Dear President Trump: Please Make America Flush Clean Again

NightHawkeye said:

“People are flushing toilets 10 times, 15 times as opposed to once,” the president said, adding that “they end up using more water.”

Click to expand...

....if anyone (including Donald) is flushing more than twice, they may want to examine their diet.

wing2000 said:

....if anyone (including Donald) is flushing more than twice, they may want to examine their diet.

Click to expand...

People should examine their diets anyway.

Water saver toilets have so little standing water in them that it can take several flushes to remove the 'residue' that often sticks to the sides of the bowl. Of course a 'first flush' at the 'moment of contact' will usually prevent this. A second flush is then needed to complete the 'paperwork'. So in any case two flushes are prudent.

I always tell new tenants to hold the handle down until the tank is fully emptied if they want a stronger flush.

The greatest advantage of the water saver toilets is that they rarely overflow, and are quite easy to unclog due to the design of the channel.

Still being studied is the effect of all water saving devices on the efficiency of the drainline systems of municipal waste systems, which can be 'starved' for lack of sufficient water volume.

Here, at a sewage treatment plant, sewage influent is at an all-time low. Regulations are definitely having an impact.

At home, however, I've removed the flow restrictors on anything I can. I got tired of waiting for the bathroom sink to dribble on my hands, and I don't like standing in the shower for great lengths of time, waiting for the shampoo to wash out of my hair. I'm in and out, and done.

Rand Paul's been whining about this for ages. Guess he was the last person to talk to Trump before this meeting.

"leaving consumers with high-cost, mercury-filled florescent bulbs as the only option."

If consumers had paid attention ten years ago when bigbox stores and energy companies were giving them away for free... they'd still have some of those free light bulbs, because they last forever.

The toilet complaint was valid 20 years ago, but the latest 1.5 flush units are very good. Seldom is a double-flush required. This is one thing I'll disagree with Trump on, another being his support of ethanol, which is nothing more than agricultural welfare.

I agree that the faucet flow restricters are usually a pain in the neck. LEDs sound like the perfect light bulb solution, but they are not good for the eyes, long-term. There is a fluorescent available that approximates natural light.

paul1149 said:

The toilet complaint was valid 20 years ago, but the latest 1.5 flush units are very good. Seldom is a double-flush required.

Click to expand...

Yes, I recall the early toilet models had issues that have since been resolved.

OldWiseGuy said:

People should examine their diets anyway.

Water saver toilets have so little standing water in them that it can take several flushes to remove the 'residue' that often sticks to the sides of the bowl. Of course a 'first flush' at the 'moment of contact' will usually prevent this. A second flush is then needed to complete the 'paperwork'. So in any case two flushes are prudent.

I always tell new tenants to hold the handle down until the tank is fully emptied if they want a stronger flush.

The greatest advantage of the water saver toilets is that they rarely overflow, and are quite easy to unclog due to the design of the channel.

Still being studied is the effect of all water saving devices on the efficiency of the drainline systems of municipal waste systems, which can be 'starved' for lack of sufficient water volume.

Click to expand...

Where are these toilets? I’ve never encountered one.

wing2000 said:

....if anyone (including Donald) is flushing more than twice, they may want to examine their diet.

Click to expand...

No, how often you drink is a bigger factor than what you drink. Many factors go into how often you pee in one day, including medications patients can't live without.

NightHawkeye said:

Even worse, ethanol significantly drops mileage in newer fuel efficient engines. Ethanol only contains about two-thirds the energy content of petroleum based gasoline and engines generally can't take full advantage of both ethanol and petroleum based gasoline simultaneously. The result is that I see mileage in my cars drop about 10% with a 10% ethanol blend. Because of this I see no real benefit to ethanol. It is, in fact, as you say, agricultural welfare.

Click to expand...

Yes. My purpose wasn't to get into the details of ethanol, but it is worse than mere corporate welfare. It is bad for engines, more fuel has to be transported = higher transportation costs per unit of energy, more stops at the gas pump = wasted fuel and time; more fuel being burned due to lower energy per volume = more air pollution. And increasing the demand for corn raises the price of virtually all foods, since corn and soy are in almost everything, including meats. It's a terrible policy. Rand Paul had it right - he went to Iowa during the primaries and right there advocated weaning the farmers off of ethanol over a period of a few years. There would be plenty of demand for their product without creating a harmful artificial demand for biofuel.

wing2000 said:

Click to expand...

I was unaware they have .8 gpf toilets. My comments about the effectiveness of the newer units applied only to 1.5 gpf; I've no experience with the .8 units.

Anyone who wants the real solution to the toilet problem should check out the book humanure.

paul1149 said:

I was unaware they have .8 gpf toilets. My comments about the effectiveness of the newer units applied only to 1.5 gpf; I've no experience with the .8 units.

Anyone who wants the real solution to the toilet problem should check out the book humanure.

Click to expand...

I don't have any experience with the 1.5 gpf either. However, i have seen the toilets with the #1 & #2 flush buttons....and in public buildings here in the Southwest, no flush urinals are become more common.

NightHawkeye said:

From the "A little less regulation, please", files: Dear President Trump: Please Make America Flush Clean Again

On Friday, while meeting with small business owners in the White House about “common-sense” regulatory reform, President Donald Trump told reporters that his administration is considering relaxing federal water-usage limits for toilets, sinks, and showers. “People are flushing toilets 10 times, 15 times as opposed to once,” the president said, adding that “they end up using more water.”
...
[W]hile most Americans support conservation, they see no sense in regulations so stringent that washers don’t wash, toilets don’t flush, and dishwashers just wash, and wash, and wash, and wash. And average, everyday folks outside the beltway talk about these things with much the same hyperbole that Trump used on Friday.
...
While it is difficult to imagine that the federal administrative state will succumb to consumer complaints and demands, four months ago we saw just that happen when the Energy Department nixed rules adopted under the Obama administration poised to go into effect on January 1, 2020. Those regulations would have mandated stringent rules for incandescent and halogen light bulbs, as well as all pear-shaped lightbulbs, leaving consumers with high-cost, mercury-filled florescent bulbs as the only option.​

It should be noted that the author is incorrect about fluorescent bulbs being the only choice; LED bulbs are significantly more efficient than fluorescent, provide better quality light than either fluorescent or incandescent and have been reasonably priced for the past few years, under a dollar a bulb at Walmart for the common 60-watt replacement bulb. Replacing a 60-watt incandescent with a 9-watt LED bulb typically pays for itself in just a few months if the bulb is in use for several hours a day.

Click to expand...

I think the president’s toilet might work better if he’d take the Constitution out of it.

nonaeroterraqueous said:

Here, at a sewage treatment plant, sewage influent is at an all-time low. Regulations are definitely having an impact.

At home, however, I've removed the flow restrictors on anything I can. I got tired of waiting for the bathroom sink to dribble on my hands, and I don't like standing in the shower for great lengths of time, waiting for the shampoo to wash out of my hair. I'm in and out, and done.

Click to expand...

I agree. My visiting brother-in-law asked me what I have against aerators (he was getting splashed). I told him life is too short to wait all day for the sink to fill up.

On a somewhat related note. I bought a small electric/hydraulic wood splitter that requires pressing two switches to operate, one with each hand, ostensibly a safety feature. However as an experienced firewood splitter I knew this was actually dangerous so I modified it so that I have one hand free to protect from wood coming off the splitter and possibly hitting me. I think that many 'safety' regulations are made by people who never use the equipment they are protecting us from.

Most notably is the guard and kickback pawls on a table saw. Most are in a corner somewhere collecting dust. They do however serve to 'protect' the manufacturer from lawsuits in case of an injury.

Sparagmos said:

Where are these toilets? I’ve never encountered one.

Click to expand...

Check the truck stop bathrooms.

wing2000 said:

I don't have any experience with the 1.5 gpf either. However, i have seen the toilets with the #1 & #2 flush buttons....and in public buildings here in the Southwest, no flush urinals are become more common.

Click to expand...

Last I heard water was a self-renewing resource.

OldWiseGuy said:

Last I heard water was a self-renewing resource.

Click to expand...

Have you ever compared water bills when you use more water one month than another?