Maytag

Seems highly unlikely that a home dishwasher nowadays would have a 3/4 HP motor.  Washing machines back in the day rarely had motors that large.

I contacted WP a couple years ago inquiring about the HP of their motors.  They told me they don't rate their motors much anymore.  After finding for myself that .18HP and .24HP I can see why! 

about SI units versus 19th century '14 inches to a foot, 2 pounds to a cup' silliness.

More accurately, though - the dishwasher which cleaned the absolute best of any I ever had was a tiny little counter-top dishwasher which had a motor rated at 85watts BUT used lots of water and heated it to 78C. Then splashed that 78C water around for 48 minutes after the detergent was dispensed.

It literally could 'scrub'.

Given the minuscule amounts of water in use today and the drip-a-drop action of most systems, motor size is truly irrelevant. They all need forever and a day to do what a BOL GE did better in 1990.

My dishwasher's pump is rated 60w.

And know it to be fact.

We will never agree on our definition of what constitutes good cleaning.

It's cool, though. I was one of the very few people in Munich to have air-conditioning. All my friends were appalled about it, just appalled. I was destroying the earth, etc. Until we'd hit one of those spells when it would be 40C at 98% humidity and barely cool off to 39C at night.

Then, they'd all come over and crash at my place....

This was, admittedly not quite as precise as it should have been.

So - here's try number two:

A modern low-energy, low-water dishwasher, with the very softest water and the very best detergent, running on the very most advanced soil-sensing algorithms and permitted to work for as long as necessary will clean as well as a late 1970's or early 1980's GE Potscrubber using 145F soft water, 11.8%phosphate detergent, enzymes, bleach and set to 'potscrubber' and 'heat water'.

There. That is a more accurate description of my recent experience with both technologies.

Just - The 1984 GE will do it in less than an hour. The Miele took over FOUR HOURS.

Do you seriously want to pretend that that Miele (which is the best of the current machines) will still be working in 2050? Seriously? 

Oh, and while we're at it - the GE will have washed FOUR loads in the time the Miele needed to do the same, admittedly great job, for ONE.

My first graduate work was in IT - I'm a very big advocate and user of the most cutting edge logic I can find. It's wonderful what we can do with little water and energy. Great! BUT - it's a trade off. The less water, the more time and better filtering (including the Whirlpool breakthrough in passive tub design). 

The less heat, the more time and the more need for better detergent design.

But that Twenty Eight Hundred is sitting right there under the counter whirling away right now - and it's 33 years old and still going strong.

That's the point.

As to the phosphates - actually, the GE does just as well as the Miele with the same top of the line phosphate free detergents.

I just use TSP because it isn't bad for the environment and it gets dishes clean.

I'm overjoyed that current dishwashers clean, once again. There was a period of about 15 years in there where new dishwashers and phosphate free detergents together equaled filthy dishes. Doesn't change the fact that they take forever to do the job. At least four times as long. And, they have tiny lifespans, measured in months not decades.

That's just plain unacceptable.

I remember reading the CR review which rated the GE Potscrubber Twenty-Eight Hundred HIGHER than the KitchenAid. Read it several weeks late, only one branch library carried it in Munich.

Was shocked.

Not as shocked as the reviewers were, though!

It's always just been a meme that GE built sh-t quality.

That Maytag Washers were built like a tank, but washed, so-so.

That KitchenAid dishwashers were the best, period - even though I couldn't tell you how many things I had to wash twice/thrice until I figured out how to cope with the pickier than one could ever believe if one hadn't done it loading patterns they demanded.

And so on.

And yet - that multi-orbital arm with a self-flushing filter that actually cleaned itself and that top spray arm (the 'useless' one) that never left yibblets....

Ack and gack all you like, they're easy to fix, they run forever despite being 'cheap' and they cleaned and clean to compete with everything on the market today.

The only other vintage dishwasher which deserves to be spoken of in the same breath are the Maytags of the 'load 'em however you feel like' era.

Indestructible and cleaned, cleaned, cleaned.

Most younger members around here only know GE from the Jack Welch rape and plunder, destroy, destroy, destroy days.

Not, that GE wasn't always profit-oriented.

Just, CR did not give the Twenty-Eight Hundred that superior rating over KitchenAid because they wanted to, they did not. Most clearly did not and said so, plainly.

We all have our stereotypes, our likes and dislikes. I HATE WCI Frigidaire with a boundless passion, to name but one.

Still, how well dishwashers clean, the amount of time they take to do so, the water and energy they need - these things are all easily documented. What comes then is purely personal choice.

Has had the opportunity to use a Twenty-Eight Hundred. We love ours, but they're aren't that many around, especially not in Europe.

It's all a matter of what one knows - I spent most of my adult life in Munich, so I'm as familiar with 'vintage' European as I am with American. My last Miele in Germany was a 2013 and it certainly was not built to the quality of my beautiful 1979  (which the movers dropped down the stairs, sigh).

So, yes - good German dishwashers clean quite well. But not better than a classic potscrubber I or III (I know, dahlinks, but it's like talking about Basketweaver 'I', if you don't add the III, everybody will think you mean those horrid "IIs".

Henrik, your viewpoint is too narrow.

A well known consumer magazine consistently rated the GE Potscrubber as a top rated machine for many years testing.  The GSD1200 held the position of "best consumer buy" for value, and effectiveness. 

The Twenty-Eight Hundred is so very well sound insulated that it is not noisy, it's quieter running that any of our KitchenAids have ever been.

We are, however, talking about a level of sound insulation you would otherwise only find in a top-notch sound studio which has to work while their street is being torn up with jack-hammers.

As to the water usage - for those too young to know what we're discussing, here's the normal cycle for most Potscrubbers over the last roughly 40 years (they're still made, if only as a BOL).

Pre-wash (up to 20 minutes heated in some models, especially Kenmore).

Pre-Wash (just a quick one, may have a running water purge in some).

Pre-Wash (short, may use less water than the first two in some models).

Wash (heated in all versions, may incorporate time delay/thermostatic control and or both)

Rinse (may have running water purge in some models)

Rinse (short, may use less water in some models)

Rinse (may be skipped, may use running water purge in some models, may use less water in some models).

Rinse with rinse-aid, heat, timer delay/thermostatic control in some models

Now, before those who only know the universal mechanical timer or the GSD 2800-3D say the above ain't true, please go try a 1200 with the multi-orbital arm (the one it supposedly didn't have) and get back to us.

GE has fiddled with the rinse cycles even more than with the pre-wash cycles through the years and the original timers were all over the place in how they ran. GE standardized replacement heaters at only about 500W for all potscrubbers and offered first two then one universal timer for all (with modification, it works, too).

One characteristic of all of them: Tons of water used. It's a big reason they clean so well and don't leave yibblets.

Second characteristic: That gigantic passive filter in the back of the tub on the MOL/TOLs for decades WORKED. When they replaced it with the ring-around-the-tower-of-power, it was a disaster. Gummed up constantly, was designed to work with phosphates and failed MISERABLY without them.

Noise: A lot of it is the gigantic fan in the shaded-pole motor which GE chose for the potscrubbers and only replaced with a capacitor start much later. They're interchangeable, but the discussion as to why they chose a shaded-pole for such a large motor is still ongoing.

It has a few advantages, not least: They are the most reliable and trouble-free motor built. Unlimited lifespan (many are still running perfectly after over 100 years, in service).

No capacitor, no complicated wiring.

As these things go, an exceptionally friendly motor to logic and other electronics. Given the cost and vulnerability of electronics in house-hold appliances back in the day (make that vulnerability, today, too), this motor was an outstanding choice.

Disadvantage: Because the starting torque is weak, weaker, weakest of all practical electric motor designs, they had to over-dimension it enormously to guarantee it would start under load.

Disadvantage: Produces lots of heat, partially because it's over-dimensioned, partially because it's inefficient, so a gigantic cooling fan is needed. Enormous.

All in all, though - what matters is the performance. Any Potscrubber with the multi-orbital arm will do a better job of washing dishes clean, all else being equal than any other home dishwasher. Add in the power-shower (which many consider useless, though I disagree) and that filter and you have no yibblets, a dishwasher which will clean your dishes sparkling clean even if your young helper puts the percolator basket into the machine without emptying the coffee grounds.

But, heh - we still hear how cheap and dreadful the GE Filter-Flo was and how wasteful the P7 was...some people just can't get past the harm done to the company in the 1990s by Welch. Understandable, but it's as if one were to take a WCI Frigidaire washer and then tar and feather the Unimatic based on the Franklin transmission in that hunk of plastic WCI called a 'Frigidaire'.

I know that our Twenty-Eight Hundred uses just over 13 gallons for the most thorough was cycle programmable.

That is indisputably a lot of water.

On the other hand, every study shows that people who hand wash or pre-rinse use far, far, far more than that.

So - you can use a vintage Maytag or GE Potscrubber and skip the pre-rinsing and pre-washing you had to do for a KitchenAid or Whirlpool (and which didn't help with the awful D&M) or you can pre-rinse/wash for those and end up using more water, even in the best dishwashers today, than those two used and still use.

Oh, and, yes - that filter basket over the sump will keep an aircraft carrier out of the pump, I know it will. Anything smaller, though.....

One can add a pump to any GE which ran the solenoid the entire time (some did) it was draining, and with the low-profile sump and SIEMENS motor, you've got a machine which actually can skip two pre-washes and still wash perfectly.

I'd not skip the rinses though. I've NEVER understood the KitchenAid 'one rinse' and it's done approach. None of ours ever were, we always had to second rinse.

But then - I absolutely refuse to pre-rinse, never mind wash the dishes. Ever. Nor will I use the luke-warm water which passes for 'hot' these days. What's the point of having a dishwasher if you pre-rinse?

Our GSD 2800D02 is from 1984, but then a little bit more every fill would add up to a lot at the end.

Yes, carryover can be a problem. There's no reason they couldn't have solved the problem way back then, after all - those seals which had to be kept from drying out were awful - the real reason the shaded-pole motors would jam was the seals, not the motors, themselves. I've seen SIEMENS motors locked up for the same reason in later years.

Still - I like lots of rinsing. It just doesn't seem possible to me that the minuscule amounts of water used by some machines to rinse can possibly we carrying all the residue away. In fact, the 'beer' test with real German beer, not American dog-piss shows it.

But, heck, had to install a new Amana in an apartment this morning. Old Estate had bit the dust (timer blew) and they were just barely OK machines at best so, the property manager has been replacing them when they blow out. Let's me fix the GE Potscrubbers, though. She knows her stuff.

Anyhow, the Amana has very good ratings for cleaning, despite being bottom of the barrel at $400. Got it on sale at The Homeless Despot for just under $300. Ran it twice while doing other stuff nearby, I noticed it's putting enormously more water through both arms then dishwashers I'd been putting in just a few years back. Also notice there was no energy star to be found on it. Maybe the manufacturers are learning? Finally.

Kicker: Like all modern dishwashers, the drain loops up over a few clips to prevent siphoning. Local code requires that we still have to pull the drain hose OVER the height of the garbage disposal knock-out, so I did. What silliness. Seems like a good way to overwork a pump.

I've only scanned this thread and intend to go back through and fully read, but...

"So - you can use a vintage Maytag or GE Potscrubber and skip the pre-rinsing and pre-washing you had to do for a KitchenAid or Whirlpool (and which didn't help with the awful D&M) or you can pre-rinse/wash for those and end up using more water, even in the best dishwashers today, than those two used and still use."

At no time, from the present going backwards, have I ever known of a Whirlpool or KitchenAid (Hobart or WP built) dishwasher needing pre-rinsing and pre-washing. They really didn't even require scraping. I remember many a time I'd open my aunt Robin's PowerClean to see cheese and tomato based sauces splattered all over the door and actual chunks of cooked ground beef and noodles in the bottom of the tank, and not a bit of it remained after a normal-no options cycle. And that was even before the Voyager design was out, so I'm sure people back then viewed the PowerClean as a "eco-monster hunk of plastic that pees on dishes with a cup of water".

And how can an older Maytag (I'm assuming JetClean Reverse-Rack era) or the GE, which both used ~12 gallons or more for typical cycles, use less water than the best dishwashers today when paired with pre-rinsing, when I myself will use not one drop of water to rinse a single dish that goes into my current dishwasher, and with the filthiest of loads, a Normal cycle will use between ~3-5 gallons and dishes emerge spotless without a trace left in the filter?

I love vintage appliances too and give my blessing to anyone that chooses to stick with older machines, because I have my own soft spot for them, but a lot of this thread seems to be discounting anything modern just on principal without even giving them a chance.

I have no problem admitting that I do NOT like modern dishwashers, not even the current MIELE - which are the best of the best.

They all just act as if the logic is being used to compensate for marginal engineering.

As to the endless pre-rinsing discussions - if we didn't scrape ALL the potato remains off the plates/bowls in any KA EXCEPT the 15 (which is truly a brilliant piece of engineering) (and a pain to load) then we'd have finally distributed potato starch over everything.

As I've said before, dishwashers suffered from three really bad things happening to them all at once:

Low energy

Low water

No phosphates

After 10-15 years of bad performance, the manufacturers delivered machines that cleaned well beginning about six/seven years ago.

Now - how many hours did those machines run before the pizza/cake were gone? And how many equally dirty loads would a 1980's Potscrubber have gotten clean in that time - 3? 4?

The part of the US in which we live is even less well populated than Mac-Pom at it's most beautiful emptiness.

So - entertaining friends (at least once a week, roughly six times a month) means never less than four full loads in the dishwasher. Sometimes five or, when the 1953 Westinghouse Roaster is involved, six.

Now, I can run the modern energy-saving, water-saving dishwasher (which does clean well ) for over two hours per load (not counting dry time) for over eight hours, meaning a dirty kitchen for two days. Or, I can bang the stuff into each 1980's Potscrubber or a Potscrubber and a KA 15 and be done with the whole mess and in bed at one in the morning, waking up to a clean kitchen the next morning when we get up at 6.00 (yes, I sleep in, joy of owning your own business).

Wir berichten, Sie entscheiden! You've got the info, now you choose.

Washman:  And don't get me started on $250 Wi-fi capable thermostats that can be managed with yet another "killer app" on one's dumbphone.  Like it is sooooooooooo important and necessary to manage  your AC or furnace setting at 2:30 in the afternoon while in the office or at the mall.........................please.

GE is still selling brand new potscrubbers, I just ordered seven at our local Homeless Despot for an apartment complex.

So, what on earth is the point?

We all acknowledge that modern dishwashers and modern detergents do a good job of cleaning.

We all acknowledge that, unless one pre-rinses and pre-scrubs (in which case they 'only' need sixty-seventy-five minutes) they need more than two and often three or four hours to clean.

Yes, they use less water and less energy. Unless, of course, one pre-rinses, in which case they use MORE than a potscrubber which doesn't need things to be pre-rinsed.

As for the TSP arguments, sorry, but chemistry isn't subject to personal opinion. It does not cause eutrophication and no amount of screaming about it will change that.

So - don't bother reading threads which you don't care for. Le Poof! Problem solved.

Most definitely Potscrubbers by any rational definition.

BOL or near BOL, but in every way Potscrubbers:

The tower of power is interchangeable with any non-orbital Potscrubber (and with minor effort with any)

Their sump, pump, 'soft-food disposer', drain system, filtration are identical and one-to-one replacements for virtually all BOL/MOL potscrubbers from the last 4 decades.

Their cutlery, lower rack and upper rack are interchangeable.

Their timer is interchangeable. The programs are identical to various BOL/MOL programs used since the late 1990's in Potscrubber III. Oh, and GE dropped the 'III' right quick, too.

Their heated water selection is identical to BOL/MOL systems used by GE for their Kenmore Potscrubber systems.

Their---Oh, come on - in what manner are they not Potscrubbers? A missing label? Because they say 'Hotpoint'?

If you are willing to use TSP and 145F water, they wash great. Especially with the newest detergents, even without TSP.

True, GE foolishly lowered the water consumption in a vain attempt to make a high-water system look 'efficient'.

Fortunately, though, they left more than enough water to work.

Now - do I wish for the multi-orbital arm? Yup. Do I wish for the old 900Watt element,Yup.

But, yes, you're quite right - I do regard them as donor-parts. Why not? With a bit of effort, one can turn a new potscrubber into a vintage one.

How can any one say that today's machines can't last 20 years or more? There hasn't been enough time to even make that argument. Come back in 2030 or so and then we'll talk about how long they lasted.

Also, not to beat a dead horse, but I'm pretty sure the current GE "Power Tower" models being sold as BOL wouldn't pass as true Potscrubbers. They don't have the passive filter assembly at the back, instead they have a round filter disc under the wash arm that looks to be a miniature crude version of what the WP PowerCleans and Point Voyagers used. The one I had in my apartment back 4-5 years ago had one of these. Everything had to be rinsed and it bothered me like crazy because there would be yiblets all over everything in the top rack, and because there was no upper spray arm, all the water pressure was going through the lower arm causing it to rotate too quickly, which seemed to hinder wash performance of stuck on foods when they *were* loaded in the machine.

The Nautilus we got in my family around when I was 15 or so was a Potscrubber, but these new BOL apartment grade machines are but ghosts of their former selves.

I don't really understand the point of the bashing that seems so prevalent on this site. You are absolutely free to use what machines you please and to avoid others like the plague as you see fit. I wouldn't touch a Samsung or LG manufactured appliance if I were paid to, but I'm not going to blatantly shut someone down if they get excellent performance or reliability from a machine they own. 

This notion that "today's dishwashers will use more than X gallons of water if they're really packed with heavy food soil" seems to me to be a pointless argument. Of course they will. They're designed that way. Can you imagine the outrage if a dishwasher was locked to it's minimum 2.7 gallon use regardless of whether the dishes are dirty or not? Actually, they were, at one time. Back 15-20 years ago, there were no sensors or algorithmic pressure tubes to decide whether a cycle could skip a prerinse or not. A Normal cycle would use X gallons, a Light cycle would use X-Y gallons, and a Heavy cycle would use X+Z gallons. The machine didn't care how dirty they were or if there was but a lone glass in the top rack. That's a waste. And that's precisely why machines are designed to be smarter with deciding water usage, and from my experience and that of many others, they've become very good at doing just that.

My Whirlpool 920 will use between 3 and 5 gallons on a typical cycle. That's with very little open space, if any, in the racks, and moderate food soils. Sometimes it surprises me by skipping straight to the main wash with loads that I would have expected it to go into full W-W-W-MW-P-R-R sequence. Yet every load comes out without a speck. Every now and then I'll find a stray piece of spinach or a noodle caught behind the silverware basket; no dishwasher is immune to that. How does that not classify as properly cleaned? There is no smell, no grit around the door seal, no yiblets on tops of glasses, the top of the tank has a mirror like finish, and the filter keeps perfectly clean save for a dot or two here or there that disappears by the next cycle. And because this machine's components are simpler and more efficient, there is less heat and vibration to cause wear and tear, meaning in theory that they should last a very long time. I'm sure combo52 could chime in, but since the release of Whirlpool's current platform in ~2010-2011(maybe even before that?) that is now being used in WP, KitchenAid, Kenmore, and Maytag dishwashers, there seems to be no major failure that has caused a widespread death of these machines. 

Yes, new machines -will- use more when needed, or when cycle/option selection forces them to. The WP's highest usage is listed as somewhere around 7.8 gallons or so. Why is there a complaint if this will produce excellent cleaning results and is still much lower than what old KA's and GE's would use on even their normal cycles, which could be around 12 gallons, and 15+ gallons for heavy cycles? Why does a machine HAVE TO guzzle water just for the hell of it?

I hate traditional top loaders.  My Lady Shredmore cured me of them.  If SQ offered a front loader with a supplemental heater, I'd buy one next time I need a front loader.  I see the supreme value for super hot water gradually heated.  I no longer have to soak for a while and in warm water to let heavy stains be dealt with and then drain and wash with hot water and then let the Shredemore obliterate my towels sheets and whites.  All using 75 to 100 gallons (with extra rinse) per load of laundry.  That kills my budget in conjunction with my sewer bill expense because of my water guzzling washer.   The above sequence takes as long, if not longer than my WP Duet heating water to 130 degrees from 115 to 120 and my garments are lasting a lot longer.  If I wash full loads a month in the winter, my water usage is very expensive.  Doing laundry with heavily soiled fabrics is far easier than it used to be.  And everything is CLEANER.

 If I have a group of people over for dinner, I kind of "sort" dish loads.  Prep and dinner dishes will go in the 1 hour wash cycle.  The dirtiest stuff gets dealt with while I'm asleep for 3 hours and I wake up to a clean load of dishes/casserole dishes.  Last Sunday my WP built Kenmore Elite, with self-cleaning filter, dealt with meat sauce stock pot, lasagna casserole, and brownie pan all without a hiccup in 2:15.  No food residue in bottom of tub nor on dishware.  And it was crammed even more than I thought I could get in there.  Even amazed me.  Auto wash with high-temp wash option.  At 2:15 ain't much different than my 99 minute GSD1200 Potscrubber cycle.   

That I am a big fan of the most advanced logic control.

It is, in fact the only way to make a dishwasher using little water and energy clean well.

So, yes, after a decade and one-half of awful detergents and horribly designed dishwashers, we now have good detergents and very short-lived but well-designed dishwashers which clean well using little water and energy.

In exchange for which they take forever. And a day.

I'll stick with vintage, thanks.

Now, as to the whole 'but this is only for 20 year old or newer'. Why yes, yes it is. It's from

1997

to today. 

Think about that, dahlinks - 20 years ago was already well past the vintage era and well into short-lived, logic controlled machines.

I fail to see why comparing machines is forbidden here when at least one is from the end of the 20th century or later.

You make very good points.

Yes, the GE dishwashers you listed under the link (I don't distinguish between Hotpoint and GE as they are the same thing) wash quite adequately.

The plastic cam for the soap door/rinse-aid is thinner and less well cast than on '80s units. The door seal is enormously better. The door liner is interchangeable with all Potscrubbers since the series began using this wonderful plastic design. The electronic units require a modification on the soap dispenser.

The sump is slightly more shallow and slightly more susceptible to damage.

The drain system doesn't drip as much.

The motor seal is better, the soft-food 'disposer' is less well designed.

All in all, this is the mature version of a very old design. One which, to the horror of all those who like to consider GE bad quality, lasts for thirty or more years without major repairs.

Well, I've seen some very worn grids on the newer design and never on the older, but, to be fair, yes, the current fine wire works enormously better than the knife which would bind on plastic  wrap and bread ties far more easily.

My concerns with these:

They're lacking insulation. It helps enormously to put an insulation blanket from a more expensive dishwasher on. I also would add waterproof insulation (painted on mastic?) to the inside of the door liner. I'd increase the insulation in the service panel, too - at which point this should be a very quiet unit.

The rinse-aid needs to be the very best - Lemishine works really well in these.

Friends who have them and who use 1 tablespoon of TSP in the detergent dispenser with a good detergent are extremely happy with the results - no pre-rinsing, dishes sparkling clean.

If you have really hot water at the sink, you can skip the hot-start. If you are doing back-to back loads (as I do when we entertain) you can stop the machine just before the end of the final rinse, empty it, reload it and then use that already quite warm water for the pre-wash.

I'd not trust the heated dry with plastics in the lower rack. One change - the current water inlet valves are now the 3/4" design everyone is using.

Not having a power-shower is a bummer, but the tip of the tower of power is specially designed to shoot water up through that tube in the upper rack to be dispersed by the molding in the top. It's not perfect, but gosh darn  it works well.

I suggested to my friends that they run a dry clorine tab every month or so, it seems to keep the tubes flowing to the filter.

All in all, if you can't go vintage (still the better choice) this is a good unit.

Oh - the modification so the float valve triggers the pump if too much water is in the unit was done with a standard micro-switch. It's an easy modification an one I'd do if your kitchen is above anything which might be ruined by an overflow. Not that they units have ever done that in my experience.

First - if you don't bother to read the posts in a thread, why should anyone bother to read your comments? It's a matter of simple courtesy.

Second - TSP does not contribute to eutrophication. This is long since settled science. Your refusal to accept it is immature.

Third - I am happy to buy new things which are well built. Unfortunately, Miele in North America is not a productive choice. All my dishwashers in Germany after the early 1970s were Miele.

Fourth - Water used by a dishwasher is easily reclaimed. Your arguments foot on an assumption which does not hold in my community.

Fifth - Unless I've missed something, you don't entertain eight or more guests at least six times a month, you don't own your own business, you aren't responsible for keeping your home clean and tidy. I am. The difference between clean and done in one hour without pre-rinsing/washing and clean and done in two and one half, three or four is enormous to me. Get back to me when you have an adult life with adult responsibilities.

Six - Do, by all means laugh. You're far too serious and enormously too uneinsichtig for such a young man. 

TSP could cause eutrophication, our local waste water treatment facility has had the capacity to remove it for many decades now.

This sort of emotion driven argumentation is not rational, nor is it productive.

And I'll set aside your snide assumption I don't know the difference between a phosphate and the element P.

Reminds me of the stupid fights my students would get into because the English word for Si is so similar to the synthetic substance silicone.

But, heh - since you asked, easily accessible reserves of P are running low. The phosphates recovered by waste water treatment plants are regarded as valuable sources of P by industry and agriculture.

Henrik, I spent 30 years teaching arrogant German undergraduate students. It's refreshing to see that the assumption that all 'Americans' are uneducated and Некультурный remains to this day. I'm attaching a link to a simple discussion of the matter, suitable for a 10 year old child. Already, today, the sale of recovered phosphorus compounds pay for the recovery methods in less time than anticipated only three years ago.

Perhaps you should refresh your knowledge to reflect technology in 2017, not 1974.

This is what happens when out-dated concepts remain the basis for highly-charged emotional arguments. What sane firm would want to get involved in 'evil phosphates' when the pitch-fork carrying 'environmentalists' are right at their door.

That very much makes sense.

I live in an area in which P is taken out of the waste water and sold at a profit. I therefore have no problem using it (wouldn't anyway, as TSP is inaccessible to plants).

When I lived in a part of Germany without such treatment, I stayed away from it - and in those days non-phosphate detergents were awful.

Part of the reason for my strong position(s) are experiences over the years. I can recall several conversations in the 1990s - here I was, non-smoker, vegetarian, didn't drive anywhere if I could avoid it (some years, I didn't even drive 100 Kilometers). And I would be criticized as someone destroying the Umwelt because I used a clothes dryer! A dishwasher! Had a deep freeze! Used (horror of horrors!!!) an electric blanket.

That last is a German specialty, right up there with suffering regular Kreislaufkollapse.....

So, when someone tells me I shouldn't use TSP when I know darn good and well it's not harming the environment, I tend to fight back a bit more strongly than I would, were someone tell me, for instance, I shouldn't use glass to reheat leftovers, but should use plastic containers.

Hmmmm....we had that fight here a while back, too.