• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

California: Replace your water-guzzling toilet

mark handler

SAWHORSE
Joined
Oct 25, 2009
Messages
11,678
Location
So. CA
California: Replace your water-guzzling toilet

By Dave Cogdill May 5, 2015

http://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/openforum/article/Help-save-California-Replace-your-water-guzzling-6244352.php

As Californians facing this historic drought together, we know water conservation is critical. We want to know what else we can do to save water. Fortunately, the governor’s executive order has given us a good starting point by rejecting extreme policy solutions and, instead, implementing commonsense and equitable water-use reduction actions, including a time-limited rebate program to help homeowners replace older, water-guzzling appliances with newer, more efficient models. It is this type of simple, but effective, solution that we as citizens and homeowners should embrace.

Policymakers should look at expanding and fully funding retrofit programs by using existing voter-approved water bonds to help homeowners make their appliances and fixtures as water efficient as possible. Doing so would create jobs, put taxpayer approved bond money to good use, and save billions of gallons of water annually.

As an industry that contributes more than $38.6 billion to California’s economy and supports more than 209,000 jobs, California builders have long recognized the importance of building energy-and-water efficient new homes and communities. It is time to apply the lessons learned and progress made on water efficiency in the new construction industry to older housing stock.

In 2011, California’s first-in-the-nation mandatory green building code went into effect, which the California Building Industry Association proudly supported. Today, a new single-family, three-bedroom home with four occupants uses about 46,000 gallons of water per year

If single-family homes built prior to 2011 updated showerheads, faucets and toilets to meet the new code, we could save up to 233 billion gallons of water annually. This is equivalent to 6.5 percent of current reservoir capacity in California.

Fortunately, swapping out old showerheads, faucets and toilets for low-flow models is one of the most inexpensive of home water-use reductions. On average, the cost to replace a showerhead will run $50, a faucet $50, and a toilet, $250.

Gov. Jerry Brown has taken a concrete first step in instituting a short-term appliance rebate program debuting this summer through the California Energy Commission, the state Department of Water Resources and the State Water Resources Control Board that will provide monetary incentives to replace inefficient water-consuming devices. The California Building Industry Association applauds such a first step, but would also strongly support an expanded, long-term program that uses funds available from previous voter-approved water bonds to make sure every home in the state — at a minimum — has low-flow shower heads and toilets.

The governor has balanced the need for water conservation with doing no further harm to the economy. The building industry will follow his lead and stands as a proud partner to help policymakers find a path to make all homes in California more effective at conserving water.
 
I need to get back into the plumbing contracting business if people would actually pay $1200 for a replacement toilet.

Some of the new ultra low water use fixtures are junk; some are ok, and some work well. Problem is to find out performance before purchase.
 
Toilet replacement is the stupidest and demonstrably least effective means of water conservation.

Another small percentage of a small percentage of a small percentage.

Idiocy abounds.

Brent.
 
MASSDRIVER said:
Toilet replacement is the stupidest and demonstrably least effective means of water conservation. Another small percentage of a small percentage of a small percentage.

Idiocy abounds.

Brent.
Several years ago I replaced my toilets with Toto dual flush since I have to pee multiple times per day and night due to bladder damage from cancer radiation, they are terrible. Building a new home recently I told the customer not to choose Totos because of the experience of both myself and several customers, he went ahead and chose Totos against my advice but not the dual flush models, his do work fine.
 
As previously posted, Be careful when replacing shower heads

Scald and Thermal Shock Hazards

Most standard flow showerheads, sold before 1992, were designed for water flow rates of 3 to 7 gallons per minute. The shower valve or tub/shower valve was designed to accommodate that water flow. The low flow or water saver showerhead significantly reduces the shower valve’s water flow and thus cannot avoid sudden and extreme water temperature changes. These temperature changes can result in scalding or thermal shock.

Thermal shock is a traumatic physical reaction due to the rapid water temperature increase or decrease. It can cause injury due to the person’s impulsive reaction leads to falls or even over compensating when adjusting the water temperature. The most common instance of thermal shock is when a toilet is flushed while someone is showering. This scenario results in a sudden change to hot water. A sudden change to cold water can happen when a clothes or dish washer in the same building abruptly turns on the hot water. Auto compensating type shower valves were designed to avoid scalding due to water pressure and/or temperature changes.

Installing a low flow showerhead with a shower valve that is not auto compensating is extremely dangerous. It is important to match the minimum flow rate of the shower valve with the maximum flow rate of the showerhead. Modern building codes forbid attempting to resolve this issue by lowering the temperature of the hot water heater. The reason that this will not compensate is because the water heater thermostat is at the bottom of the tank where cold water enters. The hot water rises and flows out of the top of the water heater and can be 30 to 40 degrees hotter than the temperature that the water heater is set at.

The American Society of Sanitary Engineering has published a white paper that discusses these risks and how to avoid them.

Scald Hazards Associated with Low Flow Showerheads.
 
It's worse than just the scalding issue, about a year ago we had hearings relevant to dropping our current 1.5 GPM shower heads to 1 GPM, several health professionals testified against the move stating that they were already seeing increased bacterial infections from the 1.5 GPM heads. ABC did a documentary on the problem:

\ said:
All of us are bathed in bacteria every day, but not all of it gets into our bodies. But the showerhead makes it especially easy for all that potentially harmful bacteria to have a direct route into your respiratory system."As the water is coming out, it's an aerosol," said Pace.

To reduce bacteria exposure, experts recommend running very hot water through your pipes for a few minutes and soaking your shower head regularly in a bacteria-killing agent and occasionally replacing your showerhead. While Yang says this bacteria is all around us and can very difficult to avoid, he also cautions people not to panic.

Area's case was extreme. She had to have part of her lung removed. Many patients will have to continue with antibiotics. For Area, it will likely be for the rest of life. ¹
If people are being advised to run hot water through their shower heads for a few minutes to clear out the bacteria that is probably going to use more water than our old 6 GPM heads that actually worked.

¹ http://abc7.com/archive/8674755/
 
I found that article about the dangers of the even lower flow proposal:

\ said:
The California Energy Commission will make a crucial mistake if it ignores a potential threat to the health and safety of Californians in favor of a proposal from investor-owned utilities.With good intentions to conserve water and energy, the commission is considering a new, unprecedented regulation that would lower the flow rate for residential bathroom faucets to a maximum of 1 gallon per minute at a pressure of 80 pounds per square inch, and a minimum of one-half gallon per minute at 20 psi.

This proposed regulation reads like plumbing gobbledygook, but it’s not. It’s potentially dangerous to public health and would undermine sanitation and water conservation.

Marc Edwards, a professor of civil engineering at Virginia Tech, says that a growing body of evidence shows that low flow rates can increase the likelihood of pathogens growing in plumbing systems. “These concerns are not trivial,” he wrote to the commission. “The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has recently acknowledged that (such pathogens) are now the primary source of waterborne disease in the United States.”

Research has demonstrated that low flow is linked to an increased volume of stagnant water in pipes leading to the tap. This could provide ideal growth temperatures for waterborne pathogens, including ones that cause potentially fatal illnesses.

Further research has shown that low flows may not provide enough volume or turbulence to properly flush faucets, increasing sediment buildup and resulting in clogged bathroom pipes and higher plumbing expenses. In addition, low flows will increase the wait time for hot water.

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/op-ed/soapbox/article4020588.html#storylink=cpy
 
I never paid any attention to Carly Fiorina but what she says about California's man-made drought makes sense.

\ said:
While California is clearly experiencing another drought, the extreme water shortages are an ongoing and man-made human tragedy — one that has been brought on by overzealous liberal environmentalists who continue to devalue the lives and livelihoods of California residents in pursuit of their own agenda. It comes down to this: Which do we think is more important, families or fish?

With different policies over the last 20 years, all of this could have been avoided. Droughts are nothing new in California — the state has suffered from them for centuries. The difference now is that government policies are making it much worse. Despite the awareness around this issue, liberals continue to develop and promote policies which allow much of California’s rainfall to wash out to sea.

While they have watched this water wash out to sea, liberals have simultaneously prevented the construction of a single new reservoir or a single new water conveyance system over decades. This has happened during a period in which California’s population has doubled. It is clear that improved or additional infrastructure would allow for greater conservation before droughts — especially as the population continues to explode — but California has not completed a major water infrastructure project in 50 years.

Some on the left want to blame global warming and climate change. Even if we could all agree that it has played a role in this drought, what all the scientists also tell us is that a single state, or single nation can make no difference at all. If we want to accept the science, we have to read the fine print. California can have the most onerous regulatory regime in the world, which it does, and it won’t make a bit of difference in combating climate change. When it comes to climate change, regulation isn’t the answer — innovation is.

Unfortunately, this is the classic case of liberals being willing to sacrifice other peoples’ lives and livelihoods at the altar of their ideology. It is a tragedy that there is agricultural land in California — the most productive agricultural land in the world — that has been destroyed.

Liberals love to tell us how much they care. What they never mention is the crushed potential of those whose livelihoods their policies have destroyed.¹
Building departments are the foot soldiers in this insane "onerous regulatory regime".

¹ http://time.com/3774881/carly-fiorina-california-drought-environmentalists/
 
Top