[Greenbuilding] low flow shower heads

[Richard Garbary]

To start with:

= Keep the 40 gallon water heater. Cost: FREE
= Put in a 2.5 gal/ 9 liter shower head with flow control/shutoff. Cost:
~$10 - $50. This will save him 6x his current energy cost
= Add an insulation blanket. Cost: ~$20 - $30
= Put an insulation pad underneath the water heater. Cost: ~$10
= Insulate any exposed water pipes. Cost: ~$10 - $25
= Install a 50%-DHR system. Cost: ~$700 - $1,000. In combination with the
2.5 gal. shower head this will save him 12x his current energy cost!

He'll never run out of hot water with this setup unless he as some other
bizarre hot water requirements. So tankless is NOT necessary. Heat loss
through a tank setup is minimal if properly insulated. He will not have to
upgrade his service $$$$$.

I would definitely NOT recommend a tankless electric/gas water heater.

Regards,

Richard


=========================================================================================
On Sat, May 14, 2011 at 5:10 PM, Carmine Vasile <gfx-ch at msn.com> wrote:

>  Steve, Reuben & Richard: Last week I received a call from the owner of a
> mult-head shower drawing 15 gpm of 105F water. He lives in North Carolina
> and his 40 gallon electric tank-type water heater ran out of hot water in a
> few minutes. I gave him my advice, install a tankless water heater with a
> 50%-DHR system to halve the load by recycling heat wasted down-the-drain.
> Solar is not an option.
>    What would your advice have been?
> Carmine
>
> Date: Fri, 13 May 2011 13:40:29 -0700
> From: steve at tjiang.org
> To: greenbuilding at lists.bioenergylists.org
> Subject: Re: [Greenbuilding] low flow shower heads
>
>
> Terminology:A navy shower = turn on to wet skin; turn off to soap; turn on
> to rinse.A hollywood shower = turn on full blast; start singing; soap; turn
> off a the end.
>
> A thermostatic value + volume control is  way better than a navy shower
> button because you can adjust the volume down to a level just to keep you
> warm while soaping.  This may convince more people to actually use less
> water while showering than the pure "Navy shower" approach.   The downside
> is thermostatic valves and volume controls setups are expensive.
> <snipped>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/greenbuilding_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20110515/154a49ee/attachment.html>