Lakewood can save money and Earth at the same time.

[Donald Farris]

Hi,
Perhaps you can revisit this issue before completing the restrooms in the remodeled part of the Library. I have seen these waterless urinals in harsh environments (places where one would expect a degree of vandalism) and none seemed to be tampered with. But the damage from a tampered waterless urinal would be nothing compared with the damage a water urinal would cause (running water all over the floor tends to cause a lot of damage).

Here's a cost comparison for CA that shows the savings. http://sustainability.ucsb.edu/_client/ ... s_CBA1.pdf
Maybe you could share with me reports that show those high costs of waterless urinals you fear.

Even more important than the cost saving of waterless urinals is the educational benefit to the students and the community. It sets a good example and shows conservation working without a loss of service.

I hope the new City Administration, School Board and people responsible for the schools yet to be renovated take a close look at this, also. Energy and Water conservation need to be a part of our visionary alignment. We must stand above the typical if we want to be special.

[Kenneth Warren]

Don:

I am quite certain all the urinals in public restrooms have been installed already.

Are waterless urinals permitted by code in Lakewood?

Kenneth Warren
Director
Lakewood Public Library

[Dee Martinez]

From what Ive read (no personal knowledge, ahem), they still havent nailed down the esthetic (odor) problem. This is why the main application for waterless urinals seems to be public parks and areas where keeping facilities heated to keep pipes flowing, not to mention routine cleaning and maintenance, is at least as big a concern as water usage.

The UCSB figures you posted show an annual savings of $110 per year per urinal. Is that worth the tradeoff for the possible odor problems in a brand new public facility?

I want to be very very very clear. I support "green" construction methods and some things in that field are truly exciting. But I dont want the library to smell like a rest area in a state park (or anything close to it). Flush toilets with water are still the standard for sanitation and esthetics. Im not sure that this paper clip has been reinvented just yet.

Never thought I would ever be commenting on the topic of urinals.

[Lynn Farris]

I talked to my daughter whose architecture firm design all over the country. She said they have been using waterless urinals in their designs for several years with no complaints. She indicated that they have been in production for over 10 years.

I asked her about the odor problem and she said the only way that she could think there could be an odor is if it wasn't maintained correctly. But their clients don't have any problems with that either. This is the instructions on cleaning (like Dee, I never thought I would be posting on this either )


http://www.buildings.com/articles/detai ... entID=3188

But seriously, Borders and other commercial sales place wouldn't be doing this if there was a problem.

Regardless, we should take the opportunity with a new administration to get the building department/council to approve new green standards for our buildings and homes. It seems a shame that we can't use these conservation /energy efficient items since it isn't allowed in the code. Let's update the codes.

Maybe the library or the schools could really push the city to look at these codes. They have more influence with our city government than a small business who wants to implement it for the first time.

[Donald Farris]

Hi,
Those cost savings discussed in the link I provided were for replacing an existing water urinal including retiling and plumbing modifications. So, it is never too late for the schools, our government building or other public buildings to make the changes and start saving tax dollars.

[Kenneth Warren]

Ms. Martinez:

You have liberated the thread.

Lynn:

I am neither an expert on this matter nor in the pocket of the plumber’s unions. But my concern from earlier inquiry (and I have not kept up on this technology because I am not in the market right now for this product) is that the seals, traps and consumables and variations in the process technology might not be as cheap and easy as promoted. That’s not to say, the product is not worthy or functional, merely that products which might seem sensible to an environmental architect or green product firm may not be quite so cut and dry to various constituents involved in any implementation and support, including the maintenance crews. So buy-in at that level is also important.

See for example:

http://www.psdmagazine.com/ASPE_memberp ... nBuild.pdf

And I do recall a maintenance person warning about some issues with either traps or seals when someone mistakenly puts something in a waterless urinal. Again this was some time past. And I really do not know for certain what brand and methods are currently best on the market.

From the little I know, I would say the key cost consideration would be the light fluids or other consumables used in lieu of water. What inflation rates are projected for these product which I assume are patented and closed source? I could not tell if the costs for such specialized consumables were adequately represented in the study Don supplied.

Again, I am not opposed to the implementation waterless urinals. Since Lakewood Public Library was raised in the discussion, I wanted to note the complexities and maintenance hesitations discerned from our earlier evaluation of the product, while making sure that any good intentions for the future are matched with the functionality and savings described and desired.

Kenneth Warren
Director
Lakewood Public Library