Test Meter: Brand 4-1850

Date: 4-25-99

Time: 8:25 PM

Load: Towels (6 bath towels, 7 hand towels, 16 wash cloths 7-8 pounds dry)

Settings: Regular Cycle, Extra Rinse, Maximum Extract, Signal (beeps when finished)

Largest Load: 834 Watts (drying)

Largest Load: 634 Watts (maximum extract)

Largest Load: 238 Watts (washing)

Pump Load: 30 Watts (draining)

Light in washer: 17 watts (door open)

Light in dryer: 17 watts (door open)

Watt/hrs full wash cycle: 134

Watt/hrs washed & Dried: 314

Water Consumption: No Data

Notes:

Neptune needs a sine wave inverter of at least 600 watts to operate. The second load washed was sheets. It used 312 watt/hrs. This leads me to believe that the pounds of laundry washed an dried has very little to do with the power consumption. To get the maximum energy efficiency, load the Neptune to its maximum capacity of 24 pounds. We also notice that using “maximum extract” the dryer did its job 15 minutes faster. The dryer actually uses more energy than the washer, this is opposite to top loading machines that have a transmission and agitator. This test was performed on our personal washer and dryer. We are very pleased with the energy consumption as well as the end results, clean clothes. However, the Neptune washer has required service 3 times since purchased new in 1999.

This test was run on an Amana energy efficient 19 cu ft refer which has the freezer on the bottom. The refer is black in color and is exposed to the sun via a sky light for several hours a day. We had three adults in the household at the time of testing. During the test the temps were at 90° F for several hours from 3-7 PM. At night the temps in the house would drop to about 68-70. The power consumption for a 24-hour period was 1,750 watt/hrs and was consistent throughout the test period of 20 days. We used a Brand Electronics digital power meter model 04-1850, this meter will only measure the A/C current of the appliance that is plugged into it.

Let’s look at the cost of purchasing and operation of this particular refer on a solar energy system.

The Amana cost about $900.00 from our local appliance store. We will need to generate 1750 watt/hrs per day and allow 30% losses in the system which comes up to 2275 total watt/hrs needed each day to operate this refer. Since we are using our refer for this test, we will also use our sight to determine how many solar modules will be needed to power this appliance. Our sight will be used for shipping cost too. We have an average solar insolation of 4.5 hours per day. If we use the Astro Power AP1206 (PV 120) solar module it will take 4.21 modules to power our conventional refer. In our catalog we sell these modules for $579.00

Now lets look at the Sun-Frost RF19A.

Since we have not run an actual test on the Sun-Frost RF19A and it is not black and exposed to direct sun light we will use the factory specs and add an estimated increase of 200 watt/hrs for location and color. According to specs. The RF19A uses 1104 watt/hrs per day plus 200 watt/hrs, again we must add 30% due to inefficiencies, which comes up to 1695 watt/hrs consumed from your battery. At our sight the RF19A will require 3.14 solar modules at a cost of $579.00 ea.

In all fairness the long term operation of the Sunfrost will save a substantial amount of energy over the life of the energy system since we used the average insolation. If it were the DC version you could expect to save the inefficiency of the inverter.

On the other hand, would you rather call your local appliance store for on site service or call Sunfrost. Go to www.energystar.gov to find more efficient appliances. They are getting better and better!