Leaving a Prosumer HX Espresso Machine On CAN SAVE ENERGY - Page 2

Need help with equipment usage or want to share your latest discovery?
User avatar
Randy G.

#11: Post by Randy G. »

The alleged energy (and money) saved by leaving a high-current draw espresso machine on 24/7 can quickly be lost if it catches fire. A commercial-roaster buddy who also installed and serviced machines had a call one morning when one of the machines they leased did exactly that, and the coffee shop came very close to being history.
Espresso! My Espresso! - http://www.EspressoMyEspresso.com
LMWDP #644

User avatar
cafeIKE

#12: Post by cafeIKE »

Ken Fox wrote:Regardless of the information gathered, I would doubt that very many people would find the energy savings or cost of changing their behavior, to be large enough to motivate them to change what they are already doing.
I have a friend who would heat his machine for morning espresso, turn it off for an hour or two, reheat for a midday espresso and the same for an evening shot thinking he was saving electricity. Once I showed him the folly, he no longer did that.

As always, there's no free lunch. Repeatedly cycling the machine fatigues components which must be balanced against reduced life span operating at elevated temperatures.

User avatar
Bluecold

#13: Post by Bluecold »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_trans ... of_cooling
the rate of heat loss of a body is proportional to the difference in temperatures between the body and its surroundings.
Either basic thermodynamics is wrong, or your measurements are wrong.
Guess where my money's at.
LMWDP #232
"Though I Fly Through the Valley of Death I Shall Fear No Evil For I am at 80,000 Feet and Climbing."

User avatar
danetrainer

#14: Post by danetrainer »

cafeIKE wrote:Several years back, I calculated that it would take about 2.5 years to recoup the 'investment' as a saving at LA DWP rates.
A little uncommon sense is cheaper. :wink:
That little sucker (killawatt meter) paid for itself in less than two months...when I plugged my full-sized upright freezer into it and calculated the monthly cost! I ran right out and spent $150 to boot on a smaller sized chest freezer with higher efficiency...both my electricity bills and coffee freezing have been happier since!
cafeIKE wrote:As always, there's no free lunch. Repeatedly cycling the machine fatigues components which must be balanced against reduced life span operating at elevated temperatures.
Agreed...every situation is different and needs evaluation. When I was corresponding and comparing notes with another user of a different make of dual boiler, found his internal temps were nearly 50 degrees higher. Working allot in the field of electronics and computers...on/off cycling is one of the higher reasons of failure rates when environment temps are within their normal design range.

User avatar
cafeIKE

#15: Post by cafeIKE »

Bluecold wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heat_trans ... of_cooling
the rate of heat loss of a body is proportional to the difference in temperatures between the body and its surroundings.
That's why the heat loss slope flattens out as the machine cools. Other conditions such as drafts also play a part.

Image
Decay curve for insulated boiler over 9 hours.
The heat loss for this boiler is considerably less than uninsulated, yet it still lost 70% of its heat in 2 hours.

There is some error in the heat decay curves as they are from a single point in the HX boiler and not multiple points over the whole machine. For example, over 6 hours the DB group decayed from 190 to 80°F while the boiler decayed from 220 to 102°F. Looking at just the numbers, the group lost 92% of its heat while the boiler lost 78%. However, the bottom of the boiler should be close to group temperature, so if we average the boiler temperature to 91°F, the boiler lost 86%. The group temperature is via Eric's adapter, which has a differential from the flow chamber.

The measurements on the HX boiler are near the bottom center rear of the boiler close to the HX return. A different location would give different curves, but the overall results are the valid.

User avatar
another_jim
Team HB

#16: Post by another_jim »

The reason I'm happily semi-retired is that I used to buy the energy conservation rights from building owners who thought running their places 24/7 saved them the start up costs. Not surprisingly, this market dried up by the late 80s. I just wished more people like Ian owned 100K square foot plus office buildings now.
Jim Schulman

User avatar
cafeIKE

#17: Post by cafeIKE »

We were never talking 24/7.
We're talking about whether turning a Prosumer HX Espresso Machine off for a few hours saves energy.
If you can show how it does, please do.

boyscout

#18: Post by boyscout »

I've actually done the analysis, using a Kill-A-Watt meter, on my Rocket Giotto Professional.

Note that I have insulated the boiler on the Giotto with 1/2-inch glass insulation - it comes un-insulated. The insulation makes a very noticeable difference in reducing the heat radiated above the machine and the number of times per day that the heater kicks in.

I posted a synopsis of my findings at CoffeeGeek and then discarded the numbers, foolishly not thinking that I'd be able to join a fray with them somewhere else. But cafeike is correct, leaving my machine on from early morning to late evening used less electricity than turning it off and on four or more times per day.

I'm Irish... knowing that there's a good fight going about this I will probably re-do the tests and report here. But in the meantime I can't help but note that cafeIke was wrong about one thing: despite his careful presentation the "Chicago Democrats" (I laughed out loud!) are still preferring to prattle about "laws of thermodynamics" and other dismissive assertions that the world can't be any way other than the way they think it should be! Facts are most inconvenient to such an attitude, and more facts will come. <grin>

User avatar
JonR10

#19: Post by JonR10 »

cafeIKE wrote:We were never talking 24/7.
We're talking about whether turning a Prosumer HX Espresso Machine off for a few hours saves energy.
If you can show how it does, please do.
Sorry, but the premise strikes me as ridiculous.

This subject has previously been beaten to death. It is a trivial matter to find the break even point on almost any common "prosumer" machine using a $25 Kill-A-Watt meter (sadly, it is limited to 15A). On my previous machine the break-even point was around 3.5 hours, but your mileage will vary. The point is that (based only on machine power draw) there is an easily-defined break even point for shutting down and reheating and once that is known then each individual can weigh this along with other factors and make an informed decision.

If you wanted to use the most energy possible then a full warmup followed by a couple of hours downtime and another full heat up cycle would be a good strategy.

FWIW - There is nothing political about this, those comments are both irrelevant and inflammatory.
Jon Rosenthal
Houston, Texas

User avatar
sweaner
Supporter ♡

#20: Post by sweaner »

Ian, what about turning it on at 6am, off at 9am, then on again at 5pm, then off at 11pm? Can you graph this?
Scott
LMWDP #248