Quote:
Originally Posted by 100_Percent_Juice
I have to stick with dean on this. I just installed a swamp cooler last week and it got the house down to 67 when it was 95 outside. And the extra humidity has been nice, I don't really miss waking up with a dry nose and throat.
|
Super. It doesn't change the fact that a swampcooler cannot do the same thing as an air conditioner. Just because a swampcooler is more efficient under ideal ambient conditions (95F, low humidity is pretty ideal for evaporative cooling) doesn't make the swampcooler more efficient in general.
If your target conditions are unachievable, then your efficiency is 0. An A/C can work outside the conditions of a swampcooler, and therefore comparing the two requires a massive asterisk next to the comparison. This "80% more efficient" claim is bunk unless you specify "under ideal swampcooler conditions with a target temp within the reach of the swamp cooler". Show me that 80% cost savings when it's 95F outside and 22F inside... oh wait evaporative coolers can't be used for refrigeration.
I refer back to the diesel truck vs moped analogy. Just because both things are "vehicles" doesn't make a comparison of their mileage useful. You might as well compare one dude with a shovel vs. a crane operated excavator and say that the one dude is the "more efficient" mining tool because it only requires a single operator compared to the crane's crew of 7.