Herbert Graf wrote:

>> The appliance that could save billions of liters of water has been
>> developed at least 50 years ago and is ready to be purchased at
>> least since that time. If all the vertically rotating washing
>> machines were replaced by typical horizontally rotating ones, the
>> savings would be as much if not more. Yet it doesn't happen... for
>> some strange reason :)
> 
> I don't see the reasons as strange. 
> 
> The fact is different regions have different factors that influence
> appliance design. 
> 
> In many areas of the world water is a scarce expensive resource. In
> others it's not.

Someone mentioned California. Horizontals are still quite common in
SoCal, for some strange reason. 

Besides, it's not only about water. Heating up water is expensive in
terms of electrical energy, too: the more water, the more electrical
energy for heating it up. 

> As a result, the added expense of a horizontal washing machine simply
> makes no sense for most from a purely economical point of view. While
> the prices have come down, the fact is they are still more expensive
> then the "water wasters", and over the life of the product, because
> of our low cost for water, you'll never recoup those costs.

Have you factored in the increased electrical energy? The diminished
lifetime of fabric? The increased allergies? (Due to the lower numbers
of clean water cycles after washing, the residues of detergent in
clothes are more. This is probably just one (small) factor that helps
explain the high incidence of allergies in the USA.)

Also, if the prices have come down (I assume you mean in relationship to
the vertical drum machines), it seems that the price difference is not
that much due to differences in construction (which haven't come down).

Gerhard
-- 
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist