No abstract

Historically, domestic chores such as washing dishes were all done by hand. Today it is estimated that 44% of the households in the EU are equipped with a dishwasher. In this article, we discuss the connections between technical developments, consumer behaviour and the test standard for energy labels. The aim of this study is to provide recommendations for future work that would strengthen the role of the energy label in order to promote the more sustainable technical development of household appliances. Technical developments are compared with the consequences of different consumer behaviour. It was found that technical developments could reduce annual energy use, but depending on the implemented technology, this is often complex and requires additional components. On the other hand, a consumer can easily increase energy usage by 50% without being aware of doing so, when goods are pretreated, appliances incorrectly loaded, or inappropriate programs selected. Our recommendation is first of all to encourage the use of dishwashers as they consume less energy and water compared with washing up manually. A holistic approach should be taken to updating the energy labelling system. Actual consumer behaviour must be taken into account and, perhaps most importantly , as dishwashers are becoming ever more energy efficient, consumers must be educated in using the machines in an environmentally friendly way. We conclude that the energy labelling system is outdated; it must be fundamentally revised and must take into account consumer behaviour.

Drying is an energy demanding industrial process and methods for reducing the energy consumption of drying is of interest to industry as well as society. This article presents the drying system of a biofuel factory. Steam is used as the refrigerant. Superheated steam is used as drying gas in a flash dryer with 28.8 tons/h dewatering capacity. The system includes an energy recovering water heat pump that receives its heat from the excess drying steam and heats the dryer. The SMER of the drying process ranges between 3 and 4 and the COP of the heat pump process ranges between 4 and 5.5 during one production season of peat drying. Variations in performance can be explained by variations in inlet moisture content and production rate. The example of this drying system shows the feasibility of drying in superheated steam, heat pump drying and water as refrigerant in high-temperature heat pumps.