First of all thanks for all the replies. Here is the specific claim from Bullfrog.
Watts used at 60 degrees F, Water at 101 degrees F, and cost at $.10 per kilowatt:
Bullfrog - A7L 164 watts
Hot Springs - Envoy 175 watts
Caldera - Geneva 229 watts
Sundance - Cameo 252 watts
Jacuzzi - J465 261 watts.
While this doesn't give dollar results expected from each spa, it does give a good relative comparison between the spas - IF THE DATA IS VALID.
It does state a monthly operation cost of $11.81. If this was at 60 degrees ambient and only 101 degrees spa temp, the potential savings could be significant in comparison to rival brands and lower ambient temps; possibly as much as $14 to $15 per month. This could be close to $200 per year.
This data is in Bullfrog's sales literature and states "figures published by the California Energy Commission." I would think some rival manufacturer would challenge these claims if they were not legitimate, possibly in court. Any thoughts, anyone???
The test used by Cal Poly consists of bringing
the spa to 102°F in a 60°F room and
holding it there for four hours. The test
starts at the end of the first heat cycle and
ends at the end of the last heat cycle after
72 hours has elapsed. At the end of the test
the total energy use is divided by the total
number of hours. The result, in watts, can
be no more than 5 x V2/3 (where V is the
volume of the spa in gallons).
