Laserfiche WebLink
<br />FLOW RATES OF PLUMBING DEVICES, BEFORE AND AFTER PROJECT <br /> <br />Showerhead <br />Aerators <br />Toilet Devices <br /> <br />Existing <br />Flow Rates <br />5.0 gpm <br />3.5 gpm <br />5 gals. /flush <br /> <br />Water Conserving <br />Flow Rates <br />2.0 gpm <br />1. 5 gpm <br />4 gals./flush <br /> <br />Percent Water <br />Savinqs/Use <br />60\ <br />57\ <br />20\ <br /> <br />It should be noted that the relatively low percentage of water <br />conserved with the toilet devices is due to the minimum amount of <br />water needed to adequately flush solid wastes in older toilets. <br /> <br />Addi tional water conservation was achieved by fixing existing <br />leaks. 32 different houses were found to have leaks, most of which <br />were minor and were easily repaired with replacement of faucet <br />washers. Any that were difficult to repair or required a plumber <br />were referred to the homeowner for follow-up. Several toilets that <br />were "running" were adjusted to take care of the problem. <br /> <br />RESULTS <br />Before describing the results of this project, it is important to <br />highlight a major cause of water conserving behavior in Gilcrest <br />during 1993. Prior to the Town's water supply project, residents <br />paid a flat rate of $18.50 per month for water, regardless of the <br />amount used. Upon conversion to the blended water in May 1993, <br />water use was metered and new water rates took effect. The new <br />monthly rate is $27.72 per 4,000 gallons, and $1.52 per thousand <br />gallons over 4,000. Annual average household bills are now close <br />to $35-$45 per month, an increase of 89 to 143\ over the flat rate. <br />Undoubtedly, the higher cost of water is causing changes in water <br />using behavior that is reflected in the "before devices" and "after <br />devices" water useage numbers. <br /> <br />The water conserving devices were installed in the spring of 1993. <br />During the winters of 1992-93 and 1993-94, metered water use was <br />recorded for all residents to allow a "before" and "after" analysis <br />of the effects of the water conserving devices. The list of <br />housing units which received devices was reviewed carefully to <br />eliminate any housholds known to have changed occupants during the <br />study period, and those which had problems with their water meters. <br />The data was tabulated and analysed by the Statistics Center at <br />Colorado State University. <br /> <br />The following table shows the results of the three groups of <br />households, those where the contractor installed devices, those who <br />asked to do their own installation, and those who chose not to <br />participate at all. It is unknown whether those who requested the <br />devices be dropped off, actually installed them. The period of <br />study was December through February of each winter. <br /> <br />~ <br />