In the Name of the King, Review This Meaningless Number!

The government-mandated EnergyGuide from my new dishwasher:

A useless bit of trivia courtesy the FTC

Note the assumptions on the bottom:

  • Estimated costs based on four loads a week. Hey, we eat 3 meals a day here, cook them, and sometimes bake with them. What kind of family does four loads a week of dishes, really? Some fluffy yuppie couple in the city with a standard-sized restaurant dishwasher?
  • Estimated costs are based on 2007 energy costs. Remember those halcyon days? Back before the depression?
  • Estimated costs based on natural gas? Well and good for you city folk, but we’re in the country here. We pay whatever David’s boss tells him to charge us when he fills up our Liquid Propane tank.
  • The standard for “standard” sized washer is not given in actual, you know, cubic feet nor anything.

This number is meaningless, but thanks to the government, IT MUST BE PRESENTED so I can better make up my mind which color suits my decor better and which one looks like its moving and grabbing parts are made of the least cheap plastic.

I wish I could blame this on a Democrat, but I know that the ruling party in Washington is the Entrenched Bureaucrat Party.

(Thanks for the link, Tam.)

Buy My Books!
Buy John Donnelly's Gold Buy The Courtship of Barbara Holt Buy Coffee House Memories

1 thought on “In the Name of the King, Review This Meaningless Number!

  1. Like all such government labeling, it’s cunningly designed so that you can’t actually check it for yourself.

    I don’t own a dishwasher, so I can’t quote any usage numbers back at you, but I do actually get the EPA gas-mileage figures for my car. (The original ones, not the 2008 fudge-factored variants.)

Comments are closed.