Laserfiche WebLink
<br />showerhead and aeraturs (Plan Twu), and the thirdopLion{Plan Three) oni:red the in~tulllltiun of <br />a 1.6 gallon ultra low tlush toilet. The participants shared program costs by paying $10 for Plan <br />One, $15 for Plan Two and $100 for Plan lbree. <br /> <br />In our original program design, we estimatcd that wc would have 25 participating households for <br />each of the three plans in ench community. This would have reached a total of 150 homes in <br />Carbondalc and Glenwood Springs. We were surprised to find that very few people were <br />interested in just getting showerheads, acrators and flappers. Purchasing a toilet proved the most <br />popular choice by far, despite its relatively high cost. Most ufthe homes buying toilets also <br />purchnsed showerheads and aerators too. <br /> <br />Because we chose to offer the combinations of devices which people requested, rather than the <br />combinations specified in the program design, we effectively offered a blending of the <br />three options. Dy the end of the program, we had retrofitted 98 homes and installed 110 toilets. <br />Because of the level orinterest, we were not able to enter the projected 150 homcs; howcver, we <br />believe the program achieved greater savings than the proposed program, because we installed <br />over twice as mnny toilets. For more specific information concerning participation, refer to <br />"PARTICIPATION AND MONITORED SAVINGS" below. <br /> <br />Participants willingly paid the wholesale cost of the Kohler toilet. This contribution allowed the <br />statc grant to create a dollar for dollar match for their fWIding, effectively doubling the size of the <br />program and giving the residents ownership in the effort. The Colorado Office of Water <br />Conservation grant provided $15,235 in funding for the project. This fWIding was matched by <br />$12,737 in direct funding from participants and over $1,000 of in-kind services from the RFEC, <br />rhe Town of Carbondale, and the City of Glcnwood Springs. The State grant reserved $1,523, or <br />10% of the total funding, to pay for monitoring, evuluution and production of this report by the <br />RFEC. <br /> <br />WATER EFFICIENT FIXTURES UTILIZED <br /> <br />TolJet.~ <br />The prognun used two different types ofULF toilets. The first 50 toilets installed were the Ads <br />822 modcl supplied by Western Pottery Company of Southgate, CA at a cost of $73.99 each. All <br />of the other installed toilets were the K3421 Wellworth Lile supplied by the Kohler Company of <br />Kohler, WI at a cost of$76.95 each. These amounts included the cost of the toilet and freight <br />but did not include a seat. <br /> <br />Both toilcts ofIercd satisfactory performance as far as theif plumbing was coricerned. However, <br />the We~lern Pottery toilets required replacement of over 40% of their handles. We contaeted the <br />company abollt this problem and they sent us free handles that we distributed to participants for <br />replacement. The plastic handles broke with such a high rate of frequency that we decided not to <br />use the product anymore. Furthermore, we will not recommend this product. However. we will <br />continue to stand behind our installed toilets by offering free replacement handles for them. <br /> <br />In contrast, thc Kohler toilet has not had any problems or broken parts. Feedback from <br /> <br />9Bd Wde~:~B v551 Be 'l~O <br /> <br />SvSl~95 'ON 3NOHd <br /> <br />MAZ" WO~.:1 <br />