Reducing water usage (Part 2)

Measuring the amount of water coming out, the simple way

Softrong has touted their faucets' water-saving feature prominently, and I noted that it felt like it was working. But to see if it was indeed the case, I made actual measurements. No fancy equipment were necessary - just a stopwatch and a water jug would do as you can see here. After repeating and averaging, these are the results.

Shower Head
Room Consumption (ml/sec)
100% 50% 25% 13%
(Default Head) 1 202 180 124 84
Softrong SH-50 109 106 82 35
(Default Head) 2 200 199 177 124
Softrong SH-50 101 101 99 75
Kitchen Faucet
Mode Consumption (ml/sec)
100% 50%
(Default Faucet) Default 120 100
Softrong SKJ-60 Spread 49 44
Middle 96 76
Focused 107 80
The Softrong shower head did indeed cut the amount of flow by roughly half across all knob settings, consistent with the company's claims. Even better, the flow rate at the highest setting became lower than the US EPA's WaterSense program standard, which is 2.0 gallons per minute or 126ml per second. The kitchen faucet also saw similarly drastic cuts, but only when the "spread" mode was used. My wife preferred the middle ground, which offers less savings but is still better than using the old faucet.

In any case, the replacements were definitely using less water if they were used for a same duration. Now I needed to see if this translated to tangible reduction in metered usage.

Comparison of the water consumption trends between 2015 and 2016

And here are the results. Note that, between late February and early April of 2015, Naju Bitgaram City suffered widespread contamination of tap water. It became unfit for most uses in heavily affected areas, and the city decided to not meter the water use during the affected period. However, the hot water use was still metered as you were paying the costs of heating the water, not the water use itself.

Taking this into account, tap water use hovered steadily around 13m3 (13,000L) throughout the year until the faucets were replaced. I saw a drop of around 1 to 2m3 afterwards. In the case of hot water, there had been about 1m3 reduction year-over-year (from 6m3 to 5m3 on average), but it dropped further on a similar scale as the tap water after the replacement.

Here, tap water costs about US$0.75/m3 and hot water, US$4.20/m3. So the reduction of 1m3 seen here equates to about 5 dollars in savings per month. The shower heads cost US$20 each and the kitchen faucet, US$30 - a total of US$70. That means it would only take just over a year to recover the upgrade costs. Even though the water use didn't fall dramatically, the new faucets still turned out to be good investments.
Defined tags for this entry: , , , , , ,


Trackback specific URI for this entry

This link is not meant to be clicked. It contains the trackback URI for this entry. You can use this URI to send ping- & trackbacks from your own blog to this entry. To copy the link, right click and select "Copy Shortcut" in Internet Explorer or "Copy Link Location" in Mozilla.

No Trackbacks


Display comments as Linear | Threaded

No comments

Add Comment

E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.

Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (*word*), underscore are made via _word_.
Standard emoticons like :-) and ;-) are converted to images.

Copyright (C) 1996-2024 Woo-Duk Chung (Wesley Woo-Duk Hwang-Chung). All rights reserved.