Sunday, July 5, 2009

Faucet fixin...

Given my continued high water use inside the house, I decided it was time to low flow the faucets. This project seemed simple enough...

First I get a two quart measuring cup and go to each sink and measured the flow. I turn on the faucet and count to ten and then multiply the amount by six for "gallons per minute". Most are around 2.2. One old one overflows the cup well before I get to ten! (Five gpm!)

I took an inventory of whether I had male or female threaded aerators on the spouts of all my faucets. And, I noted the metal finish. I then went on-line to search for the best products, and I searched, and searched. It seems this market is dominated by a company called Neoperl. And, with only a couple limited exceptions, no-one really sells these online. I found a few at Ebay and Amazon and that was about it.

Out of frustration I headed to the depot with my list. At my store, these reduced flow aerators are strategically located right above the floor in blister packs. I sit down in the aisle and start weeding through the options. And they are all made by...you guessed it, Neoperl. I guess that's why you cant find them online...

So, I find one brass version that I needed in a 1.5 gallon. I find a spray/stream adjustable one for our utility sink that is 1 and 2.2 gallons, I don't find anything for the pewter color faucets in our guest bath but settle for chrome in the 1 gallon version. I then get two in the 1.5 gallon version chrome for our bathroom.

When I get home I install the 1.5 brass one, no problem, huge flow difference but it's plenty of water. It's in a sink I don't hardly use, but guests do, so I'll save a little. I then change out the guest bathroom sinks, one with the 1.5 and one with the 1.0 gallon to compare. The 1.0 always has a spray pattern and the 1.5 is an aerated flow. I let me wife approve the spray which she preferred, and it again was plenty of water at 1.0! She never notices they are chrome, not pewter.

I then go to our bathroom with the 1.5s but they don't fit? It turns out my Kohler faucets use the "small" all the others use the "regular". (Small is 13/16s).

I switch out the utility sink and then head back to the depot to sit in the aisle a while longer. I find the small version but only in the 1.5 gallon, (I would have taken a 1.0 without any reservations).

While I am there I notice, tucked in back in the seriously disorganized rows of blister packs, some aerator inserts so you don't have to worry about the finish! You just swap out the inserts if the ones you have have some type of insert. I consider starting over but quickly move on as the cost difference is trivial.

Bottom Line 1 - 1.0 gallons is plenty for washing, brushing etc and the spray pattern is surprisingly nice. The 1.5s have the traditional flow and again are plenty of water for bathroom sinks. Having the 1 - 2.2 adjustable is nice for filling things in the utility sink. I switched out the kitchen insert to a 1.5 and it seems fine.

As I was finishing up I decided to measure the two guest showers. Uh-oh. It seems both of these were way over the 2.5 suggested. I put in 2.5 gallon washers to limit the flow.

Bottom Line 2 - I really wasn't sure about all this low flow stuff, I just thought you ended up using the faucet longer to make up for the reduced water but...The EPA and their WaterSense initiatives are driving manufacturers to provide really high quality aerators and restricted flow fixtures. They get stuff wet with less water without compromising performance.

So this project cost me about $40 and took a couple hours including the trips to the depot. I expect to see a significant reduction in water use. It was easy and almost fun. I also learned that the EPA is currently working on standards for showers that may change the 2.5 goal...stay tuned.

Saturday, July 4, 2009

It's in the toilet?

As promised I was going to do some analysis of my water use. I looked at how often we flush (not use) the toilet. Even though my wife works out of the home we each get in about four flushes a day each. Eight total.

We split those flushes between two toilets. One is a 1.6 gallon per flush commode and one is a 3.5 gallons per flush (I measured it). That means the low flow uses 6.4 gallons a day and the high flow uses 14 gallons a day. Or, 192 and 420 a month respectively. Total is 612 gallons a month.

Most water conservation sites will tell you toilet use is 26% of indoor water use. Mine is 6.4%?? (9500 gallons a month / 612). I would have to reduce my use to 2500 gallons a month to even come close to that percent.

Bottom Line 1 - It isn't my toilets that are causing the problem. If I changed out the high flow to a newer low flow of 1.28 a flush I would save 267 gallons a month or a whopping $1.55 on my bill! I would lower my percentage of toilet use to 3.6%.

I have also concluded that men use less water than women. I wont go into the details, but suffice to say, women/girls use more water for everything. The shower longer, flush more, wash more, take more baths (I have a tub in our main bath I haven't been in yet, in nine years!). I think there is a lack of gender qualification for these "household averages". I theorize that women use 50% more water than men, until we include outdoor use.

Bottom Line 2 - A household's gender makeup will skew the averages a lot.

Its time for me to measure my housekeeper's use on her day and my wife's shower time multiplied by 3.5 gallons a minute. It's either that or the cats are using the Jacuzzi tub when we're out...

Sunday, June 28, 2009

Energy Audit

I had my first energy audit. It's a prerequisite to receiving free electric company money, so why not? I felt strongly that I pretty much knew my weaknesses and strengths. But a little independent verification couldn't hurt right?

First a little background. I had contacted a "guy" who's small company (him) performed thermal imaging audits. $500 for my house! I couldn't imagine getting a return on that investment. So I bought a $100 dollar infrared remote temperature sensor and did my own audit.

As I become more home energy savvy I realized that air leaks, missing insulation etc were all interesting, but if you have a forced air furnace or AC, you really don't know how much you are losing every minute it's on through air leakage. It could be huge and you wouldn't know. So it was clear to me that having this tested was a primary need.

So I began contacting companies with that in mind that were on our electricity provider's list. Energy audits come in many forms but Oncor, our provider, has prerequisites for an audit. They include:
  • Blower door test to find leaks with a smoke stick and test the overall tightness of the house.
  • Duct Blaster test to determine the duct leakage.
  • Thermal imaging to view all of the heat (or cold) spots in the home's envelope
  • Test all the windows for low-e coating and note double or single pane
  • Inspect attic insulation levels and venting
  • Confuse homeowner with lots of gibberish
The particular auditor I chose doesn't sell anything other than audits. So they write up my audit and also fill out the Oncor forms to submit it to them. All for $399! (Oncor has up to $1500 available per home!)

Now I would argue that I pretty much knew everything I learned from the audit except, my ducts leak like crazy. I'm losing over 37% of my expensive air out of my duct system! Ouch! But it also explains why I am an Energy Star zero.

Of course it also showed me in living color how bad those can lights are, and we did test a few areas around my fireplace that were leaking that I wasnt aware of.

So my last question to the auditor was...Is there a contractor out there who can do my whole list? His answer was no...up north there are plenty, but here in Texas we make energy, not save it! (That last part was mine.)

Bottom Line - My list in order of potential payback:
  1. Seal ducts
  2. Fix can lights
  3. Add Radiant Barrier in attic
  4. Rework attic insulation, (add some and redistribute)
  5. Seal around the fireplace
I have chosen a contractor (busy week) and will cover that next.

Saturday, June 27, 2009

Disposing of batteries properly

Someone gave me a published list of all the ways to properly dispose of batteries. There was so much data on it I couldn't possibly use it. I had no idea we had so many different types of batteries and disposal methods. I am going to try and make the rules simple.

We have regular throw away, regular recycle and hazardous waste. California is always different but I am excluding them.

This list has nine (9!) battery types.

Throw away -
  • Carbon Zinc, (old style standard household battery).
  • Alkaline, or rechargeable alkaline. None can be recycled, none are hazardous waste.
  • Alkaline Manganese - rechargeable, non-recyclable, non-hazardous
Recycle -
  • Lithium Ion. They are non-hazardous waste and can be recycled.
  • Nickel - Cadmium (Ni-cad) rechargeable, they are hazardous waste but recyclable.
  • Nickel Metal Hydride (Ni-li or Ni Hydride) - rechargeable, non-hazardous, recyclable
Note: These batteries are generally in your consumer electronics that use special batteries.

Hazardous Waste disposal -
  • Button Batteries (yep all those little batteries that are round and flat)
  • Sealed Lead Acid - used in scooters, some power tools, UPS's etc.
  • Silver Oxide - Consumers can throw away but non-consumers must dispose of them as hazardous waste??? These are in greeting cards!
Bottom Line - Little ones are bad, big ones are bad, the regular household batteries are either recyclable or not. Probably ought to avoid Ni-cad, as cadmium is a highly toxic and carcinogenic. Avoiding the throw aways' seems prudent (the carbon Zinc ones are the most likely to leak anyway) but the alkalines' are what we all buy in 9v, AA, AAA, D, C, etc. The Lithium Ion are also available in those sizes as "higher performance batteries" but keep them in the fridge.

Friday, June 26, 2009

My personal opinion, soapbox deployed

I am reading the green section in the NY Times this morning (online of course). There is a blog about how a large number of environmentalist groups are coming together against oil sands pipelines from Alberta Canada to the US.

The head of the Sierra Club is asked what are the alternatives and his answer is, and I quote “There’s a lot of conventional oil to buy on international markets,” he said. “We don’t need this oil.”

That's when the top of my head blew off...

There are so many things wrong with this I don't know where to start. Let see, economic security, military spending, American death toll in Middle East conflicts, huge transfer of our wealth to countries that dislike us, funding terrorists, Hugo Chaves, energy caused recessions etc.

Did you know we IMPORTED a tanker of Liquid Natural Gas from Russia?

Does the Sierra club, in light of a global problem called Climate Change, really have any business deciding where and how we get oil domestically? Where were they when the oil fields of Kuwait were burning en-masse?

Don't get me wrong, oil sands is nasty business, but you cant be an American and advocate "other sources". You're turning a blind eye to our position on the world stage. Don't they realize when we say democracy, human rights etc to all middle eastern countries what they hear is blah, blah , blah, we need oil? Don't they realize that's what makes us infidels? Our two faced posture toward oil rich countries?

It's a ridiculously expedient argument to say, "get your oil elsewhere" just so you can kowtow to your contributors all up in arms about Alberta Canada's oil business.

All right, back to regular programming.

Monday, June 22, 2009

My sewer costs are ridiculous!

I am in shock! I was just reviewing my water bill which includes sewer, storm water and garbage/recycling charges. My Sewer bill is higher per gallon than my water bill!

In my defense, my bill was artificially low last year so it never caught my attention. This year they re-rate in April and now it has my attention.

I immediately called the city to ask what's up with that? How can the sewer bill be higher per gallon than the water bill?

You may already know that the city bases your sewer use on four winter months of water usage to, in essence, filter out your sprinkler use since it doesn't go down the sewer. This is relatively new but that's why the rates change in April.

But back to the problem, this last month I used 18, 900 gallons and that cost me $61.98 or $.0032793 per gallon. My sewer is rated at 10,800 gallons which cost $45.25 or .0041898 per gallon! It's 22% higher than clean water? So which pays for water treatment? They both do because we don't treat the water from the sewer for drinking here in the US. So we pump water from the reservoirs, treat it, store it and pump it to your home and we take the sewer water, let it flow to the treatment plant, treat it and then dump it in a stream or river.

In Singapore for example, they treat the sewage water making it into drinking water again because they don't have enough fresh water.

So somehow we can build giant reservoirs, huge long pipelines, treatment plants, build and maintain pipes to all our homes cheaper than dealing with the sewer water?

Its also worth noting that storm sewer is a different thing and we get billed $10.16 for that too. Some municipalities combine the two and end up with big costs for treating the stormwater after rains.

So, why do I care? Because my water use bill is really double because my sewer bill is included in a per gallon calculation. If I can cut water use I can cut sewer costs. But more importantly, my in-home water is really twice as expensive per gallon than what my sprinkler water costs.

I also care because I was recently looking at our city budget that is 120 million in the hole and water treatment is a huge number....I now want to know more!

Friday, June 19, 2009

I have green electrictiy!

I finally did it, made the big leap. I changed electricity providers to an all wind power renewable energy plan. And I saved money!

Here in Texas we deregulated electricity. There are four (I think) non-competing companies that deliver the stuff and about a million who sell it. Given the competition etc our rates are higher than most??? I can't really explain why but I would guess that deregulation has so many regulations that each seller's costs are higher than a single large company.

But, the good news is we have clean renewable energy choices! For a long time there was one company, Green Mountain, that really touted clean energy. There wasn't much competition so they were always 3 - 4 cents higher per KWH. Their energy mix was 20% wind and 80% hydroelectric.

But yesterday I was pleased to find at least six solid companies offering 100% renewables plans. I shopped them, built a spreadsheet to consider fees added to rates for my average usage and picked a couple leaders. I called and attempted to negotiate an even better deal but couldn't. I tried competitive rates etc but everyone manning the phones didn't have any authority to match rates.

A couple of additional things spurred my decision. First, my new green plan is cheaper by far than my old "brown" plan. My rate is 11 cents a KWH and my old rate was 14.24 cents per KWH! I also fixed that rate for 12 months as I believe natural gas prices aren't going to stay this low and that also affects coal prices. So I locked in now prior to the main summer cooling season.

Being able to do pure wind was a bonus. Having seen all the windmills in western Texas I am a big proponent, and, I want my money to go to building more of those rather than more dams.

It's also worth noting that a penny per KWH for me is $165 a year, based on last year's usage.

Bottom Line - Now is a great time to lock in rates and they are low enough to go renewables and still save money!

But now I have green energy. Can I stop being electricity use conscious? I guess, in a way, I could. But my conscience wouldn't be clear. I am using electricity from the grid regardless of source but my money goes to the wind provider. If I now used more electricity there would be more demand on the grid overall and to supply that, there has to be more generation built. But what we want is to have them decommission coal plants while building more renewable energy.

If we can all just cut 30%, regardless of source, we can get there. If we use too much energy, just because its green, we actually defeat the bigger purpose of transitioning all energy to renewables.

I hope the wind is blowing in West Texas today, I have ice cream in the freezer!