All MaP PREMIUM-rated residential toilet models meet WaterSense requirements, flush with 1.1 gallons (4 litres) or less, and achieve a minimum 600 gram MaP score.
Western water utilities are encouraging market transformation with targeted rebate programs for residences. Special incentives for MaP PREMIUM toilet models are offered by these utilities:
Check this article in Contractor Magazine from 2002 and the reaction of plumbing industry representatives to the new ‘bean curd test’! Since then, the MaP testing protocol has found its way into WaterSense and the national plumbing standard for toilets.
On December 17, 2015, the U.S. EPA’s WaterSense program released its final specification for flushometer valve toilets (water closets), used almost entirely in commercial, industrial, and institutional applications.
This new specification sets the maximum flush volume of any such toilet at 1.28 gallons per flush (4.8 litres per flush), encompassing both single- and dual-flush products. Interestingly, the specification also sets a minimum flush volume at 1.0 gallons per flush (3.8 litres per flush). The establishment of a minimum was based largely upon studies (such as the PERC drainline study) and field experience associated with the performance of commercial building drainlines.
Compliance with WaterSense is voluntary (although some jurisdictions mandate some WaterSense product categories).
Coming next – MaP PREMIUM for flushometer valve/bowl toilets
With the release of the new WaterSense specification, MaP expects to establish requirements for a PREMIUM category for flushometer combinations. Patterned after its successful PREMIUM classification for tank-type toilets, the new requirements will include full WaterSense compliance as well as a maximum flush volume below the current 1.28 gallon (4.8 litre) WaterSense maximum.
On February 8, 2016, the Alliance for Water Efficiency (AWE) released a short white paper titled “The Status of Legislation, Regulation, Codes and Standards on Indoor Plumbing Water Efficiency” which focuses primarily on provisions in current ‘green’ codes, standards, and rating systems in the U.S. Among the findings and recommendations, the white paper provides three very interesting and revealing tables of comparison. We urge you to download and review the entire paper.
How can an automatic flush valve save water when compared to a manual valve? With manual, it’s one person = one flush. The sensor-activated automatic valves may not be quite so efficient. Without the right product, correct installation, and regular maintenance of the sensor system, ‘PHANTOM FLUSHES’ will probably result…..we’ve all experienced that! Read more from the Guardian.
How about a slightly different take and opinion from the LA Times? Go here!
Do you think this problem is a minor irritant and is confined to your municipality’s sewer system? Think again . . . it is worldwide and it is serious! Check out this article from Australia.
Reminiscent of the serious problems and litigation associated with chlorine-based drop-in tablets for toilet tanks of the last decade, will non-flushable WET WIPES trigger more legal actions like this?
Don’t be confused. Two different words with two different meanings.
Unfortunately, many professionals use these words interchangeably. A few years ago an energy specialist illustrated the difference: Install a low wattage light (an LED, for example) – that’s ‘efficiency.’ Use it sparingly – that’s ‘conservation.’ Alternatively, one could install the efficient LED, but leave it burning 24/7 – that’s efficiency without conservation. The same applies to water today. Efficiency is reflected in product and building standards and specifications, and in the products and buildings themselves. It is readily measurable against a norm. Conservation, however, is how that product or building is operated; it is frequently based largely upon behavior.