Inside Airvolution...

[rolls_rapide]

"And once they're all full of dust, it's not li

My point was that paper will break down in the environment, since it consists of cellulose, and will therefore be attacked by the enzyme cellulase.

 

[vintagehoover]

Paper will break down, yes, but the raw material to make them still comes from cutting down trees!

They might have an environmental benefit over plastic when you dispose of them, but they still have to be made by destroying our natural resources!

Dyson actually now suggest the idea of dumping the contents of the dust canister in the compost bin, and I know two people who do this!

 

[rolls_rapide]

Compost heap

Ah yes, presuming that all the contents of the bin are able to be broken down.

But what Dyson failed to take into account was the synthetic content of carpet fluff, especially where nylon, polypropylene, or whatever material is used to make the synthetic carpets.

 

[vintagehoover]

'Dyson failed to take into account was the synthetic con

...where else would the synthetic material go? Into a plastic bag, and to a landfill?

Or into a paper bag, to a landfill, where the paper will break down, but the synthetic contents will not, and will end up back in the enviroment anyway?

 

[rolls_rapide]

Once upon a time...

it was recommended that the dust be burned.

Maybe highly efficient incinerators should make a comeback.

 

[vintagehoover]

'Maybe highly efficient incinerators should make a comeb

...to release those lovely toxic fumes into the atmosphere?

The problem is, no matter what you do, you're still left with a toxic by-product. This was the main issue with Dyson's motor vehicle exhaust cyclone concept: it worked like it was supposed to, separating toxic fumes from the exhaust airstream. But what do you do with the black, sticky, toxic substance left after the process?

Short of sending our dangerous/poisonous/radioactive waste into space, whatever we produce is stuck here with us somehow!

 

[eurekaprince]

What about the energy it takes to run a 12 amp bagless?

I would rather save the energy by cleaning carpets with a 7 amp fan-first bagged Eureka or Sanitaire, which does as good a job of cleaning carpets as a bagless using 12 amps of electricity. It seems that all these bagless machines require 12 amps to get the cyclones whirling fast enough to filter the air.

I leave the non-carpet cleaning to my 12 amp retro Constellation. And even then, I think the bagged machines save the environment more since you never have to use water to wash any filters or bins.

Just my 2 amps worth!!!

 

[vintagehoover]

Aside from Kirby and Oreck, which are not big-selling brands in the UK, I can't really think of any fan-first machines on sale here now. Most brands use huge motors - often 2000w+.

Dyson are to be commended, since they've never used motors rated above 1400w. They don't need to - their cyclone system is the most efficient, and gets a high airwatt rating from a comparatively low energy input.

And the amount of water needed to wash a filter is negligible compared even to what we waste leaving the tap running while we brush our teeth!