Water conservation in Hamilton

[bornagainbiking]

I just purchased two (2) new low flow dual flush toilets. I was looking up rebates for energy conservation and being green under my home audit. Quite proud, I got a very good rating and with the two toilets maybe better now.
I get $65 back per toilet back from Ontario, however I noted that cities like Toronto, Guelph and several others also match this.
So I was thinking, what about Hamilton?
We pay a charge for the amount of water we use and the same amount again for a sewage fee. So we get charged both ways, in and out. A older 13 lt tank replaced by 4/6 lt. has a huge reduction and double the savings. (less used and less flushed).

Then I remember recently that the city is complaining that due to the industrial recession and energy initatives Hamilton is not using as much water now and the city is not getting the same hydro revenue and there is a finacial budget shortfall.
What is more important being green or wasting energy to make money for the city.
Sounds like a contradiction. It is A or B, and I vote for conservation.
We have flooding in the lower city from inadequate drainage. We need to increase city incentives.
Did you know that in Toronto for awhile they were helping to pay for homeowners to disconnect their home downspouts and divert the water to their lawns and away from street storm drains.

[bigguy1231]

Originally Posted by bornagainbiking

I just purchased two (2) new low flow dual flush toilets. I was looking up rebates for energy conservation and being green under my home audit. Quite proud, I got a very good rating and with the two toilets maybe better now.
I get $65 back per toilet back from Ontario, however I noted that cities like Toronto, Guelph and several others also match this.
So I was thinking, what about Hamilton?
We pay a charge for the amount of water we use and the same amount again for a sewage fee. So we get charged both ways, in and out. A older 13 lt tank replaced by 4/6 lt. has a huge reduction and double the savings. (less used and less flushed).

Then I remember recently that the city is complaining that due to the industrial recession and energy initatives Hamilton is not using as much water now and the city is not getting the same hydro revenue and there is a finacial budget shortfall.
What is more important being green or wasting energy to make money for the city.
Sounds like a contradiction. It is A or B, and I vote for conservation.
We have flooding in the lower city from inadequate drainage. We need to increase city incentives.
Did you know that in Toronto for awhile they were helping to pay for homeowners to disconnect their home downspouts and divert the water to their lawns and away from street storm drains.

You may use less water, but that means less flushing power.

I have had low flush toilets for 20 years, bought them in the States before they were available here and I have had nothing but trouble with them. Hopefully the newer ones you bought work better than the ones I have. The ones I have constantly plug up and take multiple flushes to sometimes work properly, so much for the water savings. Let us know if you have any problems. I would like to replace mine but only if the newer ones work better. There's no sense spending money for more of the same.

[matt602]

Low flow toilets remind me of an episode of King of the Hill.

Yes, they are useless. Don't eat too much fibre.

[bigguy1231]

Originally Posted by matt602

Low flow toilets remind me of an episode of King of the Hill.

Yes, they are useless. Don't eat too much fibre.

They are not meant for man sized dumps, thats for sure.

[Northern Stroll]

Originally Posted by bornagainbiking

I just purchased two (2) new low flow dual flush toilets. I was looking up rebates for energy conservation and being green under my home audit. Quite proud, I got a very good rating and with the two toilets maybe better now.
I get $65 back per toilet back from Ontario, however I noted that cities like Toronto, Guelph and several others also match this.
So I was thinking, what about Hamilton?
We pay a charge for the amount of water we use and the same amount again for a sewage fee. So we get charged both ways, in and out. A older 13 lt tank replaced by 4/6 lt. has a huge reduction and double the savings. (less used and less flushed).

Then I remember recently that the city is complaining that due to the industrial recession and energy initatives Hamilton is not using as much water now and the city is not getting the same hydro revenue and there is a finacial budget shortfall.
What is more important being green or wasting energy to make money for the city.
Sounds like a contradiction. It is A or B, and I vote for conservation.
We have flooding in the lower city from inadequate drainage. We need to increase city incentives.
Did you know that in Toronto for awhile they were helping to pay for homeowners to disconnect their home downspouts and divert the water to their lawns and away from street storm drains.

I actually asked the city of Hamilton why they weren't doing the same thing about the downspouts... I got a reply of "Toronto has more money then Hamilton"
Oh, and having to pay residents because they are getting flooded doesn't cost money?

[mattgrande]

I also just bought two new, low-flow toilets. How did you get these rebates?

[bornagainbiking]

talk to the guy that does your audit.

[emge]

You can get low-flow toilets with two flush levers/buttons - one is a half-flush (for liquid) and the other is a full-flush (for solid) -- that helps take care of the problem.

The vast majority of current low-flow toilets work well and most people I know have them. I've even put in the cheapest Home Depot type in my parents' bathroom when we were renoing and it works fine... even after the wrath of a large dinner. If you want a step up from there American Standard's a pretty reliable brand and most of their low-flow models work well and won't (ahem) crap out.

[bornagainbiking]

Well, I think my old tank was a 20 lt (1980ish), So on a liquid flush that is over a 75% reduction and slight under the same for a solid flush.
The only problem I can see is you have to cut back on the wads of toilet paper.
So I paid $119 each at costco and I should get $65 back each. I was about $120 every two months for water (in and out). So it should pay itself off fairly quckly.
Plus cut back on my consumption and waste.
Bomb away

[Anders Knudsen]

another shitty monday morning...

[coalminecanary]

My dual flush on the main floor started out great but it is slow now. Upon investigation, the waste pipe does not have the correct slope. I expect everything will be fine after I fix it. With the old 18L flush, the slope was not a big deal because it was like a waterfall with each flush.

The dual flush on my second floor is just fine, it's been running nicely for a couple of years now.

If you search, you can find a report of almost every toilet, including it's solid waste removal capability. I would try to find a toilet on the list before committing to buy. Price does not always reflect performance with these things:

Here is an example:
http://www.a4we.org/uploadedFiles/Re...10-20-2009.pdf

Or search google in a specific way:
http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=...s+filetype:pdf

You can also buy a rain barrel from me (I build them as a hobby)
http://www.twistedcistern.ca/

[emge]

wow, 18L seems HUGE... most of the older tanks I've seen are around 13.

[coalminecanary]

old, big, yellow, late 60's - our water supply was unlimited back then! tank was designed for "style" (if you can call is that) over function haha

[bornagainbiking]

http://www.thespec.com/opinion/edito...h-this-picture