Dyson's ridiculously misleading ads

While we're on the topic of emissions and contribution to global climate change:

In a recent TV commercial, high-end vacuum manufacturer Dyson brags about its eco-friendly solid-state motors by asserting that "as the carbon brushes wear down (on old-fashioned motors), they emit carbon particles, which is bad for the environment." They've repeated this claim on their website (link below).

With their motors, on the other hand, " no carbon brushes means no carbon emissions".

I'll admit that most home appliances (washers, dryers, toasters, blenders, ovens) are fundamentally the same machines they were 50 years ago, and I applaud any manufacturer working to update the underlying technology and improve the machines. However, there's a problem with their ads. The carbon they're discussing is graphite, the same stuff you'll find in a pencil, a bottle of lock lubricant, or in carbon fiber body panels. It's a stable solid form of carbon (like diamond), not a gas that will drift up into the atmosphere and contribute to the greenhouse effect. Using Dyson's logic, we should all switch to pens, because we all know that "as the tips of pencils wear down, they emit carbon particles, which is bad for the environment."

I don't know whether there's a disconnect between the engineering and marketing departments, or whether Dyson is knowingly making misleading claims. Either way, their advertising does not fill me with confidence in the quality of their product.

More questionable statements:

--they claim that their impellers spin at 600 MPH. Last time I checked, spin rate is measured in RPM and not MPH -- the impeller isn't traveling anywhere. Perhaps they're measuring the distance traveled by a molecule in the outermost edge of the impeller? If so, then a molecule halfway between the axle and the edge will be traveling at 300 MPH, and the middle of the axle will be traveling at 0 mph. Why not double the diameter of the impeller and keep spinning it at the same RPM? Then they could (just as misleadingly) advertise impellers that spin at 1200 MPH.

--they assert that traditional motors have 2D (2-dimensional) impellers (which, of course, could be made of solid gold as cheaply as any other material, because we all know that 2-dimensional objects have no volume). In their pictures of old vs new motors, the impeller on the old motor very clearly has a length, a width, AND a height, for a total of 3 dimensions. :) Yes, I understand that they're trying to describe the vanes on the impeller, but the language they're using has room for improvement.

I believe that Dyson products feature numerous innovations, but why not describe them in terms of practical effect? The lack of brushes makes the motors more reliable. The impeller is probably more efficient. The solid-state design has additional benefits, so describe them!




Dyson's silly science