GlennLog

Turning technology from mumbo-jumbo into rich tasty gumbo

May 21, 2006

Low Flow Brings Big Savings?

I knew that low-flow showerheads could save water, but I'm a little flabbergasted looking at my energy bill. It looks like a switch from a not-very-vibrant older showerhead that never produced the kind of pressure we liked to a new Oxygenics SkinCare model saved us nearly $20 per month in water/outflow or about 40 gallons a day over last year. The showerhead cost about $30 and was easy to self-install; it included Teflon tape. It's also got a very intense spray.

The water bill shows 14 months of history in the two-month billing blocks with numeric comparisons for year over year adjusted for the length of the two periods, which can vary. At first, I thought we'd only saved a few dollars, as we pay $2.53 per cubic foot. By saving about two cubic feet a month, that's only $5. But we pay $6.76 for outbound water, which is where shower water goes -- and that's another $13.50.

This doesn't include the natural gas that heats the water. This showerhead runs 2.5 gallons per minute (gpm), while older ones apparently run 3 to 4 gpm or higher. We don't take excessively long showers, so I'm guessing we had a fairly high differential!

These are winter water rates, so there's more savings to be gained $ for $ over the summer.

We may be running laundry slightly less frequently versus last year, too, and a load of laundry can be up to 40 gallons of water per load. That's one of the next purchases for us. Front-loading, high-speed machines are the way to go for less wear on clothes and much less water use. If we're running about eight loads a week and can cut water use by--ye gods--160 gallons a week or 640 gallons a month, which is nearly a cubic foot or $9 at current rates. Over the course of the life of the product, that might be over $1,000 in savings, plus the state and federal government are offering some subsidies for that kind of appliance. There's also, of course, electricity use; modern units that are Energy Star qualified consume less than half as much as "standard" washer/dryers and we certainly have a standard set.

We wash primarily in cold since I read that the enzymes in modern detergents are optimized for cold water, which should be obvious, and that saves on heating the water, too.

Posted by Glennf at May 21, 2006 1:16 PM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://db.isbn.nu/mt3/mt-tb.pl/3723