Make a splash about water

Too many water efficiency guidelines are drowning designers with options and diluting progress on this vital issue.

12/16/2009


 

 

 

View the full story, including all images and figures, in our monthly digital edition

 

Water is a natural resource that makes for highly regional circumstances—just ask Dec. 2009 shovel
Georgia, Tennessee, California, Nevada, New Mexico, and Arizona. Even if you live near the Great Lakes, the emphasis upon sustainability and resource conservation through advanced building design is timely and absolutely necessary.

 

Much of being green about water comes down to following codes, standards, and guidelines. Compared to energy efficiency, everyone seems to have their own idea of what constitutes water-use efficiency. As a result, there is a proliferation of water efficiency mandates, codes, specifications, standards, and guidelines throughout the U.S., which is largely unnecessary. Even after accounting for necessary regional differences that affect landscape design, irrigation, HVAC design and operation, and other water-using building elements, there are just too many differing green requirements for water.

 

In the residential sector, for example, there are at least three dozen sets of water efficiency requirements across the U.S. Most of these seem to have been developed by local or regional jurisdictions, sometimes with a limited understanding of what constitutes water-use efficiency in new building design.

 

Although the nonresidential sector has much fewer competing regulations and guidelines, the large number of existing and proposed green standards, codes, and guidelines could likewise be collected into one or two national standards and one or two sets of model codes.

 

For example, ASHRAE draft Standard 189.1 for High-Performance Buildings is competing in the marketplace with the Green Globes-Green Building Initiative (GBI), both of which are soon to be ANSI standards for green building. For model codes, the battle is between the International Assn. of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials (IAPMO) and the International Code Council (ICC), both of which are developing their own versions of green requirements.

 

The problem worsens when municipalities, states, and the water-utility industry ignore this work and go their own way. Product manufacturers and trade groups spend countless hours tracking all these initiatives so they can understand and meet the demands of the marketplace and manage their production. States and other code jurisdictions should adopt ANSI standards or model codes, which represent consensus-based decisions by the best minds in the business, rather than creating their own from scratch.

 

Regarding the proliferation of differing product and system requirements, the best answer is to have them align with the U.S. EPA's WaterSense program where applicable. The EPA launched the WaterSense product-labeling program in 2006 to promote water efficiency among U.S. consumers and design professionals. The WaterSense label is earned through third-party testing and independent certification to ensure products meet EPA's criteria for efficiency and performance. (No manufacturer self-certification!)

 

In 2009, WaterSense unveiled its first commercial standard, for high-efficiency flushing urinals, which has a 0.5 gal/flush maximum. When commercial products and design practices are released by WaterSense in 2010, they should be incorporated into green building codes and standards where applicable, thereby reducing or eliminating the variance among existing specifications.

 

I recommend that designers and specifiers become more proactive within the WaterSense program ( www.epa.gov/watersense ) and aid in the development of uniform codes and standards for water-use efficiency.

 

 

 

 

Author Information

Koeller is a professional engineer with extensive experience in water-efficient technologies and products. He is the technical advisor to the Chicago-based international Alliance for Water Efficiency, and is a consultant to numerous water providers, green building organizations, and private sector firms.

 



No comments
The Top Plant program honors outstanding manufacturing facilities in North America. View the 2013 Top Plant.
The Product of the Year program recognizes products newly released in the manufacturing industries.
The Leaders Under 40 program features outstanding young people who are making a difference in manufacturing. View the 2013 Leaders here.
The new control room: It's got all the bells and whistles - and alarms, too; Remote maintenance; Specifying VFDs
2014 forecast issue: To serve and to manufacture - Veterans will bring skill and discipline to the plant floor if we can find a way to get them there.
2013 Top Plant: Lincoln Electric Company, Cleveland, Ohio
Case Study Database

Case Study Database

Get more exposure for your case study by uploading it to the Plant Engineering case study database, where end-users can identify relevant solutions and explore what the experts are doing to effectively implement a variety of technology and productivity related projects.

These case studies provide examples of how knowledgeable solution providers have used technology, processes and people to create effective and successful implementations in real-world situations. Case studies can be completed by filling out a simple online form where you can outline the project title, abstract, and full story in 1500 words or less; upload photos, videos and a logo.

Click here to visit the Case Study Database and upload your case study.

Bring focus to PLC programming: 5 things to avoid in putting your system together; Managing the DCS upgrade; PLM upgrade: a step-by-step approach
Balancing the bagging triangle; PID tuning improves process efficiency; Standardizing control room HMIs
Commissioning electrical systems in mission critical facilities; Anticipating the Smart Grid; Mitigating arc flash hazards in medium-voltage switchgear; Comparing generator sizing software

Annual Salary Survey

Participate in the 2013 Salary Survey

In a year when manufacturing continued to lead the economic rebound, it makes sense that plant manager bonuses rebounded. Plant Engineering’s annual Salary Survey shows both wages and bonuses rose in 2012 after a retreat the year before.

Average salary across all job titles for plant floor management rose 3.5% to $95,446, and bonus compensation jumped to $15,162, a 4.2% increase from the 2010 level and double the 2011 total, which showed a sharp drop in bonus.

2012 Salary Survey Analysis

2012 Salary Survey Results

Maintenance and reliability tips and best practices from the maintenance and reliability coaches at Allied Reliability Group.
The One Voice for Manufacturing blog reports on federal public policy issues impacting the manufacturing sector. One Voice is a joint effort by the National Tooling and Machining...
The Society for Maintenance and Reliability Professionals an organization devoted...
Join this ongoing discussion of machine guarding topics, including solutions assessments, regulatory compliance, gap analysis...
IMS Research, recently acquired by IHS Inc., is a leading independent supplier of market research and consultancy to the global electronics industry.
Maintenance is not optional in manufacturing. It’s a profit center, driving productivity and uptime while reducing overall repair costs.
The Lachance on CMMS blog is about current maintenance topics. Blogger Paul Lachance is president and chief technology officer for Smartware Group.