I went over to talk to the lead plumbing engineer at Erdman, a local design/build firm. We talked for about an hour about the merits of waterless urinals and extremely low-flow urinals. In terms of using environmentally friendly building choices, you would think it would be an easy decision to just go with the a waterless. Compared to the very low flow models (1/8 gallon per flush) and a no water model you have some trade-offs. The problem with waterless urinals is that they use a plastic cartridge that you fill with a oily chemical that serves as the smell barrier. After a number of uses, the cartridges have to be thrown out and replaced. Depending on the company, those cartridges are between $5 and $30. At Erdman, they replace their cartridges once a month throughout their building. Not only does that start adding up in terms of cost, you are throwing away a lot plastic.
With the 1/8 gallon per flush model you are using water, to be sure, but very very little and you aren't using chemicals or throwing away plastic cartridges every month. One thing I should also mention, a standard-flow urinal uses 1 gallon per flush--not that most men actually flush after they use the pisser.
I have decided to use the 1/8 gallon model. The problem there is that the plumber has to install a cold water source that they hadn't planned on installing. Better now than AFTER they pour the concrete.
Speaking of plumbing and concrete, we've run into a little snag. Because we have over 12 (or 14?) plumbing fixtures, the plans for the club must be approved by the State, rather than just the city. Until the plans are approved, we can't have our plumbing inspected and subsequently we can't pour the floor. And, of course, everything on the schedule depends on the floor.
We were planning on pouring the floor on Thursday, but that might not happen. That would be unfortunate since it's suppose to be warm. The space needs to be kept warm for the pour so that the concrete cures properly. It'd be nice not to have to turn the heat on in there if we didn't have to. The only heat source now are a couple of Hot Dawg heaters as seen in upper-right cornder of the picture above.
3 comments:
Not sure if you are accepting comments or not...thought I'd try and can stop if asked.
I agree that waterless urinals smell (reek, actually) and fully support the decision to use a bit of water over plastic. At least water can be treated and re-used.
Good luck with the state!
Absolutely! Thanks for the comment. I was beginning to wonder if anyone was actually reading my ramblings.
I didn't think the waterless urinals reeked, per se, but they do have a certain, shall we say, unpleasant odor. The maintenance and the plastic throw-away bits is what decided it for me. How much energy is used to create the plastic bits that are used for a short time and then thrown away?
1/8 of a gallon of water seemed a pretty minimal use of resource.
Yep folks are reading your blog.:-)
I agree it was a good idea to switch plans and go with the low-water urinals.
I hope the state won't keep you waiting too long.
LaS
Post a Comment