WHAT IF YOUR CITY PAID YOU TO USE LESS WATER?
I totally get the hesitation with retrofitting for greywater—crawling under the house is never fun. When we were looking at upgrades, I made a spreadsheet to see what would actually save money versus just sounding “green.” Low-flow stuff really does add up, like you said. One thing I’m curious about: has anyone tried those dual-flush toilet kits you can add to an existing toilet? I keep seeing them online, but I’m not sure if they’re worth the hassle or if it’s better to just swap the whole thing out.
WHAT IF YOUR CITY PAID YOU TO USE LESS WATER?
One thing I’m curious about: has anyone tried those dual-flush toilet kits you can add to an existing toilet? I keep seeing them online, but I’m not sure if they’re worth the hassle or if it’s better to just swap the whole thing out.
I’ve actually installed a couple of those dual-flush kits in my rentals and my own place. Honestly, they’re not as intimidating as they look. If you’re comfortable with basic tools and don’t mind getting your hands a little wet, it’s a pretty straightforward afternoon project. The trickiest part is usually just getting the old guts out of the tank—sometimes those bolts are rusted or stuck, but nothing a little patience (and maybe some WD-40) can’t handle.
Here’s the thing: retrofitting with a kit is way cheaper than replacing the whole toilet, especially if your current one isn’t ancient. The water savings are real, too. I noticed my bill dropped a bit after switching over, though it’s not like winning the lottery or anything. Still, every bit helps, right? Plus, there’s something satisfying about making an old fixture work smarter instead of tossing it.
That said, if your toilet is one of those old-school 3+ gallon monsters and you’ve got the budget for it, swapping for a modern high-efficiency model will save even more water in the long run. But if you’re just looking for a quick win and don’t want to deal with hauling porcelain around (or paying disposal fees), those kits are totally worth considering.
I get what you mean about “sounding green” versus actually saving money. There’s so much hype around eco-upgrades that sometimes it feels like you need an engineering degree just to figure out what makes sense. But honestly, even small changes add up over time—especially if your city starts paying you for conservation. That’d be wild... imagine getting a check just for flushing smarter.
Anyway, don’t let the DIY aspect scare you off. Worst case scenario, you spend an hour cursing at stubborn hardware and end up with a better understanding of how your toilet works. Not exactly glamorous, but kind of empowering in its own weird way.
WHAT IF YOUR CITY PAID YOU TO USE LESS WATER?
I’ve seen those kits in action during a few remodels. They’re decent for a quick fix, but I’ll admit, sometimes the fit isn’t perfect—especially in older toilets. Had one leak on me after a month, which was a pain. Still, if you’re not ready to rip out the whole thing, it’s a fair compromise.
As for cities paying people to use less water... I’m skeptical how much that’d move the needle. Folks love their lawns and long showers. Incentives are nice, but unless the payout’s real money, most people won’t change habits much. Just my two cents from watching how these things play out in new developments.
WHAT IF YOUR CITY PAID YOU TO USE LESS WATER?
Had a similar issue with those retrofit kits—sometimes they just don’t seal right, especially in older Kohler models. As for the city paying people, I wonder if tiered incentives would work better? Like, bigger payouts for bigger reductions. I’ve seen some high-end homes swap out lawns for xeriscaping when there’s a rebate involved, but it’s rare unless the numbers make sense. Does anyone actually track how much water those “smart” irrigation systems save in practice? I’m curious if the tech is worth the investment or just another gadget.
WHAT IF YOUR CITY PAID YOU TO USE LESS WATER?
I’ve wondered about those “smart” irrigation systems too. Some clients swear by them, but I’ve also seen setups where folks just override the settings because their grass starts looking rough. Hard to say if it’s the tech or just user error.
On the tiered incentives, I think you’re onto something—most people won’t bother unless the rebate actually offsets the hassle and upfront cost. But then, how do you make sure people aren’t just gaming the system? Like, running up their usage before the program starts so they can show a bigger “reduction” later?
And with older homes, sometimes even with all the gadgets and rebates, you hit a wall with old plumbing or landscaping that just isn’t efficient no matter what you do. Has anyone seen a city program that actually accounts for that kind of stuff? Or is it always one-size-fits-all?
