Posted by Nereida,I was reading the other day that modern toilets are designed to use less water than the ones we had when we were growing up. Evidently, the government passed some kind of law back in the 90’s that required this. Leaving aside for now the question about the legality of the governement mandating something like that, what was the ostensible point?
At the time the law was passed, did anybody invetigate how much water would be saved by this legislation? If they did, I would be very surprised if they presented their results to Congress in an unbiased fashion. I did a few simple calculations of my own. My results showed that of course there will be less water used by such eco toilets. But when compared with the other water used by the average person, the amount saved would be miniscule.
So it appears that the law was at best a misguided attempt to “save the planet”. Now who do you suppose came up with this idea in the first place? Um… Think about that!
Yes, I agree. Even using the rather high figure of 30 gallons for the water saved per day per person, that’s only 3% of the total amount of water used every day per capita. That’s just a “drop in the bucket”.
Obviously Celine, either you didn’t read the post very carefully, or else you don’t believe what was said. I think you need to read the article linked to in the post to look at the evidence.
I think you all are just a bit biased yourselves! Don’t you know that our planet is running dangerously low on potable water already? How can you criticize a law that was made to help reduce our water consumption?
Let’s get back to the legality of the government making such a law. I don’t really think that the framers of the Constitution had this kind of thing in mind at all. They seemed to have the idea that the fewer laws we have the better!
I don’t really know who came up with the concept of eco-whatever, but a lot of these ecoglogically friendly things do really seem to have an ulterior motive. And an awful lot of lobbyists are taking advantage of the trend.
I’ve thought about that a bit. I don’t suppose it could have been the manufacturers of bathroom porcelain fixtures, could it? Probably not. That would be a bit too obvious a case of blatant self-interest.