Boots & Sabers

The blogging will continue until morale improves...

Owen

Everything but tech support.
}

0715, 17 Jul 21

Low Flow Shower Regulation Is Back

Ugh. The federal government insists on regulating the smallest things in our lives.

Now, with a new president in office, the Energy Department is going back to a standard adopted in 2013, saying it provides plenty of water for a good soak and a thorough clean.

 

The rule change will have little practical effect, since nearly all commercially made showerheads comply with the 2013 rule — the pet peeve of the former president notwithstanding.

 

The Energy Department said the action clarifies what’s been happening in the marketplace. Showers that provide the extra supply of water desired by Trump are not easily found, officials said.

 

Since 1992, federal law has dictated that new showerheads should not pour more than 2.5 gallons (9.5 liters) of water per minute. As newer shower fixtures came out with multiple nozzles, the Obama administration defined the showerhead restrictions to apply to what comes out in total. So if there are four nozzles, no more than 2.5 gallons total should come out among all four.

}

0715, 17 July 2021

75 Comments

  1. Jason

    It’s simple to pop that little restriction plate out. Fuck liberals

  2. Mar

    I bet Queen Nancy and Senile Joe have the bigger and GPM shower heads.
    Though, with Senile Joe, he might have a walk in tub you see on TV, along with a lifeguard, a floation device and little duckies to play with.

  3. steveegg

    Why travel to France, or Cuba, or North Korea, when you can be forced to smell like them.

  4. Mar

    Now, Steve, you can just take longer shower.
    Liberals assume that you will take a shorter shower, but no, us conservatives will take a shower as long as we want
    Of course, Senile Joe doesn’t mention the building boom in places like Las Vegas, where there is a building boom, along with Arizona.

  5. Le Roi du Nord

    For those of you unaware, those low flow devices save you money, both on the cost of water, and the treatment of same at your municipal STP. Savings are for operations, maintenance, and unnecessary expansions. Ditto for those with private systems.

    It sure is ironic that those “liberals” are saving you conservatives money.

    BTW : we have low flow showers and toilets in our home. Never had any problems with getting clean, nor flushing. Apparently those are conservative problems.

  6. Mar

    Darn, should have finished with this:
    Vegas and Arizona are undergoing building booms, with new houses and apartments going up rapidly.
    The people moving in will be using water.
    The major water source is the Colorado River and lakes connected to it, and both are losing water due to the draught and increased demand for water.
    What Senile Joe did was meaningless. Just fluff.
    If they are serious about saving water, ban all the new housing connected with the Colorado River and it’s lakes.

  7. Mar

    Le Roi, so what.
    It shouldn’t be the role of the government to tell us how much water to use when showering or taking a bath or taking a dump.
    Again, this is a communist/socialist belief.
    You commie.

  8. Le Roi du Nord

    But you “conservatives “ ( now that is truly ironic when talking about diminishing water resources) will want the government to solve your water issues.

    And you suggested “ban all new housing”. Some significant cog dis going on in your noggin.

  9. dad29

    diminishing water resources

    Worldwide, or just around the Colorado River? Got stats on that diminishment?

    As to your claim that reduced shower-flow provides for a reduction in water plant or sewer plant: show us the stats on that. Growth in housing units or industrial use are the ONLY two significant water-use factors.

  10. Le Roi du Nord

    “Vegas and Arizona are undergoing building booms, with new houses and apartments going up rapidly.
    The people moving in will be using water.
    The major water source is the Colorado River and lakes connected to it, and both are losing water due to the draught and increased demand for water.”

    Do the math, dud. Hint: 1 gallon is less that 3 gallons.

    Or ask any municipal water/sewer utility manager.

  11. dad29

    No, LeeeeeeeeeeeeeeRoy. You like to run away when pushed on your lies. I’m not letting that happen.

    So you say that ONLY Colorado River basin has a “diminishment”? And you further imply that said “diminishment” is due to building, which is EXACTLY what I said?

    Good.

    Now show us your homework on why–exactly–3 gallon showers require more and more water works investment than do one-gallon showers. While we all know that 3>1, you have not demonstrated that water/sewer plants increased in equipment due ONLY to 3-gallon showers.

    And you can’t.

  12. Le Roi du Nord

    Sorry dud, but you will never get smarter if others do your work for you. If you prefer to remain ignorant, that is your church. I prefer a path of lifelong learning.

    If the whole 3>1 concept baffles you, seek out a math tutor at your local tech college.

  13. Le Roi du Nord

    And take a look at water levels on Colorado River reservoirs where much of the SW get their water. Argue that point with mar and USGS.

  14. Le Roi du Nord

    Church should be “choice”. My profuse apologies.

  15. Mar

    And and maybe Senile Joe and company feel a little guilty about the illegals in the US.
    Since Senile Joe has come into office, over, a million illegal have come into the US, mostmyin the Southwestern part of the US.
    So, each illegal uses 5 gallons a day to bathe, cook, drink, pee and poop, that’s 5 million gallons a day, or about 7.6 Olympic sized swimming pools a day. In a year, that’s 2,765 swimming pools.
    That won’t even cover the new shower order.

  16. Le Roi du Nord

    Wow mar, you did some math. Now figure out how many gallons in the 28,134,000 acre/feet in Lake Mead. Your 7.6 Olympic pools isn’t even a drop in a very, very large bucket.

    BTW: the surface elevation of Lake Mead dropped 132’ on the last 20 years.

  17. Mar

    Actually, Comrade Le Roi, I drive by Lake Mead regularly and know how far it has dropped over the years. Rocked that were not exposed are now exposed. Some boat launchers do not exist anymore.
    And of course, the 7.6 pools are for 1 day, dumbass. And I was being being very conservative on my numbers. If you include all illegals in Arizona, Nevada, California, Utah, Colorado, that number is much higher.
    But thanks for being our local neighborhood troll, Comrade.
    Come up with a better argument next time, Comrade.

  18. Mar

    I guess, Comrade Le Roi, Owen’s ban on trolls doesn’t apply to you.
    But like Paul has said, you are our punching bag. Gets hit all the time and never dies.
    But I guess, if Owen allows buffon’s like you, who lie, lie about people who post here, disrespect the people who post here, who just here to troll, adds nothing to the conversation, well, that’s his call.
    But, I guess we’ll wait until the next Blood moon for you to post anything that has a semblance of intelligence.
    But hey, keep on disrespecting this blog and being the troll you are, Comrade.

  19. Le Roi du Nord

    Here is a fun fact for you mar: at the average discharge (July 19), from Lake Mead it would take 47.1 seconds to fill your swimming pools. Enjoy.

  20. Mar

    And your evidence?

  21. Le Roi du Nord

    Your calculated volume, discharge rate from Lake Mead in CFS (from USGS). math learned in middle school. Try it yourself.

  22. Mar

    So, you got nothing, Comrade.
    And, as usual, you miss the point I was making, Comrade. The governor’s of the states in the Southwest are complaining about running out of water, in mostly blue states, especially California, they are begging the illegals to come to their state.
    But we, mostly California, don’t have the infrastructure like water and electricity to handle extra people.

  23. Le Roi du Nord

    If you are running out of water, why do places like Vegas and Phoenix keep expanding, and you alleged “conservatives “ resist conservation measures like low flow appliances, climate change legislation, or limits on population growth??

    Whining about government regulations rather than actually doing something doesn’t make the problem go away. It just makes you whiners.

    The point I made was that the water usage in your scenario is insignificant compared to the big picture water issues in the SW. That is why I suggested you do the math yourself.

  24. Jason

    >The point I made was that the water usage in your scenario is insignificant compared to the big picture water issues in the SW.

    Low flow showerheads are also insignificant, but you can’t understand that, can you Liberal Roy?

  25. Le Roi du Nord

    Not when used by everyone, j. Remember the 1<3 concept ?

  26. Jason

    >Not when used by everyone, j. Remember the 1<3 concept ?

    Well you haven't shown any proof or facts – just opinions. See how that works?

  27. Le Roi du Nord

    1<3 is a fact. I’m sure that is puzzling to you, but it is a fact nonetheless. It is never to late to learn something new, but I might might exception for you.

  28. Tuerqas

    Le Roi: “For those of you unaware, those low flow devices save you money, both on the cost of water, and the treatment of same at your municipal STP. Savings are for operations, maintenance, and unnecessary expansions. Ditto for those with private systems.”

    Oops, caught lying again there, bud. I could take 12 gallon showers and it would not cost me a dime more. See I, like many conservatives, do not live in the city and do not pay for city water. You may or may not have noticed during elections that Republicans (let’s pretend they are conservative) win virtually all the rural and small town areas that have their own individual wells and septic systems. Being a liberal, I can understand if you did not lie, but merely spoke in ignorance, never having heard of a well or septic mound. Never watched a Lassie episode in your life, eh?

  29. Merlin

    Jason’s suggestion has always worked for me. Toss those plastic restrictors right into the trash.

  30. Le Roi du Nord

    T:

    But you still pay to run the pump, heat the water, and get your septic/holding tank pumped. Unless you have a hand pump/windmill, and/or illegally discharge your wastewater, you are paying more for that 12 gallon shower. It is pretty simple to figure that out.

    We, too, live in a rural area and have both private water and septic, have done so since 1980.

  31. Mar

    “get your septic/holding tank pumped.”
    Not from shower water.
    Unless you are wiping poop off your ass as you shower.

  32. dad29

    I’d suggest that if LeeeeeeeeeeeeeeRoy wants to save water, he should shower with a friend.

    But I doubt if he HAS any friends.

  33. Mar

    Umm, Dad, don’t forget the Pervert judge who watches babies being raped.
    He’s a big buddy of Le Roi and since his judge buddy is in jail, begging for a plea deal, I think he might be eligible for conjugal visits and Le Roi brings a babie for a threesome.

  34. Tuerqas

    Really Le Roi? If one takes a 5 minute shower that pumps out 12 or 16 gallons, it is the same amount of energy and the water is free. So you are now moving the entire savings into the amount of energy to heat the water? Yeah, big savings there for sure. But I save a lot more simply by buying an efficient water heater. A lot more money than if I use less water per shower. Here is your original argument:

    “For those of you unaware, those low flow devices save you money, both on the cost of water, and the treatment of same at your municipal STP. Savings are for operations, maintenance, and unnecessary expansions. Ditto for those with private systems.”

    Your condescending garble of silliness spoke of water and water treatment savings and that is what I responded to. You say ‘ditto for private systems’ and that was a lie or ignorance. It really is pretty simple, not for you perhaps, but it is.

    And that brings us back to liberal math. Typical liberal governance: Spend $50 million in tax dollars to force businesses to spend $50 million to comply with new regulations all to save liberal city dwellers $10 million and conservatives $500 (while costing all consumers the $50 million in spent tax money).

  35. Le Roi du Nord

    mar:

    I don’t know about AZ, or wherever it is you reside, but here in WI shower water discharge (gray water) is required to go into a holding or septic tank. Were you curious you could look up the requirements on your own.

    T:

    It still costs money to pump, heat, and treat that water. And you had to drive/drill a well, install a pump, install and pump whatever treatment system you have. Remind me never to hire you as a financial advisor.

  36. Mar

    Comrade Le Roi, you have no idea how a septic tank work, do just shut the hell up.
    Stop pretending to be smart you uneducated No Nothing.

  37. Le Roi du Nord

    Why would you say that mar? You are clueless regarding my knowledge of on-site systems. Or did you just have an overwhelming urge to make up more lies about me?

  38. Mar

    Yes, I am say you know shit about septic tanks. They are not holding tanks, moron that hold sludge and water.
    You really are a No Nothing.

  39. Jason

    Leroy thinks that Septic tanks hold all the water a house consumes, and then all that water has to be pumped out. What a moron!

  40. Le Roi du Nord

    mar:

    You just proved that you are clueless regarding on-site systems. This is hilarious!!

    Do know the difference between a septic tank/drain field, and a holding tank?

  41. Le Roi du Nord

    You guys are clueless, violating DSPS codes, or both. An amazing display of ignorance.

  42. Mar

    More stupidity from Comrade Le Roi.
    Just shut up because Everytime you post something, the closer you get to be declared mentally incompetent, though, that should have happened years ago.

  43. Le Roi du Nord

    Come on mar, tell us all the difference between a septic tank, and a holding tan, and how each is used and permitted in WI. A smart guy like you should have no trouble doing that. Or will you just continue making stuff up, and spewing names?

  44. Mar

    What’s a holding tan?
    And every name I call you is 100% accurate, Comrade Le Roi.

  45. Le Roi du Nord

    You are correct only on my misspelling of tan(k). Everything else you claim is incorrect. My apologies for the spelling error.

    Are you trying to say that a septic tank doesn’t hold water and sludge? Or that you don’t know much about them?

  46. Mar

    Let’s see: Lying Le Roi, you have been caught lying many times, besides being wrong.
    Pervert Boy Le Roi: You support the pervert judge who watches babies being raped.
    Troll Boy: You enjoy trolling here.
    Comrade Le Roi: Your support communists and your view in some subjects.
    Any other names I have missed?

  47. Mar

    I’ve always said the septic tank holds sludge but it doesn’t hold water permanently, it is dispersed out of the tank.
    From Ridex: “The septic tank holds wastewater from the home until solid debris settles at the bottom of the tank (the sludge layer) and lighter waste, such as oil, rises to the top to form the scum layer. Between the two layers lies clarified liquid, which flows into an outlet pipe and is gradually dissipated through a drain field. Bacteria in the septic tank naturally break down organic waste matter and slow the accumulation of the sludge layer.”
    So, again, the water from the shower will flow out of thank and back into the ground.
    Wrong again, Le Roi.

  48. Le Roi du Nord

    “Not from shower water”. Your quote.

    And as I said, here in WI shower water is treated the same as black water: it goes in the septic tank or the holding tank. Unless you choose the illegal route.

    I never said that septic tanks hold all the water that is directed to them. You made that assumption. That is the role of a holding tank. But when you have your septic tank pumped, (every 3 years per code in WI), the waste is still fluid, hence, it still contains water.

  49. Jason

    You said…

    >Ditto for those with private systems.”

    No, not true.

    You also said…

    >and pump whatever treatment system you have.

    No, using more water in a shower does NOT change a properly sized and installed “water treatment system”.

    and you said this…

    >violating DSPS codes

    Also stupid and not true.

    Finally, you backtracked hard here..

    >I never said that septic tanks hold all the water that is directed to them. You made that assumption. That is the role of a holding tank. But when you have your septic tank pumped, (every 3 years per code in WI), the waste is still fluid, hence, it still contains water.

    Now, that you’ve back tracked after being shown to be completely wrong and ignorant… tell us how a low-flow shower head changes how often a septic tank must be pumped… thereby increasing costs. This is the premise of your argument. Everything else is just a banal attempt by you to distract and back track – as always.

  50. Le Roi du Nord

    Well kids, I wouldn’t hire any of you for designing or installing an on-site system (POWTS), nor as a financial advisor, and certainly not in any situation where truth and facts matter. Enjoy the rest of your day.

  51. Mar

    Lying Le Roi says:Well kids, I wouldn’t hire any of you for designing or installing an on-site system (POWTS), nor as a financial advisor, and certainly not in any situation where truth and facts matter. Enjoy the rest of your day.”
    That’s his way of saying I was wrong, I am a dumbass and I am a troll.
    Thank you for clarifying this for us Comrade Le Roi.

  52. Le Roi du Nord

    Well, you didn’t dispute it.

    Congratulations on coming to grips with your shortcomings.

  53. Mar

    Dispute what? That you’re a dumbass? That you are wrong.
    So, dispute what?

  54. Tuerqas

    T:

    It still costs money to pump, heat, and treat that water. And you had to drive/drill a well, install a pump, install and pump whatever treatment system you have. Remind me never to hire you as a financial advisor.

    And you are still denying that you keep changing the goal posts as your former words are parsed and laughed off. To put it back in context to your original argument(s):
    1)No, I save zero money for the ‘cost’ of the water itself.
    2) No, I save zero money for what cities send to the waste treatment plants.
    3) Zero savings for operations, maintenance, and unnecessary expansions.
    4) Zero savings for the higher water usage because the well had to be drilled, you idiot, it has to be drilled for for everyone whether they use 16 or 12 gallons on a shower at a time if they live outside the city water range.
    5) Zero savings to install a pump and treatment system for the same exact reason as #4
    6) No, a pump works just as hard pumping out 12 gallons as 16 gallons when the water difference is caused by a small plate restricting water flow. Cost would be measured in time being pumped, not amount unless you physically change to a lower powered pump.
    7) Yes, exactly as I said earlier, the heating of the extra 4 gallons would increase cost, but with an efficient heater any financial advisor would tell you the savings would be measured in pennies rather than tens or hundreds of dollars month over month.
    8) No, shower water would be siphoned out of a septic tank with exactly zero more silt accumulation, assuming you cleaned yourself equally with 12 or 16 gallons of water. The silt comes from the dirt on your body.
    9) No, the treatment on those extra 4 gallons of shower water would be below negligible.

    Kind of sounds like you need a financial advisor that would point out the insignificant factors you seem to be obsessing on, but I am not one by profession so I decline any future offers. You admit and apologize for your grammar/spelling errors too rather than just admitting you are wrong on something (still focusing on the insignificant). If you have a private well and septic yourself, why don’t you just admit that your entire initial argument and subsequent defenses of it really only apply to people with city water, not people with private well and septic?

  55. Mar

    Lying Le Roi first says this: “don’t know about AZ, or wherever it is you reside, but here in WI shower water discharge (gray water) is required to go into a holding or septic tank.”
    And Are you trying to say that a septic tank doesn’t hold water and sludge? Or:

    Now, after Lying Le Roi was caught lying…
    The Lying Le Roi says: “I never said that septic tanks hold all the water that is directed to them.”
    Never mentions that that water is discharged into the ground
    Twist and turns and everything else.
    Such a moron and dumbass.

  56. MjM

    Lets pick, oh I dunno, Oconto, for example.

    The city charges residents $1.55 per 100 cubic feet of water. That’s 748 gallons for those of you in Rio Linda. Which works out to $0.002/gallon.

    For ease of comprehension, assume A) 10 minute shower, B) one 2.5g/minute nozzle, and C) two 2.5g /minute shower heads (because this new regulation rollback deals with multi-nozzle showers and you’ve been forces to use 2.5g/min heads since Bubba Clinton).

    So, you have 25 gallons used and 50 gallons used for a 10 minute cleaning. Or, a total cost to Oconto dwellers of $0.0518 and $0.1036, respectively, per douse.

    If your Oconto friends shower every day the one shower head dude will save whopping 5 cents per shower and $18.90 in one years’ time over the two-headed guy.

    Just think! You could have used that 16 cents Babblin’ Joe saved you on a bowl of 4th of July meat to splurge and double up your wash for three whole days!

    Babblin’ Joe is now coercing those with two or more shower heads to accumulate all that wealth in nickles because the TOTAL gpm shall be restricted to 2.5. (but, as any DIY’er knows, there’s ways around it)

    An btw, if you have a septic system the amount of water used has nothing to do with frequency of pumping. As Nazi Nort so happily explained above, the g’vment forces you to pump your septic tanks. Needed or not.

  57. Le Roi du Nord

    mar:

    All the quotes you attribute to me are true.

    T:

    Didn’t change or move any goal post. But I did have to further explain things you obviously don’t understand. My bad for assuming that you had some basic knowledge. I won’t do that again.

    mjm:

    Did you factor in the sewer charge into your calculations ? Oconto charges for both based on usage.

  58. Mar

    “All the quotes you attribute to me are true.”
    No shit Sherlock. That’s what quotation marks are for.
    But you are still completely wrong about shower water in septic tanks

  59. Mar

    And some of of us have city water and septic tanks. My water bill is mostly taxes and fees as opposed to actual water cost.
    I could have the least efficient shower head and still have a very low bill.
    Just saying.
    And the shower water would still flow through the septic tank.

  60. Le Roi du Nord

    mar:

    So you first admit I am correct, then say I am wrong. You have some significant comprehension issues. And, in WI, I am correct regarding shower water in septic tanks.

    And you still pay for that water. And if you were in WI that shower discharge is still required to go into your septic tank.

  61. Jason

    >And if you were in WI that shower discharge is still required to go into your septic tank.

    Stupid Leroy still doesn’t understand. The price to pump the septic would be 100% the same if the owner had a regular showerhead or a low flow showerhead. Dumb, dumb, dumb, All he has is Noise and FUD… he does not have, and never did have, facts or logic.

  62. Le Roi du Nord

    j:

    You guys just don’t look at big picture, long term scenarios. mar brought up a situation where someone had city water and a septic tank. There are also situations where folks have private water supply and discharge to a sanitary collection system (not uncommon in rural areas where I grew up). Many pay the sanitary fee based on flow or usage, others a flat rate. And the owners/ operators of the collection/ treatment systems are always looking to reduce unnecessary inflow to reduce operation, maintenance, and future expansion costs. That is why sump pumps and storm sewers don’t go into the sanitary system. Reducing those costs is a positive thing, right?

  63. Mar

    “And you still pay for that water. And if you were in WI that shower discharge is still required to go into your septic tank.”
    Well, no kidding.
    I never said it didn’t.
    All I said, and you made such a big deal about it, is that shower water doesn’t stay in the tank.
    How simple can that be?

  64. Jason

    My goodness, Leroy has twisted his logic so much he doesn’t even realize what he’s arguing any more!

    >For those of you unaware, those low flow devices save you money, both on the cost of water, and the treatment of same at your municipal STP. Savings are for operations, maintenance, and unnecessary expansions. Ditto for those with private systems.

    And then Dad said

    >Now show us your homework on why–exactly–3 gallon showers require more and more water works investment than do one-gallon showers. While we all know that 3>1, you have not demonstrated that water/sewer plants increased in equipment due ONLY to 3-gallon showers.

    And you replied back with some bitch response about not doing his work for him. Little bitch Leroy doesn’t have a clue.

  65. Le Roi du Nord

    mar:

    That quote you attribute to me is still true. So why call me a liar?

    j:

    And another small minded response from you, the poster child for small thinking.

  66. Mar

    Because, moron, you said that a septic holds water and the water needs to be pumped out.
    Your level of stupidity is amazing and your lack of knowledge of septic tanks is even more amazing.

  67. Le Roi du Nord

    mar:

    Septic tanks DO hold water, and they DO need to be pumped out, every three years in WI. A tank that leaks before the effluent reaches the drain field is illegal in WI. You may have less protective (of groundwater) regulations in AZ.

  68. Mar

    And aging Lying Le Roi gets caught lying.
    “In 2000 the State of Wisconsin changed the State plumbing code, which the County is required to administer. The changes require that all septic systems, regardless of age, must be inspected by a qualified individual at least once every three years.”
    You don’t have to have it pumped every 3 years.
    Lying Le Roi, why is it so hard to tell the truth?

  69. Tuerqas

    Le Roi: “Didn’t change or move any goal post. But I did have to further explain things you obviously don’t understand. My bad for assuming that you had some basic knowledge. I won’t do that again.”

    I am not currently crediting you with enough intelligence to lie nearly as much as Mar accuses you of right now. You ‘explained’ to me that Biden’s new restriction on shower heads somehow saved me some of the money that it originally cost to drill the well and set up the pump on what is now my property before I was born in another part of the country. That was part of your later explanation on how this legislation saves me money. Really, it was (points 4 and 5 above per the quote included in that comment). Now you are going to come back and say that isn’t what you meant and/or that I could not understand it…AFTER I gave you the point by point refutation? You aren’t a liar so much as an idiot. Of course, you don’t even know what ‘moving the goal post’ means. I have to research how to say “He who speaks in ignorance” in, perhaps, a Native American language. I’ll get that ‘liar’ moniker removed for ya.

  70. Le Roi du Nord

    mar:

    Inspection requires pumping the tank. But a smart guy like you knew that, right?

  71. Le Roi du Nord

    t:

    Let’s just disagree on this issue as well. If your well pump operates for free, good for you. The same for the free operation of your on-site sanitary system. You are truly a lucky guy.

  72. Mar

    No dumbass, only if it is 1/3 full. Damn, Lying Le Roi, you really are an embassarment to the human race.

  73. Tuerqas

    No, I can’t let that slide as your ‘side of the issue’ is nonsensical. No one here except you has said any pump or on-site sanitary system operates for free.
    The post was about how there are again being water limits imposed on shower heads to restrict and reduce water flow. YOU commented on how that saved everyone money.
    You listed why it saved money for all here, but the whys you initially stated only applied to people living in cities with city plumbing, so I told you that you were wrong and why.
    You did not agree that only city people would save anything marginally significant you doubled down and added past costs for old pumps and long installed wells into the ‘savings’ provided by the new regs…WHAT?

    You also added costs for heating, pumping and treating the extra shower water. I agreed with the heating, though I disagreed in that it was even marginally measurable. (We would all save money if the pump wattage was reduced and everyone was forced to buy new energy saving/efficient pumps that would simply pump less water/minute, but that ain’t in the new regs) The pump works at least as hard on 16 gallons than 12 gallons if it is simply that the exit on the 12 gallon output is restricted. It just builds pressure on the pump which arguably would work harder and may cost more for the 12 gallons if run the exact same amount of time. And no, the shower water is never pumped professionally from the septic system, it is the silt at the bottom that is pumped. To say that any tiny amount of the water in the moist silt pumped is from the extra gallons on every shower is just stupid. No one has holding tanks that holds 3 years of all water used in a household.

    Will this legislation save people with private well and septic money? I guess you could try and say that technically yes from the unmeasurably low cost of energy used to heat the extra water, but that has not been your main argument from the beginning. And the cost in taxes for this legislation to be made, implemented, measured, and regulated will be a net loss to the rural folk. This regulation will save city folk money and cost country folk money.

    Your position that it will save everyone money is a fallacy. And since you disagree with basic logic and have continually tried to introduce new and even more nonsensical ‘evidence’ to support your lame claim, I won’t agree to disagree, I will agree only that your position (concerning only your back and forth with me and no one else) is stupid, in addition to being false.

    And you claiming I don’t understand even as you pour forth more and more extra (false) evidence just makes me want to laugh and cry at the same time, because I don’t think you are just trolling, you actually believe it.

  74. MjM

    Nazi Nort knows shit: ” Did you factor in the sewer charge into your calculations ? Oconto charges for both based on usage.“

    Wrong. City of Oconto charges single residences and small commercial bizzes a flat quarterly fee for discharge.

    For $102.00/qtr you can discharge up to 12,171 gallons ($0.008 per) of crud. Or, 141.3 gal / day. The legalese does say if the city determines you are dumping more than that they will charge $2.00 per additional 748 gallons. The legalese does not say how they determine you are dumping more than that., but a simple water meter reading would be a start, if not accurate.

    Nazi Nort cheers g’vment coercion: “…and they DO need to be pumped out, every three years in WI. “

    Once again – pay attention this time, numbnutz – that has nothing to do with the amount of water used.

Submit a Comment

Pin It on Pinterest