
Lame showers, dishwashers that don't work, and dirty clothes - forrestbrazeal
https://fee.org/articles/your-shower-is-lame-you-dishwasher-doesn-t-work-and-your-clothes-are-dirty/
======
colanderman
What a bullshit article. Every low-flow toilet I've ever used clogs far less
than my mother's 1980s toilets (and flushes more quickly, no less). 120°F is
the MINIMUM water boilers are allowed to be set to; typically they're at 130°F
or 140°F (which I personally find scalding). In Brazil, you can't even flush
_toilet paper_ due to poor sewage systems.

I stopped reading there. This guy clearly has an agenda to push. Reminds me of
a similar BS article a couple years ago bemoaning the lack of phosphates or
something in soap, and calling out "government overreach" every other
sentence.

If there is a scientific case to make for these supposed household woes (which
I don't think there is), it can be made without appeal to a political ideal.

EDIT: Oh shit, I forced myself to keep reading and he got around to
phosphates. It's probably the same guy.

~~~
revx
Yeah, plus Phosphates are absolutely terrible for the environment:
[https://www.epa.gov/nutrientpollution/problem](https://www.epa.gov/nutrientpollution/problem)

~~~
DiabloD3
But of the amount of phosphates making it into bodies of water almost entirely
come from commercial farming, not people's houses.

Removing it from commercially produced soaps is insane if commercial farming
isn't also prohibited from using it.

~~~
pavel_lishin
It would be nice if Mr. Tucker mentioned that in the article.

------
devicenull
> We haven’t talked about toilets but this much is true: they used to work
> well but the low-flow model is vastly inferior. Combined with low water
> pressure, toilets clog and break down, to the point that you always have to
> have a plunger nearby (this didn’t use to be the case). Folks, we know how
> to make toilets that work: they need lots of water. Your constant problems
> with flushing are not your fault!

My experience is exactly the opposite. After replacing an 80's era toilet with
a modern one, it flushes much better (despite using a lot less water). Water
pressure also doesn't effect toilet flushes (excluding commercial tankless
toilets), it just effects how quickly the tank refills.

~~~
GFK_of_xmaspast
Yeah, the early low-flow toilets weren't all that great, but they definitely
got better pretty quickly.

The author also advocates for hot water heaters that go up to 140 or 170; at
140 you'll scald in 5 seconds and at 170 you'll scald 'instantly':
[https://www.energyguide.com/library/EnergyLibraryTopic.asp?b...](https://www.energyguide.com/library/EnergyLibraryTopic.asp?bid=tva&prd=10&TID=25821&SubjectID=10182)

~~~
DanBC
Here's a similar chart, with some sourcing.

[http://www.accuratebuilding.com/services/legal/charts/hot_wa...](http://www.accuratebuilding.com/services/legal/charts/hot_water_burn_scalding_graph.html)

At 170F a person would get a second or third degree burn in half a second.

------
pavel_lishin
> _The government forced soap manufacturers to remove from soap the thing that
> makes them work for these purposes: phosphates._

Did it?

[https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/proctor-
gam...](https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/proctor-gamble-
remove-phosphates-laundry-soap)

> _But P &G already stopped using phosphates in laundry detergent sold across
> the US in the early 1990s as part of a voluntary commitment from the
> American Cleaning Institute, an industry group of which the company is a
> member. It also removed phosphates from its detergents sold in the Europe
> several years ago._

And while Mr. Tucker offers good reasons to remove flow restrictors from
showers - domestic water use is only 2% of the nation's total - he doesn't
tell us _why_ phosphates were removed from soap, just complains that his
clothes are dirty (big ol' [citation needed] on that, by the way.)

Apparently phosphates damage the environment, leading to algal blooms and fish
die-offs. But it's fine. I'll gladly read Mr. Tucker's article blaming the
government for his inability to go fishing or swimming if phosphates are added
back to laundry detergent.

He also blames "the government", a nebulous entity, but only seventeen states
seem to have banned soap manufacturers from using phosphates in soap. An odd
tack for someone who I would expect to be pro-states'-rights:
[http://www.npr.org/2010/12/15/132072122/it-s-not-your-
fault-...](http://www.npr.org/2010/12/15/132072122/it-s-not-your-fault-your-
dishes-are-still-dirty)

~~~
mikestew
_(big ol ' [citation needed] on that, by the way.)_

You won't get one because it's bullshit. My front loader using cold water with
modern detergents gets my clothes clean just fine. Covered in mud from a trail
run? Clean. Working at the dog shelter, dog poops his kennel, walks in it,
jumps on me when I walk in? Dog shit on pants: gone. Blood on the sheets from
that "tragic accident"? Lily white after one wash (I wish the same could be
said for my soul).

Does it get clothes as clean as back in the "good old days" of phosphates, hot
water, and top-loaders? Damned if I know, that was twenty years ago and my
memory's not that good. And neither is the memory of the author when it comes
to such subtle things as how clean your clothes were two decades ago.

------
mikestew
"Combined with low water pressure, toilets clog and break down"

There's all I need to know to stop reading: the author doesn't even know
enough about how toilets work to write intelligently on the topic. (The point
being that water pressure has _nothing_ to do with anything but refilling the
reservoir tank.)

Go buy phosphates at the hardware store to add to your washer? Now I'm
picturing someone who took Ayn Rand _just_ a little too seriously, stamping
his foot like a toddler "don't you tell me what to do, no matter how much it
shits all over everything for everyone else!" And then just makes shit up
without critical thinking as long it supports the narrative. Because gummint.
(BTW, I recall soap makers advertising their lack of phosphates before
individual states started banning phosphates, probably because the
overwhelming evidence said it was bad. So without wasting time on references
to refute an article not worth refuting, I call bullshit on this one, too.)

------
mikeytown2
One of the best low flow shower heads I've used:
[https://www.amazon.com/Delta-75158SN-2-0GPM-Shower-
Nickel/dp...](https://www.amazon.com/Delta-75158SN-2-0GPM-Shower-
Nickel/dp/B0041G5H2U/) OR [https://www.amazon.com/75152-Single-Function-
Shower-H2Okinet...](https://www.amazon.com/75152-Single-Function-
Shower-H2Okinetic-Technology/dp/B000LV7W4K/)

In terms of dishwashers, I will be looking for 240v or a miele/bosch.

~~~
plorkyeran
I use
[https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003XEZH5I](https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B003XEZH5I),
which is both incredibly cheap ($7.50) and one of the best shower heads I've
used, low-flow or otherwise.

------
pavel_lishin

        fee.org wants to:
          Show notifications
    

I admit ignorance; does this mean notifications would show up while I'm on the
site, or could they push system notifications when I close the tab?

Because either way, I see no reason to allow this website, and 99% of others,
to do this.

~~~
viewtransform
This seems to work in Firefox. Disables notifications for all sites.

    
    
      about:config 
      dom.webnotifications.enabled => false

~~~
pavel_lishin
Yeah, I found where to disable it in Chrome. I held back for awhile, thinking,
"what if there _is_ a website that I would like to receive notifications
from?"

------
forevercrashing
> _Free societies have a method for knowing how much of something to use or
> not use; it is called the signaling system of prices._

Ugh. There is no way I would entrust the protection of our environment to "the
signaling system of prices".

