Newspaper article The Christian Science Monitor

Low-Flow Toilets Proposed Federal Legislation Would Mandate a 1.6-Gallon-Tank Standard to Cut Water Waste. WATER CONSERVATION

Newspaper article The Christian Science Monitor

Low-Flow Toilets Proposed Federal Legislation Would Mandate a 1.6-Gallon-Tank Standard to Cut Water Waste. WATER CONSERVATION

Article excerpt

WHY the subject of toilets seems so funny, nobody really knows. But in Tom Konen's basement lab at the Stevens Institute in Hoboken, N.J., there are no giggles or silly bathroom puns.

Let the computer engineers have their fame and millions. Mr. Konen is on a mission. The United States is using too much water, and a lot of it is literally going down the john. Southern California is so short of water that people are turning in neighbors for watering their lawns. Sewage treatment, meanwhile, is going to cost a fortune. The United States Environmental Protection Agency projects the cost of needed plants nationwide at some $84 billion.

"Probably never before in our nation's history has there been more of a need for new and improved plumbing products," writes David Hanks, editor of Plumbing Engineer magazine, in the Nov./Dec. 1989 issue.

Toilets account for some 40 percent of the water flowing through the typical household - 27 gallons per person, per day. Most toilets in the US today are water guzzlers, requiring 3.5 to 7 gallons per flush, while standard models in Europe and Japan need only 1.6 gallons. Much as the nation pushed automakers to build more efficient cars back in the '70s, so today states and localities are telling plumbing-fixture makers to shape up their commodes. Massachusetts passed a law in 1988 that requires a phase-in of the 1.6-gallon standard, and New York, California, Connecticut, and other states have followed suit. A bill to require a 1.6-gallon standard nationwide is pending in Congress.

Yet even as a spiffy Japanese model - the Toto - enters the US market, the industry has resisted new efficiency standards. Meanwhile, the public wonders whether a low-volume flush can really do the job.

That's where Tom Konen comes in. His lab is one of the leading plumbing-testing shops in the country, and the American Society of Plumbing Engineers has enlisted him to resolve the doubts on low-flows.

Initial results are due soon; if favorable, they could give the green light for a new generation of plumbing technology, and help save the public billions of dollars in water bills and taxes. "It will help dispel the myth that a 1.6 gallon flush doesn't do the job," says John Borrelli, product manager for Universal Rundle, a maker of low-flow toilets.

Each year of delay, on the other hand, sinks the nation deeper into the hole. About 8 million new toilets are installed each year, and they won't be changed again for another 20 to 30 years.

Konen is an unassuming man. His office at the Stevens Institute is a plumbing lair of technical manuals and fittings, and the laboratory just below is as homely as its subject - an unadorned basement cluttered with commodes.

"He's flushed a jillion of these things," says Ed Osann of the National Wildlife Federation in Washington and a leading proponent of water-efficient plumbing.

Several units sit on a small platform connected to a transparent drainage pipe, which traverses the building. Plastic pellets demonstrate how far a flush will push material through the drain. A circle drawn on the inside of the bowl tests the unit's ability to cleanse what are called "skid marks" in the trade. They are a key to the current debate that Konen is trying to resolve. The other is industry control.

Konen was an engineer with the American Standard Corporation, a major fixture maker, when the US Department of Housing and Urban Development decided to fund a plumbing research lab at Stevens in 1972. His early work concerned drainage systems - he helped cut construction costs 25 percent - and plumbing standards for prefabricated housing. After the droughts of the mid-'70s he shifted to water conservation.

Much as the American auto industry took gasoline for granted, American toiletmakers were not greatly concerned with saving water. Styling and aesthetics came first. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed


An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.