# Bathroom - are Americans anti-environmentalists **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 25, 2001, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bathroom-are-americans-anti-environmentalists/89572 "2001-10-25T16:12:06Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 10\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Odesio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/odesio/32/20003_2.png) [@Odesio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odesio)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2001, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bathroom-are-americans-anti-environmentalists/89572/61 "2001-11-01T14:44:12Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Anthracite \* > \*\* > > That having been said - I hope to buy a PA toilet this weekend. No more problems, and environmentally sound. \*\* What do you mean no more problems? You just said that PA toliets were less reliable and had more expensive parts. Marc ---
**Author:** ![gazpacho](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6f9a4e/32.png) [@gazpacho](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gazpacho)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2001, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bathroom-are-americans-anti-environmentalists/89572/62 "2001-11-01T15:50:10Z")
On the subject of low flow toilets. When we bought our house we were required to install lower flow toilets 2.5gpf was the minimum with subsidies for low flow toilets. Since we were replacing them we opted for the low flow 1.6 or 1.7 gpf toilets. Every few months one of these toilets will back up and the old plumbers friend has to come out and fix the problem. That is pretty unacceptable in my view. In my previous 30 or so years of living I cannot recall toilets in my house or my parent’s houses every backing up. If pressure assisted toilets are even less reliable why would anybody want to use them? ---
**Author:** ![Tamex](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/ccd318/32.png) [@Tamex](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tamex)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2001, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bathroom-are-americans-anti-environmentalists/89572/63 "2001-11-01T15:57:05Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Anthracite \* > **Your best hope is to at least re-use the “brown water”, as the EPA calls it, for such things are watering your lawn - which, if you absolutely must water your lawn, would save water (“brown” water, roughly defined, is not toilet water - such as water from your washing machine, sinks, dishwasher, and showers/tubs)** I think that this is actually called “gray” water, not “brown” water. ---
**Author:** ![Una\_Persson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/una_persson/32/346_2.png) [@Una\_Persson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Una_Persson)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2001, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bathroom-are-americans-anti-environmentalists/89572/64 "2001-11-01T17:04:03Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by MGibson \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by Anthracite \* > > \*\* > > > > That having been said - I hope to buy a PA toilet this weekend. No more problems, and environmentally sound. \*\* > > What do you mean no more problems? You just said that PA toliets were less reliable and had more expensive parts. > > Marc \*\* Err…I mean no more of the…ahem…“particular” problems I have been having. You see what I am saying? 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Una\_Persson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/una_persson/32/346_2.png) [@Una\_Persson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Una_Persson)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2001, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bathroom-are-americans-anti-environmentalists/89572/65 "2001-11-01T17:07:27Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Tamex \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > \*Originally posted by Anthracite \* > > **Your best hope is to at least re-use the “brown water”, as the EPA calls it, for such things are watering your lawn - which, if you absolutely must water your lawn, would save water (“brown” water, roughly defined, is not toilet water - such as water from your washing machine, sinks, dishwasher, and showers/tubs)** > > I think that this is actually called “gray” water, not “brown” water. \*\* [You are correct.](http://www.epa.gov/OCEPAterms/gterms.html) For some reason I had “brown” on my mind this morning. It must have been the toilet-related posts. :eek: ---
**Author:** ![Odesio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/odesio/32/20003_2.png) [@Odesio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odesio)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2001, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bathroom-are-americans-anti-environmentalists/89572/66 "2001-11-01T19:43:31Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Anthracite \* > [B} > > Err…I mean no more of the…ahem…“particular” problems I have been having. You see what I am saying? 😃 \*\* Arrrrggghhh, GOOD LORD!! That’s what I get for asking. Marc ---
**Author:** ![Snickers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/5daacb/32.png) [@Snickers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snickers)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2001, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bathroom-are-americans-anti-environmentalists/89572/67 "2001-11-02T16:12:33Z")
> [@](#): > > Water is a renewable resource. It’s not gone for good after you flush. It goes to a sewage treatment plant or septic tank. It then, through either natural or man-made means, becomes clean and drinkable and is put back into the water system. The water ain’t going away anytime soon. Buzz! Wrong! Thank you for playing. Water _isn’t_ a renewable resource - right now there’s simply no cost-effective way to just make more should we want to. It is a _recyclable_ resource, meaning that it can be cleaned and reused, but it isn’t renewable. The Earth does have a finite amount (although it is a lot!), just as it has a finite amount of petroleum, gold, uranium, and such. It’s said we get more from space - comets and such - but I’ve heard they only add 1 inch of water every 100 years (or something like that), so it’ll take a while to build up more stocks. I always question arguments that state we shouldn’t worry about fresh water usage - like those have stated before, it isn’t recycled as fast as it’s used. We now return you to your regularly scheduled debate. Snicks ---
**Author:** ![tracer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tracer/32/20578_2.png) [@tracer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tracer)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2001, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bathroom-are-americans-anti-environmentalists/89572/68 "2001-11-06T15:47:30Z")
Anthracite wrote: > [@](#): > > CAFE should be about 40 MPG, IMEO. You’re kidding, right? You want the **corporate average** fuel economy for every automobile manufacturer to be **forty** miles per gallon? That would mean that, for every car a company manufactures that gets 30 miles to the gallon – which isn’t exactly low-mileage even by modern standards – the same company has to manufacture either **two** cars that get **45** miles per gallon, or one car that gets **50** miles per gallon! Don’t forget that one way to increase a vehicle’s fuel economy is to reduce the amount of steel it’s built out of, which will make it more dangerous to be in in an accident. Right now, a lot of car manufacturers are building vehicles that far exceed government-mandated safety standards. If you force them to reduce their entire fleet to an **average** of 40 m.p.g., the safety of their vehicles will fall back down to the government-mandated minimum levels practically overnight. Also, keep in mind that under current law, there are **two different** CAFE standards: [li]For vehicles built on a passenger car chassis, the CAFE minimum is **28 mpg**.[/li] [li]For vehicles built on a light truck chassis (such as pick-ups and SUVs), the CAFE minimum is **20 mpg**.[/li] Considering the popularity of SUVs, you could probably make a **huge** improvement in the fuel economy of the average vehicle out there on the road by increasing **only** the light-truck CAFE minimum. ---
**Author:** ![Una\_Persson](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/una_persson/32/346_2.png) [@Una\_Persson](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Una_Persson)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2001, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bathroom-are-americans-anti-environmentalists/89572/69 "2001-11-08T05:22:07Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by tracer \* > \*\*Anthracite wrote: > > > [@](#): > > > > CAFE should be about 40 MPG, IMEO. > > You’re kidding, right? You want the **corporate average** fuel economy for every automobile manufacturer to be **forty** miles per gallon? That would mean that…\*\* No, I’m not kidding, and I do know exactly what it means. I also know that it is very possible to achieve as well. Also - you can build car lines or fleets that get lower mileage, they just have a tax associated with them, correct? For 40, I was not including light trucks/SUVs. Raising them to 30 should be good. One thing that was not clear in my post was that I was not saying it should be 40 (or 30) overnight. I think there should be a gradual, slow, evolution, but with 40 as the goal in mind. Say, over ten to fifteen years. > [@](#): > > **Don’t forget that one way to increase a vehicle’s fuel economy is to reduce the amount of steel it’s built out of, which will make it more dangerous to be in in an accident.** That’s been the subject of a couple other threads, IIRC, and I am not prepared to debate that subtopic meaningfully, as I do not have enough data at my disposal. I do understand the physics of the situation, however. ---
**Author:** ![Playdeaux](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e99b99/32.png) [@Playdeaux](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Playdeaux)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2001, 5:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bathroom-are-americans-anti-environmentalists/89572/70 "2001-11-09T05:10:52Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Hibbins \* > > **After they’ve washed their hands.** > > DSC Maybe they’ve just peed on them, like they did on the seat while they were trying to avoid catching any germs because no seat covers were provided in the interest of preserving natural resources. Speaking of self-defeating bathroom conservation, what’s the deal with the motion-sensor toilets and faucets that always come on when they shouldn’t and continue running long after you’ve walked away? I always spit on a piece of toilet paper & stick it over the little electric eye above the commode so it doesn’t flush every time I move. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bathroom-are-americans-anti-environmentalists/89572.md?page=3)