How the Federal Government Killed a Perfectly Good Washing Machine

I'm for the environment and all, but why are front-loading washing machines so dang expensive? Sam Kazman of The Wall Street Journal investigated and came up with the (usual) culprit: the government!

It might not have been the most stylish, but for decades the top-loading laundry machine was the most affordable and dependable. Now it's ruined—and Americans have politics to thank.

In 1996, top-loaders were pretty much the only type of washer around, and they were uniformly high quality. When Consumer Reports tested 18 models, 13 were "excellent" and five were "very good." By 2007, though, not one was excellent and seven out of 21 were "fair" or "poor." This month came the death knell: Consumer Reports simply dismissed all conventional top-loaders as "often mediocre or worse."

How's that for progress?

The culprit is the federal government's obsession with energy efficiency. Efficiency standards for washing machines aren't as well-known as those for light bulbs, which will effectively prohibit 100-watt incandescent bulbs next year. Nor are they the butt of jokes as low-flow toilets are. But in their quiet destruction of a highly affordable, perfectly satisfactory appliance, washer standards demonstrate the harmfulness of the ever-growing body of efficiency mandates.

Link


Honestly, I think consumers are at least as much at fault on this one. Not only are front loaders often high efficiency, they look cool and were considered a status symbol for several years after they came out. Manufacturers responded by building mid-range front loaders, and the combination of cool-factor, more approachable price, and efficiency rebates on taxes (which, I might add, includes several top-loaders, though people may not realize that) made them very popular, and actually not all *that* expensive by today's standards (lets just say inflation is partly a self-fulfilling prophecy). As a result they pushed the top loaders out of the market, and most of the manufacturers really are only putting out crap top loaders because they are so little of their sales.

People have never really pushed back on the fact that many front loaders are not as good as advertised, and frankly most people with average laundry don't even realize it. If there was more consumer awareness instead of buying what looks cool, we'd see a change back, but manufacturers are going to make and sell what people buy - and that's the cool jet engine washer that keeps the kids occupied almost as well as a TV.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Well this is a nice slanted hit piece, but one would think even such an ideological hack as Kazman could do the basic math that would show that over the life of the washer the reduced water and gas/electricity usage easily outweighs the higher initial cost.

but then I wouldn't hate the mean old government for helping to save billions of gallons of increasingly precious water.

See how his argument plays in the southwest and get back to me
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Yes, this is a pretty short-sighted opinion piece that likes to do a lot of "gut feeling" analysis that's pretty inaccurate.

As much as people have been ridiculing the "end of the incandescent lightbulb", the creation of the requirement spawned new incandescent bulbs that use 30% less energy to produce the same amount of light. There was very little incentive to invest in that technology before because it was not clear there would be a market. Sure, the initial bulbs will be more expensive, but the prices will drop as the economies of scale kick in.

The government does have a very important role in changing the parameters of business (in this case reducing the risk of investing new technology) in order to let the free market do its work.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I grew up with top-loading washing machines and when I bought my house it came with a front loading machine.

I.HATE.IT.

I have pets who tend to make messes on their bedding, and a puppy who sometimes vomits, pees, poops etc on his fleece crate pad, and I had to wash it four times on the longest cycle to get it clean!

It also stinks all the time so I'm forever running empty loads with cold water and bleach to get rid of the mildew smell. If I forget to take a load out within a few hours they reek like pooh and I have to wash them three more times to get the stink out.

I want my top-loading machines back! I'm pretty sure the energy savings and water conservation is negated by how many bloody times I have to keep washing stuff over and over.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I for one bought a top loading washer a bit more than a year ago and it's worked beautifully. Front loaders seem like a step backwards for a washing machine, it's counter productive to "tumble" the water than to let centripetal force do it's thing. There's also the cost, about $250 for what I got vs $500+ for basic front loaders. The only front loader I would ever get would be a dryer/washer combo but those are ungodly expensive.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
They probably also killed the Ultrasound washer I saw being developed 15 years ago. Procter and Gamble probably payed the guy off. No soap just water and maybe an added fragrance of your choice.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I've had top-loaders and front loaders, and I prefer front loaders. They use less water, power, seem to wash better and are gentler on clothes. I've had a top loader with a central agitator rip the sleeves off of shirts before. I have no issues with the machine going mouldy or not washing properly, and in a country which often has strict water restrictions, the front loader definitely has the advantage.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
At the end of the article we see that Mr. Kazman is general counsel of the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
Now look up the Competitive Enterprise Institute. They're basically against anything that is even remotely environmentally friendly. Its corporations masquerading as concerned taxpayers.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Consumer reports (responding to a related Tierney piece which quotes Kazman in the NY Times) explains:

http://blogs.consumerreports.org/home/2011/03/consumer-reports-to-the-new-york-times-washers-are-greener-and-better-.html

takeaway: "Consumer Reports has seen product performance improve or remain at high levels, while energy efficiency standards have become increasingly stringent over the years. Washing machine performance has actually improved while dishwashers and refrigerators performance has remained at high levels."
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
From personal experience, I prefer top-loaders unless the front-loader is extremely high-end (which I can't afford anyway). I own a top and have never had a problem with how it washes. My MIL had a front-loader, and during the time I lived with them there was a constant mildew smell (no matter how many times we ran it with bleach) emanating from the machine when the door was opened, and was sometimes visible when it got really bad.

As for lightbulbs, I'm one of those people who get terrible migraines around fluorescent lights, give me a good strong incandescent any day!
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
"but then I wouldn't hate the mean old government for helping to save billions of gallons of increasingly precious water."

So is that the same government that allows HOA's to enforce ridiculous mandatory watering rules. Water might be precious, but come on, we can't let the surrounding communities see our yards look less then bright green can we?
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
What the hack from WSJ has failed to mention, is the simple fact that a generation ago all of these appliances were made in the US (with union labor, of all things...) while today they are with relatively rare exception (a few US and EU manufacturers) made in China.

They've replaced metal gears with plastic (much cheaper) and are using motors that fall apart (I know, my company buys nearly a million fractional HP Chinese motors a year, many of them self-destruct almost immediately.)

The Government rules were written by industry experts, who tried to use the Green revolution as a means of increasing profits, not reducing energy use. There are many outstanding EU sourced machines that are durable, perform very well, and use far less energy and water. But they are expensive, and US consumers aren't that good anymore at distinguishing the difference between cost and value.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
i remember in the 70s my friends and i were soooo resentful about the govmt intrusion into the way cars were built...they imposed all these dopey environmental controls and cars became crap for 2 decades...of course in retrospect it was the best thing that ever happened to automobiles...like, damn you can actually see blue sky during the summers now versus the yellow haze that stretched from maine to florida...i'll take a few years of junk while manufacturers get their act together if it means the planet is more likely to support life for a while longer...
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
When I bought a house last September, the two main criteria I had for appliances were price and energy efficiency.

I wound up with a relatively cheap top-loader without an agitator, and it's the best washing machine I've ever used.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I'm really disappointed to see such a slanted, partisan, hacktastic article on Neatorama. This sort of BS really taints the site for me.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
How dare Neatorama links to liberal/conservative article that is obviously wrong because it's different from my point of view. Because it's unscientific left/right wing propaganda, it can't possibly be right/have any merit whatsoever.

Neatorama is obviously a liberal/conservative mouthpiece!
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
The washing machines at my apartment complex were recently switched from top loaders to front loaders.

In general, the new washer does an adequate job of cleaning, though probably not as good as the top loader it replaced. It does not do nearly as good a job of rinsing the detergent out of the clothes, however. It also has had problems washing flannel bedsheets, because they became wadded up and triggered the unbalanced load cutoff. I wound up having to wring the sheets out by hand, which was a huge pain.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
I would say maybe you're buying cheap, crappy front loaders. My front loaders work beautifully. This article does seem to have a bias.
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Alex, it's not whether or not I agree/disagree, it's this article has a clear agenda without making a well reasoned argument and I'm pretty sure you know that. It's not enlightening, informative, or neat. In fact it is corrosive to honest, well intentioned discussion. But keep defending it, it's good to know where the posters stand on things...
Abusive comment hidden. (Show it anyway.)
Login to comment.
Click here to access all of this post's 26 comments
Email This Post to a Friend
"How the Federal Government Killed a Perfectly Good Washing Machine"

Separate multiple emails with a comma. Limit 5.

 

Success! Your email has been sent!

close window
X

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using this website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

I agree
 
Learn More