Environmental and Social Aspects of Domestic Bathing - Ethical Engineering for International Development and Environmental Sustainability - page 202

The Water Label This scheme is operated by The Water Label Company ( undated ).
(Until recently this UK scheme was operated by the Bathroom Manufacturers
Association and called the Water Effi cient Product Labelling Scheme.) The distinc-
tive and simple label states the maximum fl ow of taps, fl ow limiters and other acces-
sories and also places each in one of fi ve bands, according to maximum fl ow - Max
6, Max 8, Max 10, Max 13 and Max >13 l/min. There are 13 scheme partners,
including the UK government's Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
(Defra), the Chartered Institute of Plumbing and Heating Engineering (CIPHE) and
Waterwise. There are 38 registered companies (manufacturers) and I believe this
includes all of the major ones. The scheme is currently being expanded into Europe
by the European Association for the Taps and Valves Industry (CEIR undated ) and
known as the European Water Label. Yet from my investigations, I fi nd that the
scheme is practically unknown among retailers and the public. The contrast is stark,
between worthy, money-saving conservation advice on the one hand and the over-
whelming profi le of new and more profl igate - and profi table - products on the
other hand.

Hard Water If one lives in a hard water (apt to deposit limescale) area, the use of
a water softener can be justifi ed (Lower 2011 ). I have found such use very effective
in prolonging the life of boilers and showers, in greatly reducing the amount of
soaps and detergents needed, improving the bathing experience and avoiding
unsightly limescale stains. The disadvantages are expense and embodied energy of
equipment, expense and environmental effect of the needed salt and slight increase
in water use because of the resin regeneration stage. There should be a separate
plumbing route, not through the softener, for drinking water.

6.2 Energy

The general remarks about water apply in a similar way to energy, in that energy is
also a necessity of life, access to it is currently grossly unequal and unjust and rich
people are responsible for the globally unsustainable amounts used. It is also true
that some impoverished communities use energy in an unsustainable way, by cut-
ting down the few remaining trees in a devastated area, but they can hardly be called
responsible for this, as they have no choice.

Global Energy Use To appreciate the need for a reduction in our energy use, we
may note the historical data (1970-2000) and the projections (2000-2030) in de la
Rue du Can and Price ( 2008 ), based on the estimates of the IPCC Special Report on
Emissions Scenarios (SRES). At the beginning of their paper, p 1386, de la Rue du
Can and Price explain 'We distinguish between fi nal and primary energy consump-
tion. Final energy consumption represents the direct amount of energy consumed by
[the] end user, while primary energy consumption includes fi nal consumption plus
the energy that was necessary to produce secondary energy, such as energy transfor-
mation losses. An alternative designation to primary energy consumption is the term