FEATURE
LOOK CLOSER
Justin Binks, Director of SEBO UK, takes a closer look at the new EU labeling for vacuum cleaners and what it could mean for the commercial sector.
Much has been written, from the perspective of domestic machines, about how the EU labelling requirements for vacuum cleaners will have negative consequences.
What must be remembered is that, for the majority of commercial purchasers, the most important considerations when choosing a vacuum cleaner tend to be quality, performance, reliability, serviceability and the cost of ownership. The decision to buy is often based on past experience of products and manufacturers. Buying decisions based exclusively on the energy label are much less likely, although it is probable that some organisations will specify the more energy-efficient models due to environmental considerations.
At the heart of the labelling debate has tended to be the power of the motor, i.e. Wattage. Although with an upright cleaner, suction power is not really an issue because the rotating brush does much of the work, with a cylinder cleaner suction is key. With cylinders, when all else is equal, a more powerful motor will clean better. However, a vacuum cleaner should never have been assessed by wattage alone and suction power and wattage are not the same. With the energy label, our key objections have always concerned the testing procedures; particularly the tests for pick up.
50 | Tomorrow’s Cleaning August 2015
The label is designed to provide information on domestic household products regarding energy consumption, performance, noise and dust re-emission. Note the emphasis on ‘household’ products; the tests used to gain an energy label rating are the same whether the product is a domestic or commercial model. This is like lumping HGV’s and vans in with cars and assuming they are used in the same way.
These tests are more ‘Alice in Wonderland’ than real world. Both the hard floor and carpet pick up tests require that a special type of sand be used. This is not something that is normally collected by vacuum cleaners – generally 80% of what is picked up is fluff, hair and fibre.
Equally unrepresentative is the format of the hard floor test. This involves removing dirt from a 10x3mm crevice. It does not take into account the need to clean the surface of the floor. In order to achieve the suction necessary to clean the crevice, the vacuum cleaner head must be designed so it ‘seals’ down against the floor. In a real world situation this means that dirt on the surface of the floor is pushed along in front of the head, without being sucked up, while the device itself becomes hard to use because it ‘sticks’ to the floor. To get an ‘A’ rating the vacuum cleaner has to pick
up more than 111% of the ‘dirt’ in the crevice: Surely that tells us something about the test!
The noise and filtration tests are equally farcical and in no way make for a more efficient vacuum cleaner. ‘Ease of use’ isn’t part of the tests. A vacuum cleaner designed exclusively around the tests would more than likely be bad at picking up stuff that you do need to pick up, good at picking up stuff that you don’t need to pick up, and virtually impossible to move over the floor.
Anyone buying a commercial vacuum cleaner would be well advised to take the claims made on the energy labels with a generous pinch of salt. It is questionable whether criteria used for domestic vacuum cleaners can also apply to professional machines. I believe quality brands will still offer superior performance but remember, whichever cleaner is purchased, the advent of lower power vacuum cleaners may mean that it takes longer to clean a floor than before, even if the energy label suggests ‘A’ rated efficiency.
There are also considerable doubts as to whether there will actually be any real savings so it remains to be seen whether the next phase of the energy label due in 2017 will come to pass.
www.sebo.co.uk.
twitter.com/TomoCleaning
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80