Comments on: The Three Fundamental Flaws Of The Modern Toilet

By: Bidet Toilet Seat

Bidet Toilet Seat — Wed, 04 Nov 2009 09:07:03 +0000

Squat toilets are the norm in many countries still. Once you try it, you’ll understand why it’s a more efficient method of pooping.

By: Les

Les — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 10:44:04 +0000

I agree; water is far better for cleaning than paper, and a much more responsible choice for the environment.
Squat toilets are great too – if you are still flexible enough to use them.
But composting toilets?
Too much pee makes them stink – let alone any extra water used for washing the freckle!
I get disgusted whenever I walk into a shopping center in Australia that has opted for latest “waterless urinals” in their toilet blocks. You will get prior warning of this due to the pungent urine odor the minute you open the toilet block door.
Ah, the environmental irony – bidets or composting toilets; but you cannot have both!
Let’s get this in perspective: what would you do with the compost produced by the 10 million odd composting toilets of a major city?
Sewage systems were invented by the Roman civilization long ago for very good reason; they are simply the most efficient means of disposing of large amounts of human waste wherever water is readily available.
And really; what would you be doing building a major city where there isn’t an adequate water supply anyhow?

By: Chris Chambers

Chris Chambers — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 21:14:31 +0000

Our dual flush toilets http:www.macustrade.com. Can save the average household up to 4,000 gallons of water per year.

By: Vijay

Vijay — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 18:27:39 +0000

An absolutely must read :

http://groups.google.com/group/soc.culture.indian/browse_thread/thread/5015c70a9d801bd2?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&q=%22rohinton+mistry%22+viscoscity+toilet

By: Tootrertito

Tootrertito — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 06:07:29 +0000

Nothing seems to be easier than seeing someone whom you can help but not helping.
I suggest we start giving it a try. Give love to the ones that need it.
God will appreciate it.

By: Niki

Niki — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 18:25:21 +0000

So glad to see all this discussion on sanitartion, squatting proposals and conserving water. Beyond toilets, my husband likes to use the non-water using waterless urinals where he can. Actually wants to install one for our boys in the house too. Why use fresh water when urine simply goes by itself in the drain line. I think their website is http://www.waterless.com Have a little girl on the way and will report on the differences between the boys and the girls!

By: Aaron

Aaron — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 01:34:07 +0000

As I said, I have a dual-flush toilet. Caroma may have patents, but it is certainly not on the dual-flush concept. Caroma seems great, but we are THRILLED with our Sterling Rockton “Dual Force” toilet. It is excellently designed, relatively low, very powerful, has the same 0.8 / 1.6 as mentioned about Caroma (actually, the majority of my solid evacuations are dealt with effectively with only the 0.8, I use the 1.6 only with pretty major evacuations).
http://sterlingplumbing.com/whysterling/toilets.strl

We special ordered ours through the local Lowe’s (they carry Sterling but didn’t stock this toilet). It took a few weeks, and we paid the list price (under $300).

By: Andrea

Andrea — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 00:24:04 +0000

If a composting toilet isn’t your thing but you are serious about saving water, want a toilet that works and is affordable, I would highly recommend installing a Dual Flush toilet. Caroma toilets offer a patented dual flush technology consisting of a 0.8 Gal flush for liquid waste and a 1.6 Gal flush for solids. Caroma, an Australian company set the standard by giving the world its first successful two button dual flush system in the 80’s and has since perfected the technology. Also, with a full 3.5″ trapway, these toilets virtually never clog. All of Caroma’s toilets are on the list of WaterSense labeled HET’s http://www.epa.gov/watersense/pp/find_het.htm and also qualify for several toilet rebate programs available in the US. Please visit my blog http://pottygirl.wordpress.com/ to learn more or go to http://www.caromausa.com to learn where you can find Caroma toilets locally. Visit http://www.ecotransitions.com/howto.asp to see how we flush potatoes with 0.8 gallons of water, meant for liquids only. Best regards, Andrea Paulinelli

By: Beege

Beege — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 18:28:04 +0000

After having spent some time in Japan with some beautiful, clean squat toilets, as well as in some developing countries with less than….. ah…… pristine squatting toilets, I have to give the squatters a big thumbs up.

Sorry to be so graphic, but here are some observations: When you squat, your cheeks are more open, so there is less contact with the feces, resulting in less mess to clean off of your person. Because of the nature of the toilets, I have never experienced “blowback splash”. It is a much cleaner facility in public, because no part of you is in contact with the toilet.

One other often missed point is the time saved. On a regular toilet, I am at least a “two sections of the newspaper” kind of guy. I spent so long “reading” in the bathroom that my ex’s have either been amused or annoyed. With a squatter, it is a matter of a few seconds. Really! That in itself tends to give the cancer claims a bit more credibility, at least in my mind.

As Derek pointed out earlier, squatters can (with some practice) be used without removing the pants. HOWEVER, I would remove them anyway if you are at home, at least until you have become a moderately advanced squatter. A good way to gauge your “squatting ability” is to take a stance with your feet slightly wider than shoulder width, and squat. If you can do so without grabbing a support, you’ve got my first attempts beat! If you tend to come up on the balls of your feet, even a little, it is pants off time. If you can remain flat-footed through the whole exercise, you are ready for prime time squatting!

By: bob

bob — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 22:39:21 +0000

you missed the fourth fundamental flaw of modern toilets – mixing yellow and brown.

Separating them at the sewage plant is an expensive, carbon negative operation.

If they were separated, sewage treatment would produce more resources than it consumed.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19225831.600