timo888 wrote:Not that money matters much, but what is the difference in annual cost-of-ownership between a machine like the La Spaziale, with its small 450ml brew boiler that can be run without the steam boiler being turned on, and a large catering-classs/small professional HX machine with a multi-liter boiler?
Regards
Timo
podo98 wrote:I love the A3, and while I can plumb the water line, I cannot plumb the drain. My understanding is that both need to be plumbed.
BP
Ken Fox wrote:There is no way to answer this question in a way that would be correct for more than any one individual. This is going to depend on such things as whether the machine is operated on a timer or is on 24/7; your local electricity rates which can vary by more than a factor of 3X; how much the machine is actually used; and whether any waste heat the machine might produce will increase (or decrease) other expenses, such as for heating or air conditioning the space in which the machine is located.
ken
timo888 wrote:My estimate is that for home use, the La Spaz would cost between five and ten times less to operate, depending upon how much milk steaming is involved.
timo888 wrote:Ken,
I agree that variation in use would create variations in the cost. But the La Spaziale uses a stainless steel ergo relatively non-conductive group, IIRC, and so it needs much much less time to come up to stable brew temp than a machine with a massive highly conductive brass group needs.
When producing only a few straight shots a day, a 3-liter or 5-liter HX machine will be much more expensive to operate than a machine with a dedicated 450ml brew boiler, just as driving a Ford F350 around NYC on errands in stop-and-go traffic will cost more than driving a Ford Escape Hybrid.
When producing milk drinks, the dual boiler machine has to turn on its steam boiler, and then the difference in operational costs goes down, but only slightly. The La Spaziale could brew and steam long before the Cimbali was ready to do either.
My estimate is that for home use, the La Spaz would cost between five and ten times less to operate, depending upon how much milk steaming is involved.
A prospective purchaser could plug in their own use profile (ratio of straight shots to milk drinks) and figure out how much the two machines will cost to operate, given the projected kilowatts consumed.
Regards
Timo
Ken Fox wrote: My best guess is that anyone who can afford, and would choose to buy, a commercial level espresso machine for their home, would consider the electrical usage needed to power it of little or no significance.
HB wrote:It also depends if the particular machine's boiler is insulated, how much of its group is exposed to ambient air, etc. The thread Leave it on, or turn it off? covers the advantages/disadvantages of 24/7 operation. For what it's worth, I don't run my espresso equipment 24/7 and my previous estimates of the associated electrical costs amounted to a few dollars a month.
timo888 wrote:It may not be a matter of simply affording the cost...the prospective buyer might be one who chooses for the sake of the environment to consume less energy. Does it really make sense to heat 5 liters of water to make a 1.5 ounce beverage?
KOYANNASQATSI
Timo
timo888 wrote:It may not be a matter of simply affording the cost...the prospective buyer might be one who chooses for the sake of the environment to consume less energy.
timo888 wrote:Does it really make sense to heat 5 liters of water to make a 1.5 ounce beverage?