Water Conservation: Why Don't Homes Have Urinals?

Here's how you know you have too much time on your hands: you start asking questions like "why don't homes have urinals?"

It seems like a good idea. Today, most newer homes have at least one gigantic master bathroom that certainly would accomodate a urinal in addition to the traditional commode.

Urinals use less water than commodes. While the amount of water savings varies, depending on the type of unit used, a standard urinal typically uses one gallon per flush, while a standard toilet today uses 1.6 gallons per flush.

Let's assume that the roughly 150 million males in America would use a home urinal three times a day (being at work, school or somewhere else part of the day) if they had one. And let's assume that they would save .6 gallons compared to a toilet for each use. That comes out to water savings of 270 million gallons per day. Not bad!

A further benefit of home urinals would be to end to debate over whether it's the man's or the woman's responsibility to put the toilet seat down--it could always be down.

We suspect part of the problem is building codes and plumbing connection fees--in many localities, there is a charge for each toilet connected to the local sewer system. Others limit the number of toilets that can be connected to a septic tank. Perhaps municipalities should experiment with exempting urinals as a means to encourage water conservation.

Tradition may also be part of the problem, but we don't know why--virtually every public men's bathroom in the country has at least one urinal. It's not like it's some new-fangled contraption men aren't used to.

Perhaps this is an issue the urinal ice lobby can get going on!