CHOOSING BETWEEN ENERGY EFFICIENCY OR WATER SAVINGS FOR GREEN BUILDING POINTS?
I hear you on the low-flow toilet frustration. Had a similar experience—ended up using more water in the end, which kind of defeats the point. Here’s what’s worked for me:
- Swapped out showerheads for WaterSense models—good pressure, real savings.
- Focused on front-load washers. They cut both water and energy use, and honestly, I do laundry way more than I flush.
- Kitchen faucets: not worth stressing about unless you’ve got a giant family.
Marketing claims are hit or miss. I’d say prioritize upgrades where you’ll actually notice the savings, both in comfort and on your bills. Sometimes chasing every single point just isn’t practical...
CHOOSING BETWEEN ENERGY EFFICIENCY OR WATER SAVINGS FOR GREEN BUILDING POINTS?
I get the frustration with low-flow toilets—had a project where the client hated them so much they swapped back to older models. Sometimes the “green” solution just doesn’t fit real-world use. Curious if you’ve looked at overall building performance rather than chasing points? I’ve found it’s easy to get tunnel vision on one metric (like water or energy), but sometimes a more balanced approach gives better long-term results, especially when you factor in occupant comfort.
Have you run into any situations where going after water savings actually ended up hurting energy efficiency, or vice versa? For example, I’ve seen recirculating hot water systems save water but bump up energy use. Wondering if you’ve noticed any trade-offs like that in your upgrades. Sometimes it feels like there’s no perfect answer—just finding what works best for how the space is actually used.
CHOOSING BETWEEN ENERGY EFFICIENCY OR WATER SAVINGS FOR GREEN BUILDING POINTS?
Sometimes the “green” solution just doesn’t fit real-world use.
That’s the crux of it, isn’t it? I get where you’re coming from with the low-flow toilet backlash—seen that play out more than once. But honestly, I think we’re sometimes too quick to blame the tech instead of looking at how it’s implemented. Not all low-flow fixtures are created equal, and a lot of the early models were just...bad. These days, there are options that actually work well if you spec them right.
On the bigger picture, I’d push back a bit on the idea that chasing points is always a distraction from real performance. The rating systems (LEED, WELL, etc.) aren’t perfect, but they do force teams to consider things they might otherwise ignore. That said, I’ve definitely seen projects where people get obsessed with one metric—like maxing out water credits—and end up making weird trade-offs. Recirc pumps are a classic example: you save water but burn more energy, and if you don’t insulate those lines properly, it’s even worse.
But here’s where I think we disagree a bit: I don’t see it as an either/or. The best projects I’ve worked on take a systems approach—modeling both water and energy impacts together. Sometimes that means accepting you won’t get every possible point in one category because the overall building performance is better balanced. For instance, in multifamily buildings, we’ve found that slightly higher-flow showers (still efficient, just not ultra-low) keep tenants happy and reduce maintenance headaches, while investing more in envelope improvements and heat recovery gives us bigger energy wins.
I guess my point is, the “perfect answer” probably doesn’t exist, but that doesn’t mean we should throw out the frameworks or stop pushing for both water and energy savings. It’s about using the tools intelligently and not letting the pursuit of points override common sense or user experience. Sometimes you have to fight for that nuance with clients or code officials who just want to tick boxes...but that’s part of the job.
CHOOSING BETWEEN ENERGY EFFICIENCY OR WATER SAVINGS FOR GREEN BUILDING POINTS?
I hear you on the “points chasing” trap—seen projects where the checklist becomes the goal instead of actual performance. But here’s my hangup: when budgets get tight, which do you actually prioritize? If you’ve got to pick, is it smarter to lean into energy upgrades that pay back faster, or water savings that might matter more in drought-prone areas? I’ve had clients push hard for water credits just because it looks good on paper, but the real-world impact sometimes feels... questionable. Curious if anyone’s found a sweet spot that actually makes sense long-term.
CHOOSING BETWEEN ENERGY EFFICIENCY OR WATER SAVINGS FOR GREEN BUILDING POINTS?
I totally get where you’re coming from—sometimes it feels like we’re just playing a game with those checklists, right? I’ve been there, staring at the spreadsheet, trying to figure out what gets the most bang for the buck when you can’t do everything.
Here’s how I usually break it down for myself (and yeah, my projects are smaller scale, but the logic holds up):
First, I look at what’s actually going to make a difference in my area. For me, that meant checking our utility bills and seeing what hurts more—energy or water. In my case, energy costs are higher and our region isn’t super drought-prone, so I leaned into insulation and better windows. The payback was pretty clear on paper and in real life. But I’ve got friends out west who say water is gold, so they put in rainwater catchment systems and low-flow everything.
One thing I learned the hard way—sometimes the “points” for water savings look good on the certificate but don’t really move the needle unless you’re in a place where water is scarce or expensive. Had a neighbor install all sorts of fancy fixtures for LEED points, but honestly, their water bill barely budged. On the other hand, swapping out an old furnace or adding attic insulation made a huge dent in my heating costs.
If budget’s tight and you have to pick one lane, I’d say go for what’ll make your life easier (and cheaper) long-term. Energy upgrades usually pay off faster where I live, but if you’re in a spot where water restrictions are looming or prices are climbing, maybe that’s worth more than a quick ROI.
It’s easy to get caught up chasing those shiny points—been guilty of that myself—but at the end of the day, it’s your house and your bills. Sometimes it helps to step back and ask: what’ll actually matter five years from now? That’s usually where I find my answer... even if it means passing up some “easy” checklist wins.