| OCR Text |
Show were carried out to distribute and install, free of charge or at subsidized cost, ultra low flush toilets in existing homes of area residents. This happened in East Los Angeles and Denver in 1992. Though there were immediate water savings, a disadvantage is the cost of such programs. Other less expensive measures included various retrofitting devices given free of charge or sold at reduced cost to water customers. For most plumbing retrofit programs, these devices fall into two basic categories: devices to reduce shower usage and devices to limit toilet flush volumes. Some showerheads are adjustable while others restrict the flow to current standards or even below. Performance, durability and price vary greatly. Various models are currently being marketed in retail and wholesale outlets, and most of them are easy to install. For existing toilets, the simplest device is a filled bag or bottle in the toilet tank as a displacement device. There is a common misconception that a " brick" serves such a purpose, but the practice has been discounted. A bag or bottle is much better, less expensive and easy to install. Bottles and bags are cumbersome, however, and may not fit properly. They may migrate inside the tank, fouling the flush valve, the ballcock, or both, causing leakage and overflow problems. At best, such devices will save one gallon of water per flush. The next level of sophistication is the toilet tank dam. It is a flexible insert that, if placed across the bottom of the tank, will hold back water when the toilet is flushed. Because the position of the dam is adjustable, the amount of savings can be varied. One disadvantage of dams is little or no savings are obtained if the toilet flush valve is leaking. In some communities where retrofit packages have been distributed to homeowners, a leak detection kit is included, but there is no guarantee the homeowner will use it to conduct a test or fix a leak. Another problem is rubberized rims in the kit deteriorate as quickly as six months after installation. Optimum product life is five to six years. An increasingly popular option is the early closure flush valve. Such devices make maximum use of the pressure provided by a full tank of water, but stop the flow of water early, saving up to half the water contained in the tank. The advantage is a flushing action far superior to merely lowering the water level in the tank. The valve replaces the flush flapper valve that is prone to leaks. Installation is more costly. New, unique devices have recently been developed and found useful by the division to save water with existing toilets. Funded by the Utah Division of Water Resources, a study was completed in 1993 by the Utah Water Research Lab at Utah State University { Effectiveness Determination of Two Different Water- Saving Devices for Toilet Tanks - June 1993) that showed about a half gallon of water was saved when a toilet was flushed. Installation of these low cost devices could save an estimated 365 million gallons of water a year in Utah, besides reducing energy and wastewater treatment costs. The first device is called a Fill- Cycle Regulator and restricts the flow of water in the bypass tube of the toilet. This water is used to top off the water in the toilet bowl to prepare it for the next flush. Made from recycled polypropylene plastic, the regulator allows only a half gallon of water rather than the normal full gallon to pass to the bowl during the fill cycle. Researchers also tested a second, non- mechanical device called a Water Saver Refill Cycle Adapter Tube. Also plastic, it has a restricted brass fitting which helps regulate water that would have been wasted during the refill cycle. Water savings averaged slightly less than a half gallon per flush with this gadget. Another similar device called " AquaSaver" is also being marketed in Utah that operates much the same as the two devices studied by USU. It features adjustments for varied water savings, but it is considerably more expensive. 54 |
