaxon manner. Of course one could elaborate on the question, if washing by hand is more energy consuming or less than machine washing. For dishwashers that has been done extensivly, and of course it depends on parameters like if the machine is fully loaded or only half, which program you're using etc. This is neither the intention nor goal of Roslings talk. He also does not discuss the question if it is unjust, that it mostly women doing that washing. Why should he? That would be a talk about religion and cultur then (which mainly determine who is doing which sort of work, aside from soft stiputlations our gender and hormones do add to this. If you don't believe in such, just watch this BBC movie: http://www.spiegel.tv/filme/bbc-secret-sexes-1/ So what is he talking about? Yes: energy consumption in modern industrialized societies. And of course he is convinced that one day all people in the world will live in such societies. Why? B/c they really want to. Just like his mother wanted to have a washing machine. And he rightly points out that we do have to think about how the energy supply then has to look like. I very well remember a time, when China produced only a small part of the CO2 worldwide, much less then the US did then. Nowadays China is the topmost CO2 producer in the world. Why? B/C they adopted "washing machines", i.e. a "western" lifestyle. That's the message of Roslings talk: we should think about how to satify the world needs of power supply in 2050 - as it then will have doubled. That's his message. And of course, as a side note: education always lay in the hands of mothers, so give mothers more time and you will see better educated children. And despite all our efforts to make the world more just and balance the work between both genders, this will hold true for many generations ahead. Cheerio, Lorenz
• Options
8.

Sorry guys I can't believe that you believe in what you write.

Comment Source:Sorry guys I can't believe that you believe in what you write.
• Options
9.
edited January 2013

[Remark deleted]

That being said, I'll refrain from further comments.

Comment Source:[Remark deleted] That being said, I'll refrain from further comments.
• Options
10.

You wrote:

(Partial aside: I have heard that dishwashers are more efficient than
washing dishes by hand, at least, when the amount of water is considered.)

I heard the same, but I have no citations for that.

Asking a search engine may have helped. As your publishing in Germany, here are some german links, found with [spülmaschine handspülen vergleich]:

http://www.energieverbraucher.de/de/Zuhause/Hausgeraete/Geschirrspueler/site__1324/

http://www.verivox.de/nachrichten/geschirrspueler-nutzung-viel-umweltfreundlicher-als-hand-spuelen-68268.aspx

http://www.forum-waschen.de/online-spuelvergleichs-rechner-abwasch-per-hand-maschine.html

As often the answer lies in the question about your personal habits. If you act very thrifty, you may save energy and and water washing dishes by hand. Unfortunately most people aren't as thoughtful. Field studies (see the second link) of the University of Bonn showed that, given the personal habits of the users obeserved, dishwashers saved 50% water and 28% energy. But for your personal result just use the calculator presented at the 3rd link.

BTW: discussions tend to take a disagreeable course when "believe" comes in as an argument. Just my 2 cents.

Cheerio, Lorenz
Comment Source:@NAD: You wrote: >>(Partial aside: I have heard that dishwashers are more efficient than >>washing dishes by hand, at least, when the amount of water is considered.) > >I heard the same, but I have no citations for that. Asking a search engine may have helped. As your publishing in Germany, here are some german links, found with [spülmaschine handspülen vergleich]: http://www.energieverbraucher.de/de/Zuhause/Hausgeraete/Geschirrspueler/site__1324/ http://www.verivox.de/nachrichten/geschirrspueler-nutzung-viel-umweltfreundlicher-als-hand-spuelen-68268.aspx http://www.forum-waschen.de/online-spuelvergleichs-rechner-abwasch-per-hand-maschine.html As often the answer lies in the question about your personal habits. If you act very thrifty, you may save energy and and water washing dishes by hand. Unfortunately most people aren't as thoughtful. Field studies (see the second link) of the University of Bonn showed that, given the personal habits of the users obeserved, dishwashers saved 50% water and 28% energy. But for your personal result just use the calculator presented at the 3rd link. BTW: discussions tend to take a disagreeable course when "believe" comes in as an argument. Just my 2 cents. Cheerio, Lorenz
• Options
11.
edited January 2013

Asking a search engine may have helped. As your publishing in Germany, here are some german links, found with [spülmaschine handspülen vergleich]:

That is your first link didn't sound very scientific (or did I oversee something?). In the second link i.e. the study by Prof. Stamminger was funded by Industry: "Die Studie wurde von vier Haushaltsgeräte- und Spülmittelherstellern finanziert." likewise the third link by IKW

Comment Source:>Asking a search engine may have helped. As your publishing in Germany, here are some german links, found with [spülmaschine handspülen vergleich]: thanks for your links, however I meant scientifically independent studies. That is your first link didn't sound very scientific (or did I oversee something?). In the second link i.e. the study by Prof. Stamminger was funded by Industry: "Die Studie wurde von vier Haushaltsgeräte- und Spülmittelherstellern finanziert." likewise the third link by <a href="http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrieverband_Körperpflege-_und_Waschmittel">IKW</a>
• Options
12.
however I meant scientifically independent studies.

What is independence? I know of scientifically sound studies which were financed by the industry as well as completely biased and completly worthless studies not being financed by anyone then the taxpayer (via the wage of the prof etc.).

What impressed me with the Bonn study was the statement, that yes, if you are thrifty and save water and energy and wait until the dishes pile up etc.etc. then you may handwash your dishes at 1/3 of the water and energy a dishwasher uses. Although I do have a problem to see how I should handwash 12 sets of dishes and spoons, forks and knifes with as little as 7 ltr of water and 1 kwh of energy (that what the newest generation of dishwashers do).

Of course then they looked into personal habits of handwashers and found that you can easily quadruple the water and energy consumption by changing water once as well as doing clean rinsing under the tap afterwards etc. which they gathered from web cam recordings. And end up with more water and energy consumption.

So not having seen the data, I have no proof that the University-of-Bonn study is biased in favor of the dishwater industry.

"Aus hundert Kaninchen wird niemals ein Pferd und aus hundert Verdachtsgründen niemals ein Beweis." (Dostojewski)

BTW: Having had to do the dishwashing together with my sisters for years when being a child, I can quickly calculate, that we used 3 times ca. 4 ltrs of 50°C water (2 times for the breakfast and lunch dishes, once after and for the evening meal). That comes round to 12 ltrs and at least 0,5 kWh (not calculating any energy effciciency factors). Now the dishwaser is doing the same (at 55°C) with less then 10 ltrs and about 1 kWh. Not that bad, I'd say, as I also haven't calculated the towels used to dry the dishes and what cleaning/washing those adds to the calculation.

But I do have a request running at the UPI-Institut and will come back with a link if they provide one.

Cheerio, Lorenz
Comment Source:>however I meant scientifically independent studies. What is independence? I know of scientifically sound studies which were financed by the industry as well as completely biased and completly worthless studies not being financed by anyone then the taxpayer (via the wage of the prof etc.). What impressed me with the Bonn study was the statement, that yes, if you are thrifty and save water and energy and wait until the dishes pile up etc.etc. then you may handwash your dishes at 1/3 of the water and energy a dishwasher uses. Although I do have a problem to see how I should handwash 12 sets of dishes and spoons, forks and knifes with as little as 7 ltr of water and 1 kwh of energy (that what the newest generation of dishwashers do). Of course then they looked into personal habits of handwashers and found that you can easily quadruple the water and energy consumption by changing water once as well as doing clean rinsing under the tap afterwards etc. which they gathered from web cam recordings. And end up with more water and energy consumption. So not having seen the data, I have no proof that the University-of-Bonn study is biased in favor of the dishwater industry. "Aus hundert Kaninchen wird niemals ein Pferd und aus hundert Verdachtsgründen niemals ein Beweis." (Dostojewski) BTW: Having had to do the dishwashing together with my sisters for years when being a child, I can quickly calculate, that we used 3 times ca. 4 ltrs of 50°C water (2 times for the breakfast and lunch dishes, once after and for the evening meal). That comes round to 12 ltrs and at least 0,5 kWh (not calculating any energy effciciency factors). Now the dishwaser is doing the same (at 55°C) with less then 10 ltrs and about 1 kWh. Not that bad, I'd say, as I also haven't calculated the towels used to dry the dishes and what cleaning/washing those adds to the calculation. But I do have a request running at the UPI-Institut and will come back with a link if they provide one. Cheerio, Lorenz
• Options
13.

From wikipedia

A new energy label, introduced in 2010, is based on the energy efficiency index (EEI), and has energy classes in the range A+++ to D.[6] The EEI is a measure of the annual electricity consumption, and includes energy consumed during power-off and standby modes, and the energy consumed in 220 washing cycles. For the washing cycles, a weighted mix consisting of 42% full-load cycles at 60 °C, 29% partial-load cycles at 60 °C, and 29% partial-load cycles at 40 °C. The washing performance is not mentioned anymore, since all washing machines must reach class A anyway. For a 6-kg machine, an EEI of 100 is equivalent to 334 kWh per year, or 1.52 kWh per cycle.

From the table, 200kWh/year is typical. That's 600kWh/year for the fuel to generate the electricity.

Then there is embodied energy which people always seem to forget. I can't find good calculations for dishwashers and washing machines. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embodied_energy has a figure of .27TJ for a car. I guess 15 washing machines = one car. So that's 270/15 = 18GJ = 5MWh. If a washing machine lasts 10 years that is 500kWh/year for the embodied energy.

Comment Source:From [wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Union_energy_label#Washing_machines_and_tumble_dryers) > A new energy label, introduced in 2010, is based on the energy efficiency index (EEI), and has energy classes in the range A+++ to D.[6] The EEI is a measure of the annual electricity consumption, and includes energy consumed during power-off and standby modes, and the energy consumed in 220 washing cycles. For the washing cycles, a weighted mix consisting of 42% full-load cycles at 60 °C, 29% partial-load cycles at 60 °C, and 29% partial-load cycles at 40 °C. The washing performance is not mentioned anymore, since all washing machines must reach class A anyway. For a 6-kg machine, an EEI of 100 is equivalent to 334 kWh per year, or 1.52 kWh per cycle. From the table, 200kWh/year is typical. That's 600kWh/year for the fuel to generate the electricity. Then there is embodied energy which people always seem to forget. I can't find good calculations for dishwashers and washing machines. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embodied_energy](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embodied_energy) has a figure of .27TJ for a car. I guess 15 washing machines = one car. So that's 270/15 = 18GJ = 5MWh. If a washing machine lasts 10 years that is 500kWh/year for the embodied energy.
• Options
14.
(Sorry, that's in German first, I'll try Google translator down below)

@NAD: Dieter Teufel vom UPI Institut (wenn es da einen BIAS gibt, dann garantiert in die 'grüne' Richtung ;-) hat mir geantwortet:

>
eine Studie kenn ich nicht, aber ich hab glaub ich im TEST
der Stiftung Warentest (oder war's im ÖKO-Test) schon
darüber gelesen, aber schon länger her. Und sicher ohne den
Ressorucenverbrauch für die Maschine.

Gefühlsmässig würde ich sagen: dürfte in der gleichen
Größenordnung liegen und hängt im Einzelfall natürlich stark
von den Gewohnheiten beim Handspülen ab...
Comment Source:(Sorry, that's in German first, I'll try Google translator down below) @NAD: Dieter Teufel vom UPI Institut (wenn es da einen BIAS gibt, dann garantiert in die 'grüne' Richtung ;-) hat mir geantwortet: >> eine Studie kenn ich nicht, aber ich hab glaub ich im TEST der Stiftung Warentest (oder war's im ÖKO-Test) schon darüber gelesen, aber schon länger her. Und sicher ohne den Ressorucenverbrauch für die Maschine. Gefühlsmässig würde ich sagen: dürfte in der gleichen Größenordnung liegen und hängt im Einzelfall natürlich stark von den Gewohnheiten beim Handspülen ab... << LG Lorenz Google translation (arrgh): --------------------------------------------------------- @ NAD: Dieter Teufel by UPI Institute (if there's a bias, then guaranteed in the ''green' direction :-) replied: >> A study I know not, but I believe I in TEST Stiftung Warentest (or was it in the ECO test) already read about it, but some time ago. And certainly without the Ressorucenverbrauch for the machine. Moderately feeling I would say probably in the same order of magnitude and depends on the individual case, of course, greatly of the hand washing habits from ... << ----------------------------------------
• Options
15.
edited January 2013

What is independence? I know of scientifically sound studies which were financed by the industry as well as completely biased and completly worthless studies not being financed by anyone then the taxpayer (via the wage of the prof etc.).

Let's put it this way. If a study is financed by groups who have a strong interest in a certain outcome then a bias is usually way more likely. In principle I have nothing against such "possibly biased" studies, if there are enough studies of "the opposite" sort. If both studies come to the same conclusions, then there is a big likelyhood that one has a somewhat neutral scientifically minded statement.

I find these investigations of the above mentioned sort rather important, it is also clear that habits and technology changes and so one probably needs quite some constant reassessment of the involved facts. I had edited an Azimuth project page on Sustainable design, which you may want to look at. I think that one should bundle more such findings as the one mentioned here (washing machine, dishwasher) in this discussion. But alone the data retrieval and assessment is not easy. I have quite a rather big bookmark folder collection with all sorts of product design items, which are needed for such assessments/discussions, but I won't try to copy this collection into the Azimuth project. Or in other words the Wikiformat alone is not really suitable for collecting, assessing, discussing such rather diverse items and so I was trying to think about suitable (additional) formats. One suggestion is here: Examples of semantic web applications and environment

Comment Source:>What is independence? I know of scientifically sound studies which were financed by the industry as well as completely biased and completly worthless studies not being financed by anyone then the taxpayer (via the wage of the prof etc.). Let's put it this way. If a study is financed by groups who have a strong interest in a certain outcome then a bias is usually way more likely. In principle I have nothing against such "possibly biased" studies, if there are enough studies of "the opposite" sort. If both studies come to the same conclusions, then there is a big likelyhood that one has a somewhat neutral scientifically minded statement. I find these investigations of the above mentioned sort rather important, it is also clear that habits and technology changes and so one probably needs quite some constant reassessment of the involved facts. I had edited an Azimuth project page on [[Sustainable design]], which you may want to look at. I think that one should bundle more such findings as the one mentioned here (washing machine, dishwasher) in this discussion. But alone the data retrieval and assessment is not easy. I have quite a rather big bookmark folder collection with all sorts of product design items, which are needed for such assessments/discussions, but I won't try to copy this collection into the Azimuth project. Or in other words the Wikiformat alone is not really suitable for collecting, assessing, discussing such rather diverse items and so I was trying to think about suitable (additional) formats. One suggestion is here: [[Examples of semantic web applications and environment]]
• Options
16.
Thanks for the link to the sustainable design page, quite imformative :-)

Yes. bias is always a problem. Fortunately these days, industry more often tends to ask for a "neutral" study, results wanted to be rather "objective" than debatable. That's partly due to the bad reputation one gets with clearly biased results and of course due to the internet that spreads such findings very quickly and effectively. Remember the butter vs. margarine studies in the 70ties? Sure, things like this still happen, but people have learned since those days.

I think today the bias of the researchers themselves are far more dangerous than 'wanted' results by the financier. But that's onöy a 'believe' thus very debatable :-)))

Cheerio, Lorenz
Comment Source:Thanks for the link to the sustainable design page, quite imformative :-) Yes. bias is always a problem. Fortunately these days, industry more often tends to ask for a "neutral" study, results wanted to be rather "objective" than debatable. That's partly due to the bad reputation one gets with clearly biased results and of course due to the internet that spreads such findings very quickly and effectively. Remember the butter vs. margarine studies in the 70ties? Sure, things like this still happen, but people have learned since those days. I think today the bias of the researchers themselves are far more dangerous than 'wanted' results by the financier. But that's onöy a 'believe' thus very debatable :-))) Cheerio, Lorenz