gardenlen wrote:
fair dinkum jonno?
Heres the article. Linda B was the owner. But if this is correct then
they use a heap of water if left on all day...

LindaB wrote:

Hi Len,

Just to confirm, and keeping away from words like "waste" for the
minute (as it could be argued the moment it is drawn from the mains it
is wasted, so things gets confused)

We have now adjusted, turned all sorts of things down etc etc etc.
Including reading water meters with no other water use etc etc. The
minimum this one at the lower size in the range will work at is:

Drawing 50 litres of water per hour from the mains

Sending 20 litres per hour of that water into the stormwater (until we
put the hose on it)

Yes - that sure would do horrible things to your 300 litres a day.

But my important message is - people need to have this sort of
information so they can make decisions. It does not seem to be
anywhere in teh discussions on water saving.

Linda


that is horrendous use of sorry waste of water, 20 litres an hour was
bad enough, all this because people won't grasp the fact that our
homes are not designed to suit our climate nor are they designed to
keep people comfortable with nil or very minimal comfort control.




On Wed, 24 Jan 2007 21:34:07 +1100, Jonno
wrote:

snipped
With peace and brightest of blessings,

len

--
"Be Content With What You Have And
May You Find Serenity and Tranquillity In
A World That You May Not Understand."

http://www.lensgarden.com.au/

Wily Wilde wrote:
"Jonno" wrote in message It all ties in with
the sales of assets to corporations and lack of

income for states., which then they have to raise taxes from speed cameras
etc... I didnt vote for them!


You forget the States get the funds from the GST- including the petrol
taxes.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/sto...83-661,00.html


Never forget that tax. That cost the democrats the last time when the
liberals infiltrated them. What a loss that was.
Now they dont stand up to credibilty unless they put it right.

thanks jonno,

i most likley missed that reply post from lindaB, as i often don't
follow threads when they break away, and 2 people begin chatting
furiously on, suppose good edicate would be to post the reply to the
peson you are chatting with but also post it back to the original post
so all others will follow it, sounds complex but i think you will get
what i mean.

that is an horrendous use of water i must say again and the practise
should be treated with contempt and all such units should be turned
off, community spirit would dictate that surely?

yes as lindaB says people need tomake choices, but we need to step
right outside the square and discard our comfort zone so we can make
those choices properly. in the world of 'cause' and 'effect', we must
seek the true casue then alter the effect. the way i see it all waste
potential and unsustainability starts with the design of our homes.

i've said that before and now i've said it again, nothing will change
until we home owners do.

we ahve essays and information on our page, but unless the reader has
opened up that is come outside the square of indoctrinated comfort
zones then i guess none of it will mean much or at best it will test
their inttegrity and intelligence.


On Thu, 25 Jan 2007 09:48:46 +1100, Jonno
wrote:
snipped
With peace and brightest of blessings,

len

--
"Be Content With What You Have And
May You Find Serenity and Tranquillity In
A World That You May Not Understand."

http://www.lensgarden.com.au/

agreed willy but?

our farmers are subsidised almost to the hilt, but only to keep them
solvent so they go merrily on their inefficient ways.

this recycled class 2 water without further treatment should be pipped
to the growing areas (here that is about the same distance as it is to
pipe it to the water dams plus the extra cost of extra filtration
needed before doing that)

and wastfull overhead irrigators like they persist with should surely
be abolished in prefferece to a more efficient system.

pipe lines have their positives and negatives, but as you said if we
don't start we will never finish.

lots of other more local infrastructure to look at as well. money
better spent than the way it is now on illadvised subsidies in all
sectors.

snipped
With peace and brightest of blessings,

len

--
"Be Content With What You Have And
May You Find Serenity and Tranquillity In
A World That You May Not Understand."

http://www.lensgarden.com.au/

On Jan 24, 6:52 pm, gardenlen wrote:
dual flushes surprisingly don't save that much water, the best saving
would be if people stopped flushing urine at all, only flush solids.

Well, surely they save a lot compared to not having a dual flush.
Let's see, I do a number two about once per day. Probably do
number ones about 5 or 6 times a day (too much coffee), and
I use half flush for those. I think dual flushes are normally 3/6
L, right? So that is a saving of at least 15L per day per person,
maybe 75L for my family.

Ya, I could double that saving if I didn't flush urine, but then
my toilet would stink.

g'day bruce,

we don't flush urine at all here, mine goes into a bucket for the food
trees etc.,.

can't understand the odour thingy? just doesn't happen here, not even
my bucket though it has a lid on it.

just the way i see it with water so critical there is still a lot of
good drinking water used to flush used water away with.

On 24 Jan 2007 16:45:56 -0800, wrote:
snipped
With peace and brightest of blessings,

len

--
"Be Content With What You Have And
May You Find Serenity and Tranquillity In
A World That You May Not Understand."

http://www.lensgarden.com.au/

gardenlen wrote:
sure is linda,

would you believe that someone on another chat said they thought we
should leave how we manage water alone as they thought we where doing
a good job the way it is????


Tsk. And that is because we are obliged to allow lower forms of
intellegence to use computers and the internet. Apparently they have
"rights." Rights-schmights. Thing is, if we offered to swap these
cretins something simpler for their internet access - like... a lolly -
they'd probably be quite happy, accept and just drool. Special.

In article ,
gardenlen wrote:

dual flushes surprisingly don't save that much water, the best saving
would be if people stopped flushing urine at all, only flush solids.

Excuse me?!

We put in a dual flush toilet last April, and our water use dropped 231
litres a day. Now part of that could have been the replacement of a leaky
cistern with a good one, and replacement of our leaky bath taps, but changing
from the old cistern (~25 l per flush to 6/3 l per flush) must have been a
fair part of that!

the low flow shower heads much the same, people need to work out they
they don't need as many showers as many tend to take.

Anyone heard definitively if you can use one when you have a solar hot water
system? Low-flow shower heads are no good with gravity-fed water, but
obviously ours is a mixture of mains-pressure and gravity-fed. The plumbers
I"ve spoken to have all said they thought it was unwise, but none are experts
with solar HW.

we have a new estate up here that has recycled water piped to it but
it is only for the use of watering gardens and lawns, tat to me is
still a waste, why can't those homes be connected for using it in
their toilets?

Some new estates are; I believe Rouse Hill has that. The difficulty is the
local water company's regulations, I suspect.

we still need to remember that money spent on infrastructure is
investment fro the future, so why aren't all multiple use and public
toilets retro fitted with those waterless full flush urinals?

Because it's expensive to replace all those fittings. You refit the whole
bathroom at once, not piecemeal.

why aren't all new toilets in that catagory required to fit them first up?

why aren't water tanks compulsory for all new homes built?

We have BASIX, which is helping somewhat. I believe there is a small rebate
for fitting a tank too, but it is nowhere near the cost of installation. On
the good side, I've heard tank installers in Sydney are booked out for months
in advance.

and not to foget many homes are fitted with evaporative air coolers
these units commonly use 20 litres of drinking water for every hour of
operation.

Not down here; we're just chewing up coal and spitting out greenhouse
emissions with refrigerative systems.

--
Chookie -- Sydney, Australia
(Replace "foulspambegone" with "optushome" to reply)

"Parenthood is like the modern stone washing process for denim jeans. You may
start out crisp, neat and tough, but you end up pale, limp and wrinkled."
Kerry Cue

"gardenlen" wrote in message
...
yes kylie,

we came from rural of recent times where we supplied our own water,
that by the way would be a great training ground for many city folk
when yo ahve to wuply and mange your own water. and we had a waterless
composting toilet and i still say if we humans were 1/2 as smart as
what we are intellignet we would be wanting one of them in each home,
the water savings would be mind boggling.

yes this new yuppy affluenza idea that odour is some how unbdesirable
and must be eliminated, or that odour means unhealthy? you only have
to watch the manipulation occuring on tv commercials, they promte that
everything has to be surgically clean but this is leading to humans
getting sicker more often as the bodies immune systems have no
defences built up and defences can't come from a pill bottle.

to me here we are all running out of water to drink (the gov's story)
yet the majority of the poulation thumbs their noses at conservation
and uses 3 litres of drinking water to flush what? 1/2 a litre of
waste water from the human body.

back in the 40's to 60's before this madness of centralising human
solid waste disposal, sewerage!! came along we had thunder boxes, yes
they got a bit whiffy did anyone suffer from a pandemic? not to my
knowledge.

and the grease trap from the bathroom and kitchen waters drained into
our back yards where we played, grew beautiful lady finger bananas,
again hospital wards weren't crowded with the sick and dying of some
disease because of all this.

the affluenza of our society is driving us backward, closing our eyes
and narrowing our minds vision.

i saw a tv commercial the othe day that bought it all home we
developed nations are donating funds that help 3rd world countries get
access to clean water supply ie.,. bores, dams, well, yet here we are
prepared to waste good water so we can drink it as recycled poo water.


On Sat, 27 Jan 2007 14:37:00 GMT, "0tterbot" wrote:

wrote in message
roups.com...
snipped
With peace and brightest of blessings,

len

--
"Be Content With What You Have And
May You Find Serenity and Tranquillity In
A World That You May Not Understand."

http://www.lensgarden.com.au/

You have my wholehearted agreement on this one len! Especially about our
sterile society....I refused to sterilize every item my children touched
from birth...they ate dirt, grass, dog food, and on one occasion a very
unlucky house spider (that wasn't planned but DS1 seemed to enjoy it) and
they haven't died yet. I did suffer being picked on by my MIL and SIL for
not washing my baby twice a day....we just didnt have the water; a stinky
post-nappy bum didn't kill him, and he's perfectly fine now....not sure
where people got the idea that we can completely eradicate bacteria and
microbes by obsessive disinfecting of everyone and everything, and that this
was a good thing....

George.com wrote:

A good start to conserving water. Another relatively easy thing to do would
be to reuse grey water down the crapper (twice over then).

Only problem is that that involves a few hundred dollars for a grey
water system, plus a few hundred dollars for a pump to pump it back into
the toilet cistern, plus a few hundred for the plumber to connect it all
together, plus a few hundred for the electrician to wire it all up.

It would be easier for me to just build an old pit style loo over the
drop off in the back yard, but they'd never allow that.

Wily Wilde wrote:
We should be giving subsidies to farmers to do massive levels of water
saving irrigation techiques.

In Israel, the Israeli farmers are doing ok despite farming in an arid land
because they use new modern well designed irrigation systems.

Explain how you grow a field of wheat with it?

We should also build am irrigation pipeline from the areas which recieve
plenty of water - in NT etc.. - to the parts of Australia which are drier.

That will totally fsck the land.
far easier to send the crop to where the water is, but the Ordriver
scheme is already being impacted by salination. Not surprising with the
amount of water they are adding to the soil.

g'day meeee,

it's the indoctrination throuhg tv ads that does it, like the latest
type ads not only are you supposed to blast a fly or cockroach with
spray but it has to have a disinfectant in it to kill the germs they
supposedly carry.

all that ads that say if it smell clean it must be clean all
subliminal type manipulation saying if you detect an odour then that
is unclean.

we use a fly swatter and guess what no pandemics in ths family.

people don't question anymore if tv or some media says this is the way
then that is the way.

and the thing in our lives that most of us either aspire to or
purcahse is our homes and unquestioningly we buy this major investment
and never say why, never ask is there a better way? homes can be built
a whole lot less expensive (now wouldn't everyone like that?) be
designed to run with minmum power bills, and believe it or not ther
was a time when young home owners (my aprents era) wher they new waht
aspect the land had to be they knew a scillion roof facing the right
way was needed to keep warm in winter, just there was a lot they
didn't know, but modern folk don't know any of these things.

and back to water (this topic is a very wide isuue isn't it?, it goes
a whole lot deeper than just drinking poo water) our ikkustriuos you
know the ones we pay golden peanuts too to do the right thing by us,
well he said no right of choice now! no vote/plebacide/refferendum on
drinking the stuff "ya gunna get it whether you like it or not"

and it's coming the way of all the other southern states and most
likely at the same time.

one chap on tv said "i won't let me dog drink the clean water out of
the toilet bowl so no way" he says " am i going to drink the recycled
water"

can see huge profits for the water bottling companies hey, anyone into
share protfoliios you better get some of these hey? funny thing but at
the end of the day most of that bottled stuff is just outa the normal
supply so it will still be recyclet potty water.

On Sun, 28 Jan 2007 09:40:05 GMT, "meeee"
wrote:


"gardenlen" wrote in message
.. .
snipped
With peace and brightest of blessings,

len

--
"Be Content With What You Have And
May You Find Serenity and Tranquillity In
A World That You May Not Understand."

http://www.lensgarden.com.au/

On Jan 29, 4:29 am, gardenlen wrote:
it's the indoctrination throuhg tv ads that does it, like the latest
type ads not only are you supposed to blast a fly or cockroach with
spray but it has to have a disinfectant in it to kill the germs they
supposedly carry.

all that ads that say if it smell clean it must be clean all
subliminal type manipulation saying if you detect an odour then that
is unclean.

I think that urine left sitting in the toilet bowl for hours in the
heat gets stinky. I know this because sometimes my kids
use the ensuite and forget to flush. We don't watch tv.

I don't care whether it is clean or not, I just don't like the
smell.

"Terryc" wrote in message
...
George.com wrote:

A good start to conserving water. Another relatively easy thing to do
would
be to reuse grey water down the crapper (twice over then).

Only problem is that that involves a few hundred dollars for a grey
water system, plus a few hundred dollars for a pump to pump it back into
the toilet cistern, plus a few hundred for the plumber to connect it all
together, plus a few hundred for the electrician to wire it all up.

It would be easier for me to just build an old pit style loo over the
drop off in the back yard,

excellent idea, try drilling a bore next to it for drinking water as well. 2
for the price of one.

rob

"meeee" wrote in message
...

"gardenlen" wrote in message
...
len
yes kylie,

we came from rural of recent times where we supplied our own water,
that by the way would be a great training ground for many city folk
when yo ahve to wuply and mange your own water. and we had a waterless
composting toilet and i still say if we humans were 1/2 as smart as
what we are intellignet we would be wanting one of them in each home,
the water savings would be mind boggling.

i want one in MY home :-)

meeee
You have my wholehearted agreement on this one len! Especially about our
sterile society....I refused to sterilize every item my children touched
from birth...they ate dirt, grass, dog food, and on one occasion a very
unlucky house spider (that wasn't planned but DS1 seemed to enjoy it) and
they haven't died yet.

that was my thinking too (add dead blowflies, cat kibble etc to that list)
and my kids have always been extremely healthy, so i must be doing something
right ;-)

I did suffer being picked on by my MIL and SIL for
not washing my baby twice a day....we just didnt have the water; a stinky
post-nappy bum didn't kill him, and he's perfectly fine now....not sure
where people got the idea that we can completely eradicate bacteria and
microbes by obsessive disinfecting of everyone and everything, and that
this was a good thing....

agree :-) i do also agree with len that much of it is advertising, which
would aim to send people into a competition over (perceived) cleanliness
(etc), in order to sell products nobody needs. it's really not a competition
anyone would get involved in if they thought about it for 5 minutes. as well
as agreeing with len that it's interrelated to other problems, the real
problem is consumption in general.
kylie