Drawer Fridge Saves Energy, Protects Food
by Lloyd Alter, Toronto on 09. 4.07
We keep saying "Small fridges make good cities" and keep looking for the perfect small fridge. When we wrote about the Norcool drawer fridge, we bemoaned the fact that it had open bottoms and all of the cold air would fall out of it. Commenter Fridgegirl informs us that there are other drawer fridge designs that specifically address this issue.
The FX series from Randell is designed for commercial installations but hits all of the issues. The drawer itself is insulated, and specifically designed to hold the cold. It is designed for safety first: "Whether operating as a refrigerator or freezer, this new technology provides individual units with 100% cooling within each insulated insert. Temperatures remain consistent and energy is conserved no matter how many times the unit is opened and closed. Since cold remains in the insulated insert, food remains refrigerated and safe from dangerous bacteria and cross contamination."
"Traditional refrigeration systems all suffer from the same traditional problems. Open and close them again and again, and food is subject to re-freezing and crystallization, premature thawing, cross-contamination, even bacteria. All because the cold air isn’t kept where it belongs—with the food."
And, normally the air has to be re-cooled every time you open the fridge. We note again that this unit is designed for commercial use, and at 500 watts for three cubic feet it is not as energy efficient as the Norcool, which was rated at 105 watts for six cubic feet. However we look forward to somebody applying the principles of the Randell for a residential unit. That would be cool. ::Rendell FX
A consumer version would be great!
Is the fridge in the photo the FX Series? It more closely resembles the graphic for the 'traditional' drawer fridge than the intended graphic.
Whoops!
Smaller can often be better, and it's true that one drawer unit may draw less power than most freestanding refrigerators. But is that really better in this case?
The fact is that these drawers are typically spectacularly inefficient when measured on a running cost per cubic foot basis. They're also quite small inside (4 cubic feet is typical). If your family can live in 3 or 4 cubic feet of refrigerated space, maybe you'll come out ahead. Maybe. A recent Consumer Reports article on refrigerator drawers pegged them as using around $35-$40 worth of electricity per year (using CR's assumed rates). The better freestanding refrigerators from US manufacturers with four times the space typically run about $50-$55 per year in power costs. Much more efficient models are available.
The problem with the drawers is that most people will find themselves needing more than one set (I've seen houses with three). Or perhaps they'll live in one and then shop more to compensate. It's not clear to me that the extra travel would be green, either.
A smaller freestanding refrigerator (15 cu ft or less) would be a better match for most than the monstrous walls that show up in modern kitchens. But these drawers, as currently produced, have too many compromises - especially from an efficiency standpoint - to make sense for most.
Finally, I'm not following this "rated at" comment at the bottom of the article? That appears to be just the maximum power draw of the appliance. That has absolutely no connection whatsoever to the typical energy usage of a refrigerator. You pay for energy, not instantaneous power draw.
Like an ice box, but a hundred years later.
If you dig on the manufacturer's web site, you can find that one 3 cu ft drawer uses 1.22 kWh/day, or 445 kWh/year. You can get a 18.2 cu ft. regular top-freezer fridge from Sears for $500 that uses less (407 kWh/year).
What we need is engineering focusing on the bottom line--energy consumption--rather than on features that sound like they will help but may not in practice.
As a followup to my earlier comment on the efficiency of these drawers, let's run the energy usage numbers...
The Randall FX-1 uses, according to the company's spec sheets, 1.22 kWh/day in refrigerator mode and 1.99 kWh/day in freezer mode. That's 445 kWh/yr and 726 kWh/yr respectively.
The Whirlpool ET1FTE refrigerator/freezer, the top rated top freezer refrigerator at ConsumerReports "Green Choices" page (http://www.greenerchoices.org/ratings.cfm?product=fridge) is rated to use 442 kWh/yr. That's pretty typical for good refrigerators in this size class. That class is 21 cubic feet. This refrigerator provides twice the freezer and nearly 4 times the refrigerator space and still uses less energy than the Randall FX-1 running in its most efficient mode (refrigerate only).
Maybe you don't need all that space. Smaller conventional refrigerators (if you manage to find one) typically use even less energy. The thing is that all of these refrigerators are boxy for a reason. It's the most energy efficient configuration for a refrigerator using current technology.
This is not to say that drawers like the Randall FX-1 don't have a place. I'd be happy to see one under the counter when I walk in and order a custom made sandwich, where the food materials need to be close at hand and still kept cold. However, in their current incarnations they're totally inappropriate for residential use.
If you look on the manufacturer's web site and find the pdf datasheet, it says 1.22 kWh/day, which is a little more than a basic $500 18.2 cu ft. energy-star fridge from Sears. There's a lot more to making an efficient fridge than just how it opens.
If you want an efficient small fridge, try the Sun Frost R4. 0.1 kWh per day (at 70 F). Quite expensive, but achieves what this drawer thing only gestures at, with a normal front-opening door.
The manufacturer's pdf datasheet does list the power consumption: 1.22 kW/day. That's a little worse than a basic 18.2 cu ft. energy star fridge from sears ($500).
For a real small, low-energy fridge, try the sun-frost 4 cu foot model. Less than one tenth the energy use of this thing. Check the bottom line, not just the over-hyped features.
To elaborate on the power consumption issue (not sure why my earlier followup post on this never appeared), the Randell FX-1 uses 445 KWh/yr in refrigerator mode. It uses an astonishing 726 kWh/yr in freezer mode.
The Whirlpool ET1FTEXS, a fairly conventional midsize refrigerator/freezer, uses 442 kWh/yr. That energy usage is pretty typical of refrigerators in its size class. For less energy than the FX-1 you get twice the usable freezer space and nearly four times the refrigerator space. Maybe you'll never use that space. I, personally, like to freeze locally picked produce rather than shipping it in from Chile, so I do use it. If smaller works, there are much more efficient small standalone units like the one Charlie pointed out.
These drawers, as currently engineered, only seem to make sense in food service applications and in cutting edge at all costs designer kitchens.