Is it worth it to switch to a high efficiency toilet?

[@FatTony071984]

Filming a video about saving water in front of your recreational pool is really smooth.

[@BenBuildsDIY]

Haha, yeah... It's still a good way to save water nonetheless.

[@seigeengine]

Amusing, sure, but not particularly relevant. The point isn't using less water, the point is using less water to retain the same functionality. A higher efficiency toilet functions identically, and provides no additional inconvenience beyond the up front replacement costs.

[@thetoiletfrenzy]

​@seigeengine Except they don't. The minute you take a dump that isn't hard as a rock, the bowl will be left with cloudly water and a lot of skids and need to be flushed 2 or 3 more times. I'd rather just have a real toilet that handles everything in one go

[@amishpope]

I tore out my high efficiency toilet because it had to be flushed several times. I found an old seven gallon crapper the would flush a pair of work boots down. Life is good.

[@DavidinEssexUK]

How do you feel about using rain water to flush?

[@BenBuildsDIY]

Thats an idea worth investigating.

[@stuartgrimm6048]

Don''t forget maintenance. A leaking flapper valve can waste a lot of water and drive you nuts as it tops off the tank every 20 minutes or so depending on the leak.

[@wcampbell1502]

so I have a well, and septic tank, please tell me how much money on my water bill will I save over an efficiency toilet versus an average toilet, how long will it take me to recoup the cost of a new commode including the plumbers fee to install it?

[@treynamy]

Definitely good thoughts, and I applaud you for your efforts in conservation of resources and money. I think you really should only be using the "usage" parts of your bill, not the basic service fees. Those fees in most municipalities are fixed regardless of how much you use. (If we don't go to our farm house for a month and use zero gallons, we still get the $26 Basic Service Water fee...). So really your cost is about $0.0068 per gallon, a little over 1/2 your calculation. Still, it's a good idea though!

[@marcmagus0]

I had the same thought, it looked like fixed costs were being included in the calculation. I pay our water bill, so I know we are charged for a minimum amount of water per month in the variable costs, which we have never yet exceeded. Which means that while we switched to a high efficiency toilet, and I stand by that as the right decision because it reduces our impact on both the clean water and sewage system, it's not actually saving us any money.

[@reallifeistoflat]

you shouldn't reduce the water in the tank below what is listed as the fill line. high efficiency toilets are designed to use the amount on that fill. because of their efficiency they are also much more sensitive than large tank toilets to a change in volume.

[@LeeroyReading]

Put a brick or two in your old toilet cistern, that'll save water without having to change your crapper!

[@Remmes]

Great video, we've been thinking about replacing our old toilet (which does have a flush stop) because it's old, a bit broken, and we could probably save some money in the long run. Though calculating in the other costs (which usually are a fixed price) isn't all that fair, so savings are going to be less than that, but in the end it'll all add up and seeing how a toilet will be around for man years it's a great way to invest and save money.

[@BenBuildsDIY]

Agreed!

[@lleberghappy]

Hot tip to save water in flushing: Carefully add for example a brick in the tank in your toilet, it will displace the water and rise the water level, and you will have less water per flush, by as much as the volume of brick you have added. Adjust if needed. But then of course: A modern toilet is probably more efficient with hte water it uses, but the tip above is basicly free.

[@iNNeRKaoS]

For some reason, Skyrim comes to mind.

[@fasfan]

just a quick note... you do all the math and cone out with like $240 a year in flushing water. That's not what you'd be saving with a high efficiency toilet. You'd still be flushing the HE toilet. it's about a third of the water usage so you'd only actually be saving about 2/3 of the $238 or whatever it was.

[@combatmedic1980]

Well stitching toilets are plumbers and sewer cleaning company's big money makers. Sure you can flush a toilet with less water, BUT what they fail to understand is there is NOT enough water to carry the solid's and paper down the entire pipes and end up sticking to especially older cast iron and terracotta and steel pipes, and then need a plumber or drain cleaning service to unclog the pipes. But the government doesn't care because they don't need to pay for the problem after the flushing in toilet has left

[@combatmedic1980]

well I can tell you from first had experience having worked for a plumbing company, unclogging pipes went through the ceiling, having to have to buy and put cleaning machines in all our fleet of trucks. But your welcome to your limited experience in Sweden, not knowing what kind of piping you have there

[@instantsiv]

There's an old saying. Penny smart, dollar stupid.

[@seigeengine]

Sounds like people should be looking into replacing their piping.

[@combatmedic1980]

You obviously speak from lack of personal experience. There are MANY different types of piping from rough cast iron to terracotta steel copper steel and a LOT of roots growing into the systems , not to mention the length of the runs of the pipes. It's simple physics , the amount of weight of the water to push the weight of the solids and paper down a given run or length of pipe. Given a perfect system with perfectly smooth pipes and short runs, the process works. Work in the field before you give a inaccurate account as to what happens in the real world field of plumbing.

[@bd_mayhem]

Well, you flush, then you wash your hands, and later on you take a shower, wash the dishes, do some laundry, etc. There's still plenty of water running through your pipes.

[@tadwilson9563]

Low flow toilets are unsanitary they clog up and they waste a lot of water because you have to flush several times

[@NickHorvath]

Your cost per gallon is flawed because you included the basic charges for having water/sewer service in your cost per gallon. those are usually static charges and wouldn't apply to your actual savings. Still you'd probably be saving over $100 /yr.

[@joem.7621]

Better yet, build an outhouse around a hole in the backyard and use no water at all

[@Bob8673]

Also consider most people probably do half of that at work or school.

[@UberAlphaSirus]

7 fucking gallons! WTF are you people flushing? That's 32 liters.

[@havenisse2009]

Do you water your front lawn? Water savers in your shower? How efficient are us dishwashers?

[@seigeengine]

This isn't a "who can be the most eco-friendly" contest.

[@BenBuildsDIY]

Front lawn is watered with free reclaimed water and yep, shower water savers too!

[@rronaldreagan]

+Ben Builds: damn you are a fabulous princess

[@Leo-fluffy]

Fun fact If Scotland had a drought we would still have three years worth of water its always raining

[@Leo-fluffy]

We don't pay water bills

[@jsnxbskscnskcnskcjbzjzjbvd]

I'm installing new toilets too!

[@Dzichader]

Install Pisuar for men and now we can talk about saving water and money.

[@Dudeinator]

that pool is also water efficient and saves money per year compared to no pool at all...

[@Dudeinator]

The pool saves more money than moving out and such! xD

[@seigeengine]

If I lived somewhere hot and didn't have a pool, I'd probably give up on life. The short time of the year it gets hot here I basically avoid going outside as much as possible.

[@BenBuildsDIY]

Yeah, we live in Florida where 70% of the year the temperature is >90 F so a pool is a must. We actually never fill it because it rains so much anyway.

[@Mikidy303]

ha ha, he said floater at 4:59. Not my idea of what a floater is though....

[@markgriz]

Right. That a float. A floater is something else entirely

[@BenBuildsDIY]

Ha, yeah... oops. I meant float.