[Peakprepper]

We used to try and put our washing machine on maximum spin to get them as dry as possible, but ended up having to iron them more as they then got so creased in the spin.

We ended up doing the following: in summer we use one of those "upside down pyramid on a stick" outside clothes dryers - works fine.

For non-warm & non-sunny months, I ended up fixing two "Sheila Maids" (Google it if you don't know what they are) to our highest ceiling rooms, one of which has a woodburner.

The effect of the rising heat means that the clothes dry really quickly, even with no heating on - when the woodburner is on, duvets, heavy clothing, dog blanket etc all dry overnight.

When fixing the Sheila Maids to the ceilings, I offset them slightly, so they weren't directly above the woodburner, and mounted a smoke alarm not too far away on the ceiling.

As a consequence of the above, we have not used the tumble dryer for nearly a year, with abosolutely no inconvenience to ourselves, and a reduced electricity bill to boot - definitely the way to go.

[mommy22]

For those looking for an alternative to drying jeans/towels to dryness, consider putting your jeans/towels in the drier for 10 minutes, then take them out and hang them up on your line/rack. It's enough to get some of the wetness out, and you don't need to iron jeans. I never use fabric softeners, and believe me, it is something you can get used to. I used to completely dry my jeans/ towels in the drier, but for the past couple of months, I've been drying my jeans this way, and saving lots of green this way.
I have an indoor drying rack that is metal (covered with a molded plastic) that I used to see at Target, etc... and now I never see. I found mine while driving on trash day, and it's still going strong 10 years later. But I wish they were available in the stores still, as they hold 2 1/2 loads (!) and everything is dry in 24 hours, then I do the rest of our laundry for the week. We're a family of 4.

[TommyJefferson]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', 'I') admit I'm a clothes dryer junkie.

[Retsel]

My wife and I are putting in a geothermal heat pump for our house. It will cost us about $23,000 when it is all said and done. We currently have a ~60% efficient furnace. We compared the economics of replacing the current furnace with a 95% efficient natural gas furnace instead of the geothermal heat pump, and the payback is not very attractive at current natural gas prices for the geothermal heat pump (over 20 years for payback). However, with the anticipated increase in energy prices when oil production peaks, it should bring the payback time down considerably.

Our geothermal heat pump system will be a closed loop system, which is expensive to put in because we need 1 well 150 foot deep for each ton of heat required. We are planning to do some renovation in our house, which will increase the size of our house and require a total of 4 tons of heating. Actually, I will probably put in more insulation than what our house has now which should make our house even more energy efficient and maybe could have permitted us to decrease the heat pump down to 3 1/2 tons or even 3 tons, which would have reduced the cost for the geothermal heat pump further.

Another way to install a geothermal heat pump is to put in an open loop system. An open loop system uses a single well (could be an existing water well, and you pump the water to the heat pump. It extracts the heat in the winter, or rejects the heat in the summer, to that water which then must be discarded to a stream, pond, or swamp. The up-front cost for this system is much lower than the closed loop system since you can either use an existing water well, or you just need to put in one well.

My recommendation for sizing a geothermal heat pump for your house would be to think of the ways to improve the energy efficiency of your current house. The companies that install geothermal heat pumps will come out and do a detailed energy audit for your house before telling you their proposed cost. If they take into account these energy efficiency changes, they will provide you a lower quote which will make this technology more attractive.

Retsel

[Frank]

If you're truly a "believer" you should keep in mind presumed declining availablity of fossil fuels in future years (within lifespan of any equipment installed today). That would imply that a renewable technology such as heat pump is worth strong consideration, especially in your latitude. Another option might be a wood gasification boiler but that means dealing with firewood. Pellet stoves are a nice option also but pellet availability seems to fluctuate (at least in our area where everyone is switching to them).

How about solar thermal panels? Can you retrofit radiant floor heat if you don't already have it? I'd be thinking long-term; if you're going to drop a bunch of cash think of it as an investment. My bet is that renewable technologies and "earth friendly" houses won't lose value. Don't forget better insulation too.

[Doly]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Frank', 'D')on't forget better insulation too.

[WisJim]

Back in 1977 or so, we built a house in western Wisconsin, about an hour east of LaCrosse, that was super-insulated (12 to 16 inch think walls, etc.), and had some good south facing windows, but not a lot, and was easily heated with occassional fires in a pair of small wood stoves, one in the basement and one in the living room. One was a Jotul 118 and the other was a locally manufactured steel box stove. If heat was needed one or the other was used, depending on how much heat and how long. We burned a cord or 2 of fire wood each year, and actually got rid of our wood burning kitchen range because it would cook us out of the house even in minus 20 F weather.
So my opinion is, INSULATION and weather tightness first!! Then passive solar, then active solar, then wood or other local fuel source. We now live in a 100 year old farm house a hundred miles farther north, and it is being steadily but slowly reinsulated and improved, so that we are more comfortable and use less wood for heat each year.

[Frank]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('WisJim', 'S')o my opinion is, INSULATION and weather tightness first!! Then passive solar, then active solar, then wood or other local fuel source. We now live in a 100 year old farm house a hundred miles farther north, and it is being steadily but slowly reinsulated and improved, so that we are more comfortable and use less wood for heat each year.

[eastbay]

My dear wife handed me a hundred bucks a few days ago thanking me for not using the clothes dryer for another year telling me it's my 'rebate.'

At about around 50 cents per load I suggested she fork over another $50.00.

This household saved about $150.00 last year by not wasting natural gas drying clothes. In 2007 I suspect the savings will be $200.00. It may be chump change to some, but it's free money and I'll never turn down free money.

[Terrapin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Peakprepper', 'F')or non-warm & non-sunny months, I ended up fixing two "Sheila Maids" (Google it if you don't know what they are) to our highest ceiling rooms, one of which has a woodburner.

[pea-jay]

Or you could do this


Link

[Terrapin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pea-jay', 'O')r you could do this


Link

[WisJim]

I did something similar near our wood burning kitchen range--made some wooden brackets that fastened to the ceiling and support a piece of closet rod. A handy place to dry towels after a shower, hang a jacket or raincoat that is wet, or dry a small batch of clothes. And it cost me only a few dollars, wouldn't cost much even if you bought all new materials to make one with a rod 3 or 4 feet long.

[oilfreeandhappy]

These spin dryers look like they would substantially decrease the hang-drying time. Maybe I could talk my wife into hanging out clothes if we had one of these.

[oilcanboyd]

I agree with the above suggestions, Insulation is the biggest bang for the buck.

We live in a 135yr old house, sawed 2 X 4's in half and strapped the old real 2 inch by 4 inch studs out to 6 inches to use Roxul R-23 insulation, less mass in these old walls means more insulation, (studs @ 24 in centers vs 16 in centers today).

I only cut down trees people want removed or the city ordered removed due to disease. 1 tree now lasts us easily 4 yrs, but the mild winter we are experiancing today here in Ontario Canada,--- very little wood.

Heat pumps are the most desirable most efficient, most reliable imho. Natural gas used should be banned for everything except heating. It is the only instant means of heat available on the planet! Methane hydrates are very expensive to obtain from off shore and in arctic climates, Canadian researchers are investigating extraction techniques.
Oilcan

Nat Gas stats:

The world has enough proven natural gas reserves to last 64 years at 2005 consumption levels, compared with only four decades worth of oil, according to the BP Statistical review.

Much of the world’s estimated 180tn cu m of gas reserves are deep under the sea, in vast deserts or politically unpredictable countries. Russia, Iran and Qatar account for 27%, 15% and 14% respectively and 58% of the total lies in former Soviet Union countries.

Getting that gas to consumers will become increasingly easier with new pipelines and liquefaction plants, which cool it to liquid form so it can be shipped anywhere in the world.
Much of the demand growth is spurred by the power industry, where the latest combined cycle gas turbines make gas-fired electricity generation ever more efficient.

Gas was producing 20% of the world’s electricity in 2004, up from 12% in 1973, figures from the International Energy Agency (IEA) show. Its share of total final energy consumption rose to 16% from 14.6% over the same period.
The IEA sees gas supplying 21.5% of the world’s total primary energy in 2010 and 24.2% in 2030.
In Europe, gas should be the fastest growing fuel source in the next two decades because of demand from new power stations, but as Europe becomes more addicted to gas, concerns about security of supply mount.

Liquefied natural gas (LNG) – gas cooled to minus 160 Celsius (-260 Fahrenheit) and shrunk to a 600th of its volume – is a more costly way of transporting natural gas but it avoids the inherent risks of pipeline supplies through unstable countries.
http://www.gulf-times.com/site/topics/a ... rent_id=28

[tsakach]

I have been using a small refrigerator called a "Free Piston Stirling Cooling" system for the last 6 months as part of my off-grid refrigeration setup. It maintains a constant 37F while drawing only 8 watts from a 12vdc power source, which amounts to about 192 watt-hours per day.

[align=center][/align]

[align=center]Free Piston Stirling Cooler

[/align]
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '"')A FPSC differs from a compressor system in that the refrigerant is not pumped into the space that is to be cooled. Rather, a Stirling cooler has a cold head, where heat is transferred into the machine, and a warm head, where heat is transferred out of the machine."

From: Global Cooling Technology Overview

[katkinkate]

How about this option. Turning a super efficient chest freezer into a mega super efficient chest fridge.

[hi-fiver]

Good information Katkinkate:
I live in Alaska, which limits my use of solar, but the old "root celler" is the way to go here. I spend half my time (work) above the artic circle, and up there the ground is permafrozen about one to two feet deep. The natives have been complaining that the permafrost has been moving down, and they have to dig deeper to be able to keep their dry fish ect . frozen (global warming?) Any way, I live on the Kenai Peninsula and we don't have permafrost, except during the winter the ground usually freezes to a depth of about eight feet. During the summer the ambiant temp. usually does not exceed 70 degrees F, so it a person digs an 8-12 ft deep root celler you can keep anything refridgerated- requiring proper ventalation of course.

[ChumpusRex2]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('tsakach', 'I') have been using a small refrigerator called a "Free Piston Stirling Cooling" system for the last 6 months as part of my off-grid refrigeration setup. It maintains a constant 37F while drawing only 8 watts from a 12vdc power source, which amounts to about 192 watt-hours per day.

[gg3]

The article Kat pointed to was the starting point for my R&D project on refrigeration. However, the article's claim of 0.1 KWH/day works out to 36.5 KWH/year, which is almost impossible in practice. Reality is more like 100 KWH/year for the fridge, and similar for a slightly smaller freezer. I'm still waiting for a component for our test platforms, but once it comes in, we'll be back on schedule.

---

Re. the Coleman unit:

192 watt/hours per day = 70.08 KWH/year. That's pretty good if the main goal is to reduce absolute power consumption, for example in an off-grid situation where every watt saved is a major savings in cost of PV panels.

A cubic foot of storage is about equal to a milk crate. Not much but one can live with it.

---

Re. Chumpus Rex:

What's the make & model number of your unit? Is it a combined fridge/freezer? If so, what's the capacity of the freezer section?

Your figures add up to about 146 KWH/year. That's damn good. How are you taking your measurements?