Greaaaat Question, Kait,
First response: "muffling," a.k.a. "ashing," has not received much energy efficiency attention to my knowledge.
Second response: Why not? This is a neglected design challenge that we should put to the manufacturers AND distributors (hello Thermo and VWR???). The outside surfaces are hot, and thus wasting functional heat, and adding cooling load to a room. Can this be designed for efficiency, safety, and counter space convenience, and also designed to cool quickly at the end of a process?
Generally these furnaces are used infrequently, so not focused on. On the other hand, one room with several furnaces could disrupt the cooling of a whole building. The engineers solve this with giant canopies to sweep giant volumes of conditioned air out of the building, sometimes 24/7 when there is no heat load.
In a search on line, I found this old school description, "The fuel is burned in the chamber to generate heat, which is then transferred to the workpiece to be heated. The chamber is lined with refractory bricks to prevent heat loss." Hmmmm...Refractory bricks are not great insulators.
Follow the strategy of "put it in a box" where ventilation demands are intense. An enclosed layer of insulation would conserve energy and heat load to the room. Could that enclosure be vented to exhaust with a damper or fan to accelerate cooling at the end of the run? What are the design challenges to these ideas?
Perhaps it's time to have a contest,
"Muffling Challenge,"
Or
"Conserve Your Ash Off" :-)
The benchmark test might be for a 0.5 CF furnace to maintain 550 C for 1 hr.
Accessory enclosures could be allowed. Other constraints?
Maybe This could be part of getting an ACT label???
See if you can find a pro active vendor for now, but I'm afraid we may need to change the industry ( again) to get something sensible.
I look forward to other insights.