[Greenbuilding] low flow shower heads

[Jason Holstine]

Not that a Navy shower is weak (as in pressure), but will provide a weak (or
uncomfortable) showering experience to most people‹this is ALL about
perception so it¹s subjective (ala CFL or LED lighting colors, marital
bliss, etc.). Getting people to separate the shower and rinse cycle would be
nice but I¹m cynical about that‹much more likely to throw on the showerhead,
install a GFX (no I don¹t sell them, Carmine) and let Calgon take you away.
And that¹s a good thing.

99.2% is about 90% a completely made-up number. But I¹m 100% sure the right
figure is a very high figure.

re: Origin ­ therein lies the problem, no? Breaking shopping assumptions and
considering factors like where something is made/grown and distance shipped
should be factored for virtually every decision in the interest of
sustainability and economic security.

I think the Hansgrohe provides a good modern model‹engineered in Germany,
some parts are made there, but final assembly of that SKU is in US.

Items can have cheap plastic shells and will simply show wear over time.
Gaskets can wear out. Some heads have weak threading and won¹t screw tight
to the wall neck (=leaks).
The lime scale can get stuck and isn¹t easy to clean out‹so they clog and
get trashed. Many of the better heads (like the Hansgrohe and Grohe) have
rubber nozzles‹just rub your finger over it to clean out the scale and
anti-clog. 

One line of showerheads (which I¹ll let remain nameless) is all gizmo to
save water and provide strong pressure but it involves a spinwheel on the
face‹a moving part that screams wear and replacement to me.


On 5/13/11 3:43 PM, "Reuben Deumling" <9watts at gmail.com> wrote:

> 
> 
> On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 12:32 PM, Jason Holstine <jason at amicusgreen.com>
> wrote:
>> slight shape or design difference‹bigger, rounder, oblonger, squarer....
> style = higher price; fine.
> 
>> There are definitely performance differences though, obviously in the
>> potential water and energy savings‹most are 1.75 to 2.5GPM‹and especially in
>> the pressure...many on this list would be fine with a Navy shower or weak
>> shower, 
> This is what I'm interested in, but I'm surprised you lump Navy with weak. My
> sense of the value of the button is precisely that it does not in any way
> interfere with the 'strength' or other qualities of the shower. It represents
> an opportunity to change the coincidence of acts performed in the shower with
> water consumption, but I'd be inclined to separate pressure and the presence
> or absence of a soap valve.
>  
>> but the other 99.2% of the populace is much more picky.
> I'm not sure we know this. Most folks I've mentioned the shower valve/soap
> button to haven't heard of it and seem to immediately like the idea--which of
> course doesn't mean they go out and find one and install it and live happily
> ever after, but it makes me suspicious of your percentage figure.
>  
>> Durability and place of origin also factors.
> Say more. I happen to be inclined toward favoring both when I shop for shoes,
> appliances, etc., but it hadn't occurred to me that a showerhead (a) would be
> identified as domestically produced, or (b) that there were significant
> differences in durability. I'm curious--what are the wear parts on a
> showerhead? 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Greenbuilding mailing list
> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
> Greenbuilding at bioenergylists.org
> 
> to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
> http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergy
> lists.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110513/ac7d576d/attachment.html>