Cistern! Don't want one, but being forced - experiences

I will make the following calculation. The average German is calculated with 120l/day, of which 27% is for toilet flushing and 12% for laundry washing. Let's calculate 40% or 48l for washing machine and toilet. Although the statistics certainly still include some flush tanks from 1960 or ancient washing machines. Let's round that up to 50l to make the calculation easier. That is exactly the part that can be replaced by a cistern. Not the noodle water, tea, or full bath. That means, in a household with 3 people, a good 50 cubic meters per year are potentially replaceable. But we still have to subtract times when it is too dry and the cistern runs empty. I assume a flat rate of 20%, so 40 cubic meters remain.

And now one can consider what is consumed elsewhere. Example garden water meter: One time lawn sprinkling is calculated with ~20l/sqm. Whoever waters 20 times a year (e.g., May-August once a week) has reached the same amount at 100sqm.

As I said, I basically think it's sensible to do this. But financially it will never pay off. And I think, if we already start with ethics, then first of all we should abolish garden water meters. And secondly, regulations for retention cisterns. Because from our cistern the larger part will mainly contain air, as we have to release the water unused. Thirdly we should talk about bathtubs. We certainly don't have any, but had to defend this decision quite strongly here.

Crane?

In some regions, that is what people call the (water) tap.

As I said, I basically think it makes sense to do that. But financially it never works out

That just means that drinking water is still too cheap.

Hello,

I wrote about this: totally worth it, I have connected all toilets, washing machine, and garden. I have an annual consumption of 2km as an individual.

So you only use 5.5 liters per day for cooking, brushing your teeth, and showering? Could it be that a digit is missing? ;-)

Best regards,

Andreas

That only means that drinking water is still too cheap.

Or wastewater is too expensive. For the quantities involved here, there is probably not much to gain from price either. I would find a better lever than raising drinking water prices would be to give more consideration to the use of rainwater in stormwater management. We should promote actual use instead of prescribing retention, which ultimately only directs water into the sewer.

In the first sentence, I don’t understand the logic or I would also say that it’s too cheap. I basically agree with you about the rest, or in connection it will probably make sense: Drinking water into wastewater is too cheap and should become more expensive. Rainwater into wastewater likewise. Drinking water without a corresponding wastewater quantity can remain cheap and rainwater without a corresponding wastewater quantity should remain free. But how do you measure that (especially non-discharged rainwater)? I suspect that’s why it usually remains forbidden, as the usage is hard to monitor...

Water costs about €2 for us, wastewater €5. The expensive wastewater undermines profitability, because you definitely have to pay for it. No matter where the water for the toilet flush comes from.