At Dyson we engineer machines that work properly, and to help our customers understand how they work, we are transparent about all of the claims we make.
Unfortunately, some of our competitors do not act the same way. They often use misleading claims, which can be confusing.
Below is an explanation of how we calculate our claims. If you would like more information, please contact us at 0800 345 7788.
At Dyson we use the following figures in our calculations:
Number of paper towels per use = 2
This is based on our own internal research. We know that people can often take more than 2 paper towels to dry hands but we believe in estimating costs as cautiously as possible.
Paper towel cost = £0.01
This is based on our own internal research. We have taken paper towels costs from the five most popular sources and calculated the average cost across all territories.
Bathroom usage per day = 200
This is based on our own internal research into the usage of an average sized bathroom. For smaller bathrooms with low footfall we use a figure of 100, and for high footfall areas such as service stations or airport bathrooms we use a figure of 400.
Number of days the bathroom is in use = 365 days
We assume a whole year.
Electricity price per kWh = £0.10
This is based on our own internal research. We have taken electricity costs from 5 different sources and calculated the average cost across all territories.
Wattage = as stated by the manufacturer
Standby power = as stated by the manufacturer or as tested by Dyson.
Dry time is based on the National Sanitation Foundation’s Protocol P335 (NSF P335).
Annual carbon impact is calculated based on 200 uses per day, 365 days per year.
Watch out: most hand dryer manufacturers do not follow NSF P335, so may quote incorrect dry times. NSF is an independent hygiene specialist. If you want an accurate dry time, insist on the NSF P335 test results.
The annual running cost of paper towels is estimated by =
The average number of paper towels used to dry hands x the average cost of the paper towels x the assumed number of uses per day x an assumed number of days the bathroom is in use.
There are 2 steps to this calculation.
Step 1: Running costs when in use (without standby)
Dry time of hand dryer (in hours) x rated wattage of hand dryer (kW) x the assumed number of uses per day x the assumed number of days the bathroom is in use x electricity price per kWh.
Step 2: Running costs when in use (with standby)
Result of step 1 +
((Electricity price per kWh * number of hours in a year) – (estimated uses per day (100/200/400) * dry time of hand dryer (in hours))) * Standby power (kW)
= Annual running cost
In collaboration with Carbon Trust, Dyson has produced a method to measure the environmental impact of electrical appliances and paper towels. The carbon calculations were produced using GaBi software provided by PE International, based on product use over 5 years and using the US as a representative country of use.
At Dyson we engineer machines that work properly, and to help our customers understand how they work, we are transparent about all of the claims we make. Below is an explanation of how we calculate our Dyson Lighting claims.
At Dyson we make fair comparisons. We have therefore chosen to compare ourselves against competitors that are directly comparative to Dyson’s suspended lighting which are:
- Bi-directional light (sending light upwards and downwards)
- Suspended from the ceiling
- Powered by LEDs
- Less than 1.5m in length
At Dyson, we carried out internal research to assess whether Cu-Beam Duo was the only lighting product within the competitor selection to offer fully flexible up and down distribution of light. By this, we mean “the ability to divert the full luminaire illumination either up, down or anywhere in between without sacrificing light output”. Cu-Beam Duo allows the user to adjust the split of upward and downward light as they desire.
Dyson internally analysed leading global products from other manufacturers and found that none offered the same potential as Cu-Beam Duo in terms of offering a full flexible solution.
Some luminaires enable the adjustment of up and down illumination but only in pre-set steps such as 50/50, 40/60 and 30/70. They do not offer the option of selecting a value in between such as 42% of light upwards and 58% of light downwards. Some other luminaires claim to offer full flexibility but on further investigation, this is done through dimming. Instead of re-diverting the light in the desired direction, the light output in the opposite direction is reduced to provide a similar effect, sacrificing overall light output.
Lighting software DIAlux was used to compare the performance of Cu-Beam Duo relative to leading competitor luminaires. Data for Cu-Beam Duo is based on external testing distilled into IES files for use with DIALux. IES files for competitor luminaires was obtained directly from the manufacturer website.
Two scenarios were created in DIALux to form the basis of the testing against which Cu-Beam Duo was compared against competitor luminaires:
- Boardroom scenario: An 8m x 4m space designed to accommodate 10 people
- Open plan office scenario: A 30m x 20m space selected to suitably accommodate 100 people
No windows were included in the calculations to avoid outside influences and therefore control variables. In instances where the competitor variant formed part of a product range, the best performing variant in each range was selected for comparison.
In the boardroom scenario, a single Cu-Beam Duo was found to successfully illuminate the task area to recommended levels as stated by EN-12464-1. Most leading global luminaires were found to require more than one fixture to reach these recommended levels.
Open plan office scenario
In the open plan office scenario designed to accommodate 100 people, Cu-Beam Duo was found to successfully illuminate the task areas to recommended levels as stated by EN-12464-1 with 25 fixtures. Most leading global luminaires were found to require more fixtures to reach these levels.