Executive Summary

Conserving water helps to ensure that this important resource will be available for many generations

to come. Conserving water also saves energy—the

energy needed to treat, transport, and heat our

water. That is why the Energy Policy Act (EPAct) of

1992 (Public Law 102-486) addresses water efficiency as well as energy efficiency on a national scale.

As part of the Federal government’s goal to lead the

nation by example in improving energy and water

efficiency, Executive Order 13123, Greening the

Government through Efficient Energy Management

(1999), directs agencies to reduce their potable water

consumption. This order calls on the government 

to implement all cost-effective water conservation

measures in Federal facilities by 2010. The order also

required Federal agencies to determine their baseline water use in FY 2000 and report on their usage

every two years.

Agencies must also implement at least four of 10

cost-effective Best Management Practices (BMPs) 

for water conservation at up to 80% of their facilities

by 2010. Cost-effective practices include actions the

government can take, methods it can use, and products and systems it can purchase and install that

have payback periods of 10 years or less, on a lifecycle cost basis. Federal agency representatives

developed the BMPs with guidance from staff in 

the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Federal

Energy Management Program (FEMP). For a list 

of these BMPs, please see page 8. And for more

information about Federal water conservation,

please see FEMP’s Web site, www.eren.doe.gov/

femp/.

To help set priorities for Federal water conservation

activities, in 1997 FEMP conducted a study of water

use in Federal facilities. That study indicated that

the government consumes more than 50% of its

water in just three types of Federal facilities: housing, hospitals, and office buildings. These facilities

have enough kitchens, restrooms, and laundry areas

to provide facility managers with many opportunities to begin reducing their water and energy use—

and utility costs—with cost-effective, water-saving

products. Therefore, this Federal Technology Alert

focuses on water-efficient domestic technologies,

products, and appliances. They include watersaving faucets, showerheads, toilets, urinals, 

washing machines, and dishwashers.

Water- and Energy-Saving

Mechanisms

Domestic water conservation technologies can be

used effectively in many kinds of residential, institutional, and commercial buildings to help conserve

water. They are especially helpful in areas where

water use has been restricted

because of scarce or dwindling

supplies. However, these technologies can be used anywhere 

in almost any kind of building.

Federal facility managers can

begin achieving significant savings

by installing technologies and

products like faucet aerators, 

low-flow or sensored faucets, lowflow showerheads, low-flush and

composting toilets, and low-flush

or waterless urinals wherever 

possible. Domestic appliances 

such as water-saving dishwashers

and clothes washers can also be

cost-effective. All these products

are available in models that 

Domestic Water Conservation Technologies

Using less water and energy is an investment in a sustainable future

FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Office of Energy

Efficiency and

Renewable

Energy

Federal

Technology

Alert

A publication series 

designed to speed the

adoption of energyefficient and renewable 

technologies in the 

Federal sector

Prepared by the

New Technology

Demonstration

Program

No portion of this publication may be altered in

any form without prior

written consent from the

U.S. Department of

Energy, Office of 

Energy Efficiency and

Renewable Energy, and

the authoring national

laboratory.

Internet: www.eren.doe.gov/femp/

Jim Miller, NREL/PIX03282

Water conservation technologies help extend our limited freshwater resources.

DOE/EE-0264
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

reduce water use without sacrificing 

performance. 

And all these products help to save 

energy, as well, by reducing the amount

of energy needed to process, move, and

heat the water. Moreover, domestic

appliances often include features that

save energy at the point of use. For

example, water-efficient dishwashers

usually have energy-saving features

such as air-drying, rather than heatdrying. 

In addition, detecting and fixing water

system leaks, and making sure that

valves operate at the proper pressure,

can add to water savings. Fixing leaks 

in pipes, fittings, tanks, and fixtures

enhances the effectiveness of watersaving products. And pressure-reducing

valves can be used to lessen the force

and amount of water flows.

Recent drought conditions have made

water efficiency a high priority in many

parts of the nation. It is not enough,

however, to simply install a new watersaving technology or product in a

Federal facility. Federal experiences with

the technologies show that upgrades

and retrofits are most effective when

employees and others know how to use

a new fixture or appliance properly.

Therefore, FEMP recommends that facility managers educate employees about

the purposes and proper use of these

water-saving technologies. 

Potential Applications

Domestic water conservation technologies can be cost-effective in almost any

Federal facility or housing complex that

includes restrooms, kitchens, or laundry

areas that are used regularly. New products are not always needed; retrofits can

often bring older domestic products,

such as faucets, up to today's efficiency

standards. The majority of these technologies are most cost-effective in facilities that obtain their water from a water

utility and send wastewater to a sewer

utility. 

The 1997 study funded by DOE FEMP

estimated that the Federal government

consumes at least 300-400 million gallons (about 1-1.5 billion liters) of water

per day. Because some agencies did not

respond to the survey, this is a very 

conservative estimate. The study estimated the cost of this water to be at least

$229 million-$250 million per year. The

estimated cost is based on an average

water/wastewater rate of $2.08 per

1000 gallons (3785 liters). 

The average rate used to estimate costs

is fairly low because many military 

facilities, which consume the bulk of

Federal water, pay $1.29 or less per

1000 gallons for water. The average rate

for nonmilitary facilities, however, is

$3.82 per 1000 gallons. So, savings to

those facilities could be significant after

water-efficient products are installed.

The FEMP study concluded that the

government could save up to 40% of all

the water it now consumes by implementing conservation measures in the

three building categories (housing, 

hospitals, and office buildings) with the

highest apparent conservation potential.

And just four agencies could represent

as much as 80% of the potential for conservation: the Army, Air Force, Navy,

and Veterans Administration (VA).

Field Experiences

Many Federal, state, and local government agencies have been purchasing

and using water-efficient technologies

for years. And government agencies

have tested a number of them in the

field. For example, a few years ago, the

VA Medical Center in Portland, Oregon,

identified about $75,000 worth of water

and wastewater savings, with a discounted payback of three years, in a

quick walk-through audit of the facility.

The center was a good candidate for a

water efficiency project because of its

size (1,364,000 ft2), its age, and the 

high volume of use of domestic water

technologies. 

The audit indicated that it would be

cost-effective to begin by installing

water-efficient toilets, urinals, faucets,

and showerheads. Therefore, the VA

Medical Center began replacing as many

fixtures as possible. Replacing 346 toilets

and urinals resulted in an estimated

annual savings of $33,800. Installing the

toilets cost about $104,000; the simple

payback period was three years, and the

discounted payback, four years.

Retrofitting all the faucets with low-flow

aerators cost approximately $8,000.

Estimated annual savings were about

$10,000, for a simple payback of 0.7 year

and a discounted payback of 1.5 years.

Replacing 51 showerheads resulted in

estimated annual savings of $6,500. 

The installed cost was about $2,100, the

simple payback was 0.3 year, and the

discounted payback, one year.

Implementation Barriers

Despite the potential for water, energy,

and money savings, certain institutional

barriers could reduce or prevent the

widespread implementation of waterefficient technologies. Barriers in the

Federal sector include these: 

• Inadequate information about the

amount of water a facility uses

• Low current water costs

• Insufficient knowledge about the

cost-effectiveness of water conservation projects

• Lack of funding to carry out projects

• Misconceptions about the use and

benefits of water-efficient 

technologies.

Overcoming these barriers is important,

because in some areas, the nation faces 

a crisis in water supplies. In such areas,

water-saving technologies and products

can make an important contribution to

aggressive conservation efforts.

Conclusion

Water-saving technologies provide

important benefits to facilities in severely dry areas, but they are worth considering for Federal facilities everywhere

because of their environmental and 

economic benefits. Even in areas where

water resources are not scarce, we are

likely to see increases in the use of these

and other practical, water-saving technologies in our homes, places of business, and government facilities, because

they are cost-effective, they help us save

natural resources—and they work. 
Abstract

The Energy Policy Act (EPAct) of 1992 set new 

standards for energy and water efficiency. Because

the government is required to lead by example in

achieving the nation’s conservation goals, EPAct

directs Federal agencies to install all cost-effective

water efficiency measures by 2005 and to purchase

products in the upper 25% of those that meet 

standards for energy and water efficiency. 

In support of EPAct, Executive Order 13123,

Greening the Government through Efficient Energy

Management, signed in 1999, directs the Federal

government to implement all cost-effective water

conservation measures in its facilities by 2010. Costeffective measures include conservation methods,

products, and fully equipped systems that have

simple payback periods of 10 years or less. Agencies

must report on the measures they are taking and

their water usage every two years.

By implementing water conservation measures, the

Federal government could save more than 120 million gallons (450 million liters) of water per day, or

40% of the estimated 300 million gallons (about

1.1 billion liters) or more that it now consumes daily,

according to one conservative estimate. There is

great potential for savings, and it may be greatest 

in housing, hospitals, office buildings, and other

Federal facilities that make extensive use of waterusing equipment. 

Most of the domestic products being manufactured

to new standards for water and energy efficiency are

cost-effective to install in Federal facilities now. In

other words, they will pay for themselves in water

and energy savings in 10 years or less. These products include faucet aerators, low-flow and sensored

faucets, low-flow showerheads, low-flush and ultralow-flush toilets, and ultra-low-flush and waterless

urinals. 

Along with those fixtures, many water-efficient

appliances—such as clothes washers and dishwashers—are cost-effective for new government

housing and other facilities that use them. The costeffectiveness of these products has been demonstrated in numerous studies done by the water

utility industry.

Fixing supply system leaks and installing pressurereducing valves, where appropriate, can also help to

conserve water. Because they save water and energy

in areas with good conservation potential, and they

provide environmental and economic benefits to the

nation, these domestic products, technologies, and

conservation measures are the focus of this Federal

Technology Alert. 

Domestic Water Conservation Technologies

Using less water and energy is an investment in a sustainable future

FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Federal

Technology

Alert

1

Jim Miller, NREL/PIX03282

Water conservation technologies help extend our limited freshwater resources.
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Contents

Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

About the Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

Application Domain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

Water- and Energy-Saving Mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

Other Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10

Federal-Sector Potential . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10

Technology Screening Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10

Estimated Market Potential . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

Laboratory Perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

Implementation Barriers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .11

Application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12

Application Screening . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12

Where to Apply the Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12

What to Avoid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .12

Equipment Installation, Integration, and Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .13

Warranties, Standards, and Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

Procurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

Utility Incentives and Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .15

Technology Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16

Field Experiences . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .16

Case Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18

Portland VA Hospital . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18

The Technologies in Perspective . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18

Technology Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18

Technology Outlook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18

Water Efficiency Service Companies and Equipment Manufacturers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20

Who Is Using the Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23

For More Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .23

Appendixes:

A. Guidelines for Domestic Water Technology Applications in New Federal Construction and Retrofits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26

B. Estimating Water Use and Savings Associated with Domestic Fixtures and Appliances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .27

C. Comparative Economic Analyses for Selected Water Conservation Technologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .30

D. Estimating Savings with WATERGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36

E. Guidelines for Conducting a Water Audit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .37

F. Commercial Self-Audit Checklist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .39

2
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

About the Technologies

The technologies described in this

Federal Technology Alert include waterefficient faucets and faucet aerators,

low-flow showerheads, low-flush and

composting toilets, low-flush and waterless (water-free) urinals, and waterefficient clothes washers and dishwashers. These domestic water-conserving

technologies can help to reduce water

use at your facility and trim your water

utility costs. Table 1 shows the water

usage rates for the fixtures and appliances described in this section.

Water-efficient faucets—EPAct set new

Federal efficiency standard for faucets

manufactured after January 1, 1994. The

new standard for kitchen faucets is a

maximum flow rate of 2.5 gallons per

minute (gpm) [9.5 liters per minute

(lpm)] at 80 pounds per square inch 

(psi) [550 kilopascals (kPa)]. The standard for lavatory faucets is 2–2.2 gpm

(7.6–8.3 lpm) or less at 60 psi (414 kPa).

EPAct requires that metered, selfclosing, and sensor-operated faucets 

use a maximum of 0.25 gallon (0.9 liter)

per cycle.

Faucets and aerators. New faucet products that meet or exceed Federal water

efficiency guidelines operate by means

of either laminar flow or aeration. In

laminar-flow faucets, water flows in

clear, parallel streams and is not mixed

with air. Thus, laminar-flow faucets 

usually wet surfaces better than aerating

faucets do. Nonaerating, laminar-flow

devices that do not pull potentially contaminated air into the water stream are

usually required in hospitals. Aerated

faucets are suitable for many other

applications, especially residential and

office building lavatories.

Kitchen faucets usually need to operate

at higher flow rates and pressures than

lavatory faucets. This is because the

washing, rinsing, filling, and sanitizing

tasks done in kitchens often require

rather forceful flows. Flows between 2

and 2.2 gpm (7.6 and 8.3 lpm) are about

the minimum needed for kitchen faucets

and aerators. In contrast, flow rates as

low as 0.5 gpm (1.9 lpm) may supply

3

Table 1. Water-Usage Rates for Domestic Fixtures

Technology Pre-1990 Pre-EPAct EPAct 2000

Usage Usage Requirement Efficient

(1994–1997) Models

Faucet 5–7 gpm a 4 gpm 2.5 gpm 0.5 gpm

(18.9-26.5 lpm) (15.1 lpm) (9.5 lpm) (1.9 lpm)

Showerhead 4.5–8 gpm 3.5 gpm 2.5 gpm 1.5 gpm

(17–30.3 lpm) (13.2 lpm) (9.5 lpm) (5.7 lpm)

Tank toilet 4–7 gpf b 3.5 gpf 1.6 gpf 1 gpf

(15.1–26.5 lpf) (13.2 lpf) (6.1 lpf) (3.8 lpf)

Flushometer toilet 4.5 gpf 3.5 gpf 1.6 gpf 1 gpf

(17 lpf) (13.2 lpf) (6.1 lpf) (3.8 lpf)

Urinal 3.5–5 gpf 1.5 gpf 1 gpf Waterless

(13.2–18.9 lpf) (5.7 lpf) (3.8 lpf) urinal

Clothes washer 45–55 gpu c No requirement, 25 gpu

(170.3– 45 gpu (94.6 lpu)

208.2 lpu) average

(170.3 lpu)

Dishwasher 10–5 gpu No requirement, 4.5–6 gpu

(37.9– 10–15 gpu (17–22.7 lpu)

56.8 lpu) average

(37.9-56.8 lpu)

____________

a gpm = gallons per minute; lpm = liters per minute

b gpf = gallons per flush; lpf = liters per flush 

c gpu = gallons per use; lpu = liters per use

Infrared sink sensors help conserve water in a restroom at the Denver Federal Center.

Warren Gretz, NREL/PIX00653
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

enough water for the average user of a

lavatory faucet.

Both kitchen and lavatory faucets with

flow rates of about 2 gpm (7.6 lpm)

should be satisfactory for many applications, according to the Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA). And FEMP

has recommended that faucets have a

flow rate of 2 gpm or less at 60 psi. In

contrast, older manually operated

faucets usually have flow rates from

about 3–5 gpm (11.4–18.9 lpm), though

some are as high as 7 gpm (26.5 lpm).

Older faucets can often be made more

efficient with new aerators, if the faucets

are in good condition and have threads

at the ends that can accommodate an

aerator. 

Faucet controls. Mechanical, electronic,

and battery-operated controls can be

used to turn faucets on or off. They are

probably most cost-effective in facilities

in which users tend to leave lavatory or

kitchen faucets on too long. 

Push-spring controls turn the faucet on

when the user pushes the mechanism

down; the faucet turns off when the

push spring bounces back. However,

these controls must be properly maintained to be effective. For example,

water audits of 25 schools in Georgia

uncovered several malfunctioning pushspring faucets containing grit, which

was causing them to stay on longer than

necessary. 

Trickle shut-off valves or fingertip levers

can often be added to faucets. They

allow the user to shut the water off 

during a task that does not require a

continuous flow and then turn it back 

on without having to readjust the flow

and temperature. 

Other controls feature electronic or 

battery-operated sensors. The electronic

type uses an infrared sensor to detect

movement within a certain distance; 

it is wired to an electrical circuit. The

battery-powered type uses fiber optics

to detect motion. Many models can be

customized, and some can be adjusted

to turn the faucet on and off only when

users’ hands are within a certain distance. With many models, an installer 

or maintenance worker adjusts the

amount of time that the faucet stays on.

Some older faucets can also be fitted

with sensors. 

Low-flow showerheads—EPAct mandates that showerheads manufactured

after January 1, 1994, have flow rates of

2.5 gpm (9.5 lpm) or less at a maximum

pressure of 80 psi (552 kPa). Many showerheads are effective at lower flow rates,

however. To choose the best showerheads, facility managers should first

determine the water pressure in their

buildings. If it is less than 40 psi (275

kPa), a low-flow showerhead will 

probably not be satisfactory. If the water

pressure is greater than 80 psi, however,

the flow rate will be greater than the

allowed 2.5 gpm. 

Older showerheads have an average

flow of 3.7 gpm (14 lpm). However, customer satisfaction surveys—such as the

one undertaken by SBW Consulting for

the Bonneville Power Administration—

have shown that well-designed, lowflow showerheads provide showers that

are just as satisfactory as those provided

by older models with more forceful

flows. 

Today’s 2.5-gpm showerheads are 

highly efficient, cost-effective, waterconserving devices with good track

records. They are relatively inexpensive,

and they yield significant water savings,

especially in facilities with a high volume of use. To further reduce water use

in facilities with public showers, facility

operators may also want to consider

installing coin-operated timer controls. 

Several companies manufacture showerheads with flow rates lower than

2.5 gpm; customers have provided

favorable feedback on many of them.

Several models have flow rates of

1–1.5 gpm (3.8–5.7 lpm) or less. In at

least one model, a venturi effect is built

into the design; this creates a strong

spray pattern at a high velocity and low

flow rate.

Low-flush and composting toilets—

EPAct requires that all indoor residential

toilets manufactured after January 1,

1994, consume 1.6 gallons per flush (gpf)

of water or less [6.1 liters per flush (lpf)

or less]. Until January 1, 1997, commercial toilets that consumed about 3.5 gpf

(13.2 lpf) were allowable under EPAct.

FEMP procurement recommendations

for toilets are consistent with the EPAct

standard.

When low-flow toilets were first introduced, they were thought to be ineffective because they required more flushes

than should be necessary. Most of those

low-flow models were modified versions of older 3.5 gpf (13.2 lpf) toilets.

Today, many have been redesigned to

provide a more effective flow through

the unit and a better wash in the bowl.

However, some low-quality toilets are

still on the market, so FEMP recommends purchasing high-quality models

that save time and money in the long

run. 

The three general types of toilets are

tank-style, flushometer, and composting.

• Tank toilets are the type that most

people have in their apartments or

homes. Most tank models use stored

water and water pressure to flush

waste. Some tank toilets also use

another flushing mechanism, such 

as a vacuum. 

• Flushometer-style toilets are those

found in most commercial office

buildings. They contain a bowl and 

a flush valve that allows a metered

amount of water to enter the toilet

under pressure and flush the waste.

These toilets are flushed either 

manually or automatically by means

of a sensor. 

• Composting toilets have no flush

valves or handles and use little or no

water, allowing waste to fall into a

cavity where it is composted. They

make use of aerobic bacteria to break

down wastes into by-products that

can be used as fertilizer for trees and

shrubs.

Tank toilets. There are four basic 

types of tank toilets: gravity-flush, 

pressure-assisted, pump-assisted, and

vacuum-assisted. Gravity-flush and

pressure-assisted toilets are the two

most common types.

4
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

•Gravity-flush toilets are the standard

for residential use. They use the

weight and pressure of water stored

in the tank to wash the bowl and

remove waste. These models require

a water pressure of only 10–15 psi

(68.8–103.1 kPa) to operate properly.

They are usually the cheapest toilets

to buy, install, and maintain, starting

at about $75. However, they can be

less effective at removing wastes than

pressure-assisted models.

• Pressure-assisted toilets use compressed air to increase the force of 

the flush. The pressure in a facility’s

water line compresses the air.

Releasing the valve forces pressurized water into the bowl with a force

up to 500 times greater than that of 

a conventional gravity-flush toilet.

These toilets require a minimum

water pressure of 25 psi (171.9 kPa) 

to operate well. Generally, they

remove wastes more effectively than

other types, but they are also noisier

and more expensive. At $200–$700,

they cost approximately as much as

efficient flushometer toilets.

• Pump-assisted toilets are a kind of

hybrid, somewhere between gravityflush and pressure-assisted. Rather

than using the pressure in a facility’s

water lines, these toilets have a pump

to increase the force of the flush.

Drawbacks include the electric power

required to run the pump and higher

costs (up to $1,000). It can also be 

difficult to find replacement parts.

• Vacuum-assisted toilets use a vacuum

chamber inside the toilet tank to pull

wastes from the bowl. They are easy

to install and maintain. These specialty toilets work well in niche applications and are often installed in boats

and planes. They can use as little as

1 pint (about half a liter) of water.

However, they are noisier and more

complicated than most other models.

Some are very expensive, but one

model was listed in the May 1998

Consumer Reports at around $225. 

The best ultra-low-flush tank toilets are

very effective while using as little as

0.5–0.8 gpf (1.9–3 liters). Ultra-low-flush

metal toilets can often be used in hospitals and prisons. Some models consume

only a pint of water (about half a liter)

per flush. A consultant or contractor can

advise you about their suitability for

your facilities.

Flushometer toilets. EPAct states that all

new flushometer toilets must consume

1.6 gallons (6.1 liters) per flush or less.

Low-flush models require that the flush

valve and the toilet bowl match, so both

must be replaced. These toilets operate

best at pressures between 25 and 40 psi

(171.9–275 kPa). The average cost of

flushometer models is about $450.

Composting toilets. These use little or

no water and are not connected to traditional plumbing systems. They can be

very effective in remote or hard-toplumb facilities. They consist of one or

more conventional-looking toilets connected to a composting unit underneath

(for example, on the floor below or in a

crawl space or basement). Residentialstyle toilets can process waste from up

to seven people; commercial models can

accommodate from seven to 50 people.

Long popular in Europe, composting

toilets are now available in several

designs from a variety of U.S. manufacturers and suppliers.

These toilet systems convert wastes 

to compost by means of an aerobic

decomposition process carried out by

micro- and macro-organisms.

Decomposition is accelerated by air,

heat, and periodic mixing of the 

compost; in some models, this is an

automated process requiring electricity.

Air is drawn through the system to 

help control odors. Disease-causing

pathogens are destroyed by thermophilic (high-temperature) bacteria

that break down the pathogens within 

a few days if the composting chamber

reaches a certain temperature.

According to the Humanure Book, E. coli,

cholera, salmonella, hookworms, roundworms, and many other pathogens will

be killed within 20 hours at around

140°F (60°C) or within 24 hours at 122°F

(50°C).

These systems can produce both liquid

and solid high-nutrient fertilizers.

Wastes can then be used to fertilize trees,

shrubs, and lawns and thus offset the

cost of artificial fertilizers. Composting

toilets also reduce the pollution associated with runoff of artificial fertilizers. At

current utility rates, however, composting toilets are usually not a cost-effective

way to save water at facilities connected

to commercial water and wastewater

systems. Check local codes and installation requirements in your area before

purchasing these systems.

5

Compost

Air

Exhaust

Vent

Toilet

02279901m

Composting Toilet

Fan

Waste

Drain to 

Evaporation

or Receptacle

Access to

Compost

Composting toilets use little water and can be effective in remote or hard-to-plumb facilities.
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Low-flush and waterless urinals—

Older urinals use 1.5–3.5 gpf (5.7–

13.2 lpf) of water or more. New urinals,

to comply with EPAct guidelines, must

consume no more than 1 gpf (3.8 lpf). A

waterless or water-free urinal requires

no water at all, except for occasional

cleaning. Waterless urinals manufactured in the United States use a 95%

biodegradable, immiscible fluid through

which heavier liquid waste passes. 

This fluid, which is kept in a special, 

U-shaped drain insert, controls odors by

forming a barrier on top of the waste

that traps vapors.

Note that the term waterless refers here

to a fixture that does not require water

for flushing, rather than to a specific

product. Urinals that do not require

flush water are currently manufactured

by at least two U.S. companies; please

see the list of service companies and

equipment manufacturers in this 

publication.

In part to test the performance of this

technology, hundreds of units have been

installed in more than 40 different government facilities and public buildings,

to date. Most of the feedback on the

technology’s water efficiency and ease

of maintenance has been favorable. In

facilities in which the number of users is

expected to increase, waterless urinals

will not require additional water-supply

plumbing, and they add a negligible

load to the waste system. 

Water-efficient clothes washers—Many

new washing machines use much less

water than older models do. They have

either a horizontal-axis tub or drum or 

a conventional, vertical-axis drum. The

drums in horizontal-axis clothes washers rotate the way the drums in clothes

dryers do, allowing clothes to tumble

through a relatively shallow pool of

water. Large-capacity, horizontal-axis

washers are often used in commercial

laundries; they are available in smaller

sizes for residential use, as well. Highly

efficient versions of vertical-axis washers, especially for residential use, are

also available.

Federal facilities with large laundries

can often use commercial-size horizontalaxis washers. Manufactured for many

years in Europe, residential-size horizontal-axis washers are now being made

by several U.S. companies, and they are

widely available. In 1995, EPRI and a

group of utilities used DOE test procedures to compare six horizontal-axis

models with one vertical-axis model.

The horizontal-axis machines consumed

an average of 25% less water than the

vertical-axis machine did. The horizontalaxis washers also used about 45% less

energy and left less moisture in the

clothes, which reduces drying time.

However, today’s new vertical-axis

machines are performing better in 

terms of water and energy savings.

Horizontal-axis washers usually cost

more than other types. But paybacks

from water and energy savings make

them cost-competitive, especially where

energy costs are high and local utilities

offer rebates. If you use older, verticalaxis machines one or more times a day, it

is usually cost-effective to replace them

with horizontal-axis machines or highly

efficient vertical-axis models. 

There are many different models of

water-efficient domestic washing

machines to choose from. DOE and

EPA’s ENERGY STAR® Web site has 

information on several different models.

The site also includes a calculator to

determine water and energy savings

(www.energystar.gov/products/clothes

washers/index.html). The calculator can

help you quickly determine the payback

associated with each machine. 

Water-efficient dishwashers—Old, 

inefficient automatic dishwashers can

often be replacedwith water- and 

energy-efficient models. Newer models

use less water, and less energy to heat

water, than older models do. Several

models have boosters to heat water to

6

Cross-Section of EcoTrap

X-Traptor

Access Slots

EcoTrap

Blue Seal

Urine

To Drain

02279902m Copyright

Waterless Co. 1996

Water-saving estimates for flushless urinals range from 10,000–45,000 gallons per unit each year.

Warren Gretz, NREL/PIX00656

Ultra-low-flush urinals, like these used at

the Denver Federal Center, are one of many

water-saving fixtures that can be purchased

by Federal agencies.
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

140°F (60°C) or more. So, if you do not

have special needs for very hot water

elsewhere in your building, these dishwashers could allow you to lower the

maximum temperature setting on your

main water heater.

Older residential-size dishwashers use

between 9 and 15 gallons (34.1–56.8

liters) of water per cycle. The average is

about 10 gallons (37.9 liters) per load.

Newer water-saving dishwashers use

between 4.5 and 9 gallons of water

(17–34 liters), according to Consumer

Reports (December 2000). It is usually

cost-effective to replace a residential

dishwasher if your current model uses

13 or more gallons (49 liters) per load

and you run at least one load per day.

Whether you have large-capacity models or residential-size machines, operating them fully loaded will maximize

water and energy savings. 

Fixing domestic system leaks—DOE has

estimated that as much as 15%–25% of

the water that goes through any system

could be lost because of leaks and breaks

in valves, faucets, pipes, and other

equipment. To reduce water waste with

any technology, all pipes and fixtures in

a facility must be properly maintained

and free of leaks.

Small leaks can quickly add up to a lot

of wasted water. For example, a toilet

leaking only four tablespoons of water

per minute will waste 30 gallons (about

114 liters) of water per day, which adds

up to 10,920 gallons (41,337 liters) per

year at a cost of about $60 or more. If

your facility had 50 toilets with similar

“small” leaks, you could be paying

about $3,000 per year or more for water

that is never used. 

Be sure to check fixtures regularly for

leaky pipes, seals, valves, and other

components. Dye tablet testing is a simple, inexpensive way to detect otherwise

imperceptible leaks from the toilet tank

to the bowl. Another way is to check two

readings on a water meter. First, select a

time when you know that the building’s

occupants will not be using water fixtures for a while. Next, read the meter

and record the reading. Then, check the

meter again one hour later. If the reading

has increased, there is probably a leak

somewhere in the system. 

You can also compare water-use data if

you have records from past years. A

detailed water audit of your facility 

can provide recent data, and you can

compare the new data with past annual

totals to determine if a significant

amount is unaccounted for. If you still

cannot account for a large amount of

water after correcting for data collection

and analysis errors, your facility probably has hidden leaks. Contact a plumbing contractor or other expert for help in

finding and fixing them.

Using pressure-reducing valves—

Consider installing a pressure-reducing

valve when your water line pressure is

higher than 80 psi (552 kPa). Reducing

or stabilizing the pressure helps to

reduce leaks and flow rates from faucets,

hoses, showerheads, and other equipment. Reducing the water pressure from

80 to about 65 psi (448 kPa) will reduce

the flow by only about 10%. Reducing

the pressure from 80 to about 50 psi

(345 kPa) can reduce water usage

approximately 25% in most small 

commercial-type buildings. 

Before installing pressure-reducing

valves, however, you may want to determine if several areas of your building

need water at high pressure (for example, for thorough cleaning or rinsing

tasks). If only one area needs highpressure water, other areas might still be

able to accommodate lower pressures. 

You can usually install a pressure-reducing valve for about $75–$100. The exact

installed cost depends on the size of the

water line, the size of the facility, the

7

Axis

Axis

Agitator

Water

Level

Water

Level

Baffle

Vertical-Axis Configuration Horizontal-Axis Configuration

02279903m

Source: EPRI

Horizontal-axis washing machines use 25% less water than vertical-axis machines, according to a 1995 EPRI report.
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

need for a meter box, and so on. For

example, including a meter box can

increase the cost to $250–$275. Consult a

licensed plumber or other expert about

requirements for pressure-reducing

valves in your building.

Application Domain

EPAct requires every Federal agency to

have all possible cost-effective waterand energy-saving technologies and

products installed in governmentowned facilities by January 1, 2005. This

means that a substantial percentage of

the 500,000 buildings that the Federal

government owns or leases will require

at least some new or retrofitted waterefficient fixtures, appliances, or other

equipment. A technology or product is

considered cost-effective if it has a discounted payback period of 10 years or

less. 

Executive Order 13123 requires Federal

agencies to determine their baseline

water use and to meet a new water conservation goal. Under the guidelines,

agencies had to determine their FY 2000

water usage in million gallons per year

and report that number to FEMP that fiscal year. The report must then be updated every two years. The conservation

goals also require agencies to implement

at least four Best Management Practices,

or BMPs, for water efficiency in up to

80% of their facilities by 2010. FEMP

developed the BMPs to help facilities

identify the best ways to use water more

efficiently. The managers of each government-owned facility can decide

which four of the 10 BMPs are the most

cost-effective for them, and they can set

priorities for purchases and installations. The BMPs are as follows:

BMP #1 — Public Information and 

Education Programs

BMP #2 — Distribution System 

Audits, Leak Detection & 

Repair

BMP #3 — Water Efficient Landscape 

BMP #4 — Toilets and Urinals

BMP #5 — Faucets and Showerheads

BMP #6 — Boiler/Steam Systems 

BMP #7 — Single-Pass Cooling

Systems

BMP #8 — Cooling Tower Systems

BMP #9 — Miscellaneous High WaterUsing Processes

BMP #10 — Water Reuse and Recycling

For more information on the water 

baseline guidance and the Federal water

efficiency goal, see FEMP’s Web site

(www.eren.doe.gov/femp/resources.

waterguide.html).

Your agency could begin meeting

Federal water efficiency goals by concentrating on categories of buildings

with the highest potential for savings. 

A 1997 study conducted by Lombardo

Associates for FEMP indicated that as

much as 40% of the water the government consumes could be saved by

implementing water conservation 

measures in three building categories:

housing, hospitals, and office buildings.

These categories could represent about

78% of the total Federal potential for

water conservation. Additional categories examined in the study were

industrial, prisons, R&D, schools, 

services, and "other."

This section describes some of the most

cost-effective technologies for Federal

applications. And Appendix A lists some

of the best low-water-use options for a

variety of facilities. 

Faucets, aerators, and controls—Most

kinds of water-efficient faucets are costeffective in Federal buildings. In fact,

low-flow faucets are required in new

Federal construction. Faucet aerators 

are so inexpensive—and save so much

water and money—that they are costeffective in nearly all applications. In

large facilities with frequently used

faucets—such as public lavatories in

large hospitals or office buildings—

faucet controls are often cost-effective, 

as well.

Low-flow faucet aerators can be especially cost-effective in restrooms and

kitchen areas in government housing,

hospitals, and office buildings. Although

ultra-low-flow aerators [0.5 gpm

(1.9 lpm)] are often cost-effective in 

restrooms, they are not as suitable in

most kitchens and janitor closets,

because a more forceful flow is usually

needed for the washing, rinsing, and

sanitizing tasks done in those areas. In

public restrooms, vandal-resistant aerators that must be removed with a special

tool can discourage theft.

Metered and sensor-operated faucets

powered by batteries or low-voltage AC

are often used in new airports and other

high-traffic public restrooms. Also

known as “duration” faucets, metered

faucets are less susceptible to vandalism

than many other types. In hospitals and

food preparation areas, sensored faucets

can also improve hygiene by eliminating

the transfer of germs to and from faucet

controls. Metered and sensor-operated

faucets appear to be most cost-effective

in large restrooms and kitchens in which

a significant amount of water is wasted

when faucets are operated manually. 

But these types of faucets are not yet

cost-effective for most residential 

applications. 

Showerheads— Low-flow showerheads

can save so much water that they are

cost-effective in almost every situation.

And they are especially appropriate for

use in military housing and barracks,

VA hospitals, recreation areas and 

centers, and prisons. There are many 

different models to choose from; please

see the list of manufacturers in this 

publication.

Toilets—Many low-flush and ultra-lowflush toilets are already in use in a wide

variety of Federal facilities. But there is

still enormous potential to retrofit or

replace older technologies with watersaving products. 

Composting toilets are usually costeffective only in remote sites, such as

many Federal parks and recreation

areas, that are not connected to utilityoperated water and sewer lines. In new

construction, composting toilets may 

be preferable to a septic system because

they often have lower life-cycle costs.

They appear to operate best where temperatures are at least 60°F (15.6°C), but

some are effective in cooler areas at high

8
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

altitudes. Space heating helps to increase

their applicability.

Urinals—Waterless urinals have already

been installed in more than 40 Federal

facilities. They are particularly costeffective in areas of high usage such as

barracks, large office buildings with

many male occupants, and men's restrooms in large or popular national parks

and recreation areas.

Appliances—Water-efficient appliances

such as clothes washers and dishwashers are cost-effective in most Federal

housing. They are also economical in

many large facilities—such as hospitals,

large schools, and prisons—that have

their own kitchens and laundries. 

Water- and Energy-Saving

Mechanisms

Some information follows about the

water- and energy-saving mechanisms

of these technologies and associated savings. Exact water and energy savings for

each technology vary, and depend on

factors such as the number of users and

the frequency of use.

Water-Saving Mechanisms

Water-saving mechanisms, as well as the

amount of water that can be saved with

each product, can vary widely even

within one technology category. 

Aerators, faucets, and showerheads—

Low-flow aerators save water simply by

reducing the flow from the faucet while

mixing water with air. Many low-flow

faucets are designed to maintain a flow

at the standard 2.5 gpm (9.5 lpm) rate,

and some operate at even lower rates.

And many low-flow showerheads can

control flows to around 2 gpm (7.6 lpm)

or less. With each technology, actual

water savings depend on the amount of

use. But each one will reduce total water

usage, and thus water costs, unless the

number of users increases to offset savings, or people begin to use them much

more frequently. 

Toilets and urinals—Water-saving toilets and urinals are efficient because

they either (1) reduce the amount of

water available per flush, (2) use 

compressed air to increase the force of

the flush, (3) refine the design of the fixture so more waste is washed away per

flush, or (4) are completely redesigned,

for example, as a composting toilet or

waterless urinal. The fourth option can

virtually eliminate the need for water to

operate the fixture, though some water

is usually required to clean it. 

According to the Rocky Mountain

Institute, replacing an older conventional toilet that uses 3–5 gpf (11.4–18.9 lpf)

with a low-flush model can reduce residential water use per capita by 8–22 gallons (30–83 liters) per day, depending 

on the number of uses. Estimates for

savings obtainable with waterless urinals range from about 10,000–45,000 gallons (37,854 –170,344 liters) of water per

unit each year. 

Appliances—One of the most effective

water-saving mechanisms in clothes

washers is a horizontal-axis tub or

drum. These kinds of machines can

clean as many clothes as comparable

vertical-axis or “agitator” washers, but

with less water. Manufacturers' estimates of the water savings

obtainable with horizontalaxis washing machines

range from one-third to

one-half the water and

energy used by conventional, vertical-axis machines.

One manufacturer states

that 18 gallons (68.1 liters)

of water per load can be

saved with its extra-largecapacity, horizontal-axis

household machine. Some

newer, more water-efficient

vertical-axis models may

save as much water per

load as some horizontalaxis machines, however. 

Newer dishwashers

designed for efficiency use

advanced technologies to

operate with less water

than older models do. For

example, many models

include modified spray

arms and pumps that

reduce the total amount of water used

per load. Some models employ special

sensors to gauge the amount of food 

left on dishes and adjust the amount of

water accordingly. And some adjust the

amount of water according to the size of

the load. 

Energy-Saving Mechanisms

Reducing water consumption saves

energy, either directly on site at the point

of use or off site at water treatment and

distribution points. For example, using

less hot water at a lavatory sink reduces

the amount of energy needed to process

the water at a treatment plant, pump it

from a storage tank, and heat it in our

homes. Off-site energy savings are real

savings. But they can be counted in

Federal life-cycle cost calculations only

when a facility treats and distributes its

water on site. 

This section provides some of the energy-saving mechanisms associated with

these technologies. See FEMP, DOE, 

and EPA product efficiency and 

ENERGY STAR® ratings for details

9

U.S. Department of Energy/PIX02252

Federal agencies can save water and costs by installing

faucet aerators and sensored faucets, among other

products.
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

(www.eren.doe.gov/femp;

www.epa.gov).

Faucets and showerheads—FEMP

reports that a water-efficient faucet that

reduces the flow rate to about 2 gpm

(about 7.6 lpm) can save up to 2.5 gallons (9.5 liters) of hot water per person

per day, assuming that at least onefourth to one-half of the total amount

used is heated. This translates to an onsite energy savings of 0.07 kilowatt-hour

(kWh) per person per day. Similar onsite energy savings can be obtained with

low-flow showerheads (approximately

0.85 kWh per person per day) and efficient washing machines and dishwashers (about 0.2 kWh each). These are

estimates; actual savings depend on the

type of water heater used (gas or electric), its efficiency, the frequency of use

of the fixtures, and other variables.

Toilets and urinals—Using water-efficient toilets and urinals reduces the

amount of energy needed to treat and

pump the cold water they consume.

These savings can be counted in a lifecycle cost analysis if the facility pumps

and treats water at the site. The amount

of energy needed for pumping can be

considerable. Estimates of the energy

consumed in water treatment and distribution range from 1.5 kWh per 1,000 gallons (3,785 liters) to as much as 9 kWh

per 1,000 gallons.

Appliances—Horizontal-axis washers

save energy chiefly by using less hot

water per load. And some new verticalaxis machines have been modified to use

as much as 18 gallons (68.1 liters) less

water per load than older agitator washers use, according to some estimates.

Newer, energy-saving dishwashers

often employ such features as more 

efficient motors, better insulation, and

improved drying cycles (such as airdrying or overnight-drying) to save

energy. A new ENERGY STAR®-rated

appliance displays a tag showing where

its energy use falls on a scale from least

to most use for that particular kind of

appliance. Appliances must meet efficiency standards higher than the minimum to qualify for an ENERGY STAR®

rating.

Other Benefits

Conserving both water and energy with

water-efficient technologies is extremely

beneficial to the environment. In the

early 1990s, only about two-thirds of the

freshwater used every year was being

treated and returned to our rivers and

streams. As the population increases, so

will the depletion rate of our freshwater

resources, unless we begin using more

rigorous water conservation and management practices. Every gallon we conserve adds to the reserves of available

freshwater, reducing the likelihood of

dangerously depleting our reservoirs,

lakes, rivers, and streams during times

of dry weather or severe drought. 

Saving energy by conserving water also

helps to protect the environment from

further damage caused by the excessive

use of fossil fuels. Studies indicate that

energy production and use are the chief

causes of environmental damage. And

burning fossil fuels is still the chief

method of producing electricity to heat,

treat, and pump water. In the United

States, fossil-fuel power plants produce

about 50% of the nation's total air pollution, and gasoline-powered vehicles

cause another 20%. The air pollution

caused by conventional energy production and use is also said to be a major

cause of lung-related illnesses. Thus,

reducing energy use has health benefits,

as well.

These benefits can be achieved with the

help of Federal water efficiency programs. The most successful programs

will combine the use of water-efficient

equipment with long-term water

resource planning, effective system

operation and maintenance, and education programs for employees and other

users about conservation products and

practices. Communicating information

to users about the quantity, cost, and

impacts of water use can go a long way

toward enlisting people in a successful

water-efficiency campaign that will reap

considerable rewards.

Federal-Sector Potential

This Federal Technology Alert is one of a

series of publications describing energyand water-conserving technologies that

have significant potential for application

in the Federal sector.

Technology Screening Process

Federal facility managers have tested

and evaluated many water-conservation

technologies over the past several years,

and many have shared their experiences

in reports and papers. The technologies

are also described in numerous reports

10

Graham Knight, KnightScenes, Inc./PIX06847

Water conservation upgrades and retrofits are most effective when users are educated about

the technologies.
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

published by DOE, EPA, the General

Services Administration (GSA), the

Rocky Mountain Institute, the American

Water Works Association, and other

organizations specializing in energyand water-efficient equipment. 

Through evaluations, case studies, 

and reports, FEMP’s New Technology

Demonstration Program also provides

information about conservation to

Federal facility managers to help them

meet national efficiency goals.

Estimated Market Potential

Federal facilities include more than

500,000 owned or leased buildings and

more than 420,000 military housing

units. Nearly all of them can use some 

of the cost-effective water conservation

techniques and technologies described

here. So, there is a very large market for

these technologies in the Federal sector.

Data from the 1997 Lombardo

Associates study for FEMP indicate that

the Federal government consumes at

least 300–400 million gallons (about

1.1–1.5 billion liters) of water per day.

Because only some agencies responded

to surveys, the actual figure is probably

at least 450 million gallons (1.7 billion

liters) or more. This water costs at least

$229 million–$250 million per year, but

probably much more. The study estimates that the potential for water conservation in the Federal government is

at least 121 million gallons (458 million

liters) per day, or about 40% of current

usage. The conservation potential

appears to be greatest in hospitals, 

housing, and office buildings, as noted

earlier; those types of facilities could

represent about 78% of the total 

potential.

The actual potential for water savings in

Federal facilities could be even greater.

The GSA estimated that an average of

300,000–500,000 gallons (1–1.9 million

liters) of water are consumed every

month in a typical GSA regional facility

alone. A typical facility has about

188,000 square feet (17,465 square

meters) of space occupied by about 450

people. To put this estimate in perspective, note that the GSA manages more

than 285 million square feet (more than

26 million square meters) of building

space—and this is only about 10% of the

space occupied by all Federal agencies.

Estimates indicate that Federal water

consumption represents only about 

0.5% of total U.S. domestic water use

and about 3% of total commercial use.

Nevertheless, trimming water usage can

help to reduce the cost of government

and conserve our resources.

Laboratory Perspective

Most water-saving technologies, such 

as low-flow faucets and toilets manufactured since 1994, are so well established

that few additional technical demonstrations are needed. Newer technologies,

such as waterless urinals, are being

demonstrated, tested, and monitored 

for their conservation potential and 

cost-effectiveness in Federal facilities. 

Not every technology or retrofit is

appropriate for every facility, however.

FEMP case studies and the references in

this publication indicate Federal agencies’ experience to date. Please see the

list of contacts in this publication, or

contact FEMP for additional guidance

and information (800-363-3732).

Implementation Barriers 

Certain institutional barriers to conservation may be reducing or preventing

wider implementation of water-efficient

technologies. Some barriers in the

Federal sector, and suggestions for 

overcoming them, follow. 

• Inadequate information about the

amount of water a facility uses

• Low current water costs

• Insufficient knowledge about the

cost-effectiveness of water conservation projects

• Lack of funding to carry out projects

• Misconceptions about the proper use

and benefits of water-efficient technologies installed at a site.

Inadequate information about water

use—Water management needs to begin

with actual data on current water use, or

an audit of your facility’s usage. It can

be more difficult to obtain water-use

data in leased facilities than in facilities

owned by an agency, depending on how

a facility’s water bill is paid. Metering 

is just one good way to obtain this 

information. Small, portable meters 

can also help you determine the 

11

Larry Gordon/PIX04211

Water-efficient technologies at the Carl Hayden Visitors Center at Glen Canyon Dam in

Arizona included low-flow toilets and urinals, flushless urinals, and sensored sinks.
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

cost-effectiveness of individual technologies and processes. You can also

request a water-use audit or engineering

estimate from an expert in government

or the private sector.

Low current water costs—In some areas

of the country, water utility rates are 

currently low (for example, less than

$2/kgal). In those areas, monitoring

water use, conservation, and resource

management planning are often not 

priorities. To determine actual costs,

however, all costs associated with water

use should be included in your economic analysis. These can include the cost of

treatment, pumping, energy for heating

and processing, chemicals, and even

environmental permits. Once you know

your facility’s total water costs, you can

benchmark them against those of similar

facilities and begin setting conservation

goals. 

Insufficient knowledge about costeffectiveness—Many people might not

realize that a water conservation project

can be one of the most cost-effective

expenditures they can make. This is 

true in part because water conservation

measures usually have a significant

energy-saving component. When water,

sewer, energy and other costs are included, many water efficiency projects typically have a discounted payback period

of three years or less. Bundling a water

project with a cost-effective energy efficiency project, such as an efficient new

cooling system, can also improve the

economics of a project. 

Lack of funding—Another barrier to

implementation is the lack of funds for

projects. However, a variety of funding

mechanisms are available in addition to

direct Federal appropriations. These

include energy savings performance

contracts, shared savings, utility incentive programs, and utility energy services contracts. Contact FEMP to learn

more about financing options that can

include funding for water projects.

FEMP’s Financing Team provides policy

guidance and technical and contracting

assistance with private-sector funding

for Federal energy efficiency, renewable

energy, and water conservation projects.

Misconceptions about the

technologies—Upgrades and retrofits

can be more acceptable to both managers and employees when they know

what a new technology is, what it does,

and how to use it properly. See FEMP’s

Web site (www.eren.doe.gov/femp) for

information you can use to discuss

water-efficient technologies and products with employees. 

Application

The criteria for applying domestic

water-efficient technologies in a particular facility depend on many factors,

especially the age and water efficiency

of current fixtures and appliances. Other

factors include current plumbing configurations, plumbing codes, and local

laws and regulations (for example, composting toilets are not legal in all areas).

Another major consideration is the costeffectiveness of the retrofit or technology—whether the technology will pay for

itself through water and energy savings

(discounted payback) in 10 years or less.

Application Screening 

Before considering new water-efficient

products and technologies, begin by

estimating the amount of water you are

consuming now, using actual billing

data or as part of a preliminary survey. 

If project funds are limited, you might

want to compare the amount of water

consumed by each major type of fixture,

appliance, or system in your facility to

find out which ones would provide the

lowest life-cycle cost or the greatest net

present value after a retrofit or replacement. Appendix B shows three examples

of methods you can use to evaluate costs

and savings associated with domestic

water-using fixtures and appliances.

FEMP's experiences show that a facility’s operating costs can be reduced as a

result of adopting cost-effective water

conservation measures and practices.

Lower operating costs result from reducing costs in some or all of the following

categories—water, pretreatment, sewer,

energy, chemicals, contracts, equipment,

and labor. Operating-cost reductions can

also help to offset increases in capacity

charges and limits, drought surcharges,

and utility rates. 

Where to Apply the Technologies

After calculating life-cycle costs (including the cost of operation and maintenance) of potential water efficiency

improvements in your facility, you can

choose improvements, retrofits, and new

technologies with more confidence.

These choices will also help you bring

your facilities into compliance with

Federal and local regulations and guidelines for water management. Then, you

can request a professional water audit of

part or all of your facility.

Areas and systems to include in these

audits will vary, depending on your

needs. In commercial, residential, and

institutional facilities, audits should

include restrooms, shower areas,

kitchens, cleaning areas, janitor closets,

and laundries. Although this Federal

Technology Alert focuses on domestic

water technologies, audits can cover all

categories of water use at a facility.

These include irrigated landscape; heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning

systems; single-pass cooling systems;

distribution systems; and other highwater-using processes. 

Comprehensive audits require a systems

approach in which all water-consuming

areas of the facility are analyzed and all

available auditing tools are used. Begin

by gathering data on your facility’s

water usage and associated costs. Find

out your facility's plumbing configuration, since that will affect the selection of

appropriate retrofits and new products;

a blueprint is helpful. Consult with a

local water utility or water board for

advice or assistance with the audit, if

necessary. Or contact your DOE

Regional Office FEMP representative

(see the list of contacts in this publication) for information about SAVEnergy

Program audits and water-survey software. It is also a good idea to conduct a

leak-detection survey.

What to Avoid

Although most of the technologies and

products described here can be used

12
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

widely and cost-effectively, they should

be evaluated according to their appropriateness for a particular facility (see

Appendix A). Some general caveats are

given below; see the list of references 

for publications with more specific

information. 

Don't rely solely on manufacturers'

claims—Be sure to balance manufacturers' claims about water savings against

the results of independent tests, field

experiences, and product reviews (for

example, in trade journals or consumeroriented publications). Check catalogues

and reports prepared by government

agencies and nonprofit conservation

groups that include data on water 

efficiency and lists of manufacturers.

Government and nonprofit groups 

cannot provide warranties or endorse

products, but some conduct tests, make

comparisons, and provide ratings.

Check product warranties to see if water

efficiency claims are backed up by a

guarantee, and look for ENERGY STAR®-

rated appliances. FEMP has prepared

case studies and fact sheets with agencies that are already using various technologies with good results (see FEMP’s

Web site).

With many low-flow products, user satisfaction can depend heavily on subjective factors such as aesthetics or "feel,"

which may not be evident in the manufacturers’ claims. You may want to fieldtest new products in your facility to

determine which ones are most suitable

and meet your requirements before 

purchasing them in any quantity.

Don't rely solely on the estimated 

savings in case studies—The savings

reported in case studies can help you

choose new water-saving technologies.

However, because individual experiences and usage patterns vary, you will

want to weigh various water-management options against your own usage

patterns, needs, and budget constraints.

Actual water and energy savings associated with each technology vary from

region to region and from one facility 

to another. Therefore, the data reported

here are only estimates of a range of 

possible savings.

Don't base decisions on another 

facility's needs—Consider your facility’s specific needs for water quality and

other important factors. Some technologies are effective only at certain water

pressures and temperatures. Seek expert

advice to determine what is most appropriate for your facility. FEMP can answer

many of your questions about watermanagement technologies.

Don’t forget to check local codes, rules,

and regulations—Just as conservation

needs and savings vary from one location to another, so do local laws, codes,

and standards applying to retrofits and

new technologies. Local plumbing codes

and regulations could be strict in some

areas. So, it is a good idea to involve

local utilities and water boards in decisions whenever there is any question

about regulations governing a waterconserving technology.

Don’t neglect to educate employees and

other users—As noted, educating users

is very important in implementing

water conservation technologies and

methods successfully. Refer to BMP #1,

Public Information and Education

Programs, on the FEMP Web site for

more information and ideas about how

to educate users (www.eren.doe.gov/

femp/resources/waterguide.html).

Equipment Installation, Integration,

and Maintenance

You will need to evaluate many of these

technologies according to whether they

fit in with your current plumbing configuration. This section provides guidance on integrating new technologies

with current equipment as well as

installing, maintaining, and using new

equipment.

Equipment Installation

It is important to know the water pressure of a building or other facility before

installing flow-reducing retrofits. And

there are some special considerations to

keep in mind when installing low-flush

toilets or toilet retrofit devices.

Aerators and showerheads—Check the

water pressure in your facility before

installing aerators and showerheads.

The water pressure should be at least

40–60 psi (276–414 kPa). In buildings

with extremely low water pressure, flow

rates might become so low with these

fixtures that users might try to bypass or

modify a fixture to achieve a more satisfactory flow. In buildings with extremely

high water pressure, the resulting high

flow rate can accelerate the deterioration

of a fixture as well as reduce savings. 

Toilets—Ask building managers,

plumbers, or other professionals for recommendations. You can also ask to see

the manufacturer’s performance testing

data and guarantees. Look for toilets

with a 2-in. (50.8 mm) glazed trapway,

which makes the fixture less likely to

plug up. Make sure that the water pressure on each floor is adequate for the

type of toilet you select; low-consumption toilets can make waste line or venting problems worse. Solving current

problems now may increase project

costs, but it will also help you avoid

expensive repairs later. So, check shutoff valves, drain line slopes, waste lines,

and venting before installation. Be sure

that plumbing contractors include all

necessary repair costs in their bids, as

well as the cost of replacing flooring and

wall coverings in a restroom and disposing of old toilets. 

Toilet retrofits—Sometimes a retrofit

can make an older toilet more efficient.

With gravity-flush models, placing displacement devices in the tank, such as

plastic bottles filled with water or pebbles, could save as much as 1 gallon

(3.8 liters) per flush. Toilet dams can

keep a certain amount of water from

entering the flush cycle. And some toilets can be retrofit with early closure

devices or dual-flush adapters that save

from 0.5–2 gpf (about 1.9–7.6 lpf).

Retrofit devices are more likely to work

on toilets that consume a large amount

of water per flush [5 gallons (18.9 liters)

or more]. You can ask local plumbers

and water utility conservation staff

about retrofit devices. Or you could test

a device on a few sample toilets in your

facility.

The Rocky Mountain Institute has stated, however, that some toilet retrofit

13
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

devices have damaged plumbing and

performed poorly in the past. Retrofit

devices can also be removed easily, eliminating water and cost savings. Because

most toilets are designed to work with 

a certain amount of water, modifying

that amount might cause operational

problems. 

Integration

You can install most of the products and

appliances described here almost anywhere a fixture or appliance is already

being used. Utilities, plumbing contractors, permitters, local water boards, 

zoning authorities, and others may have

to be involved, as well, depending on

the complexity and size of a particular

installation.

It is important to ensure that even simple water-management technologies are

integrated correctly into your plumbing

and HVAC systems. The water temperature, pressure, piping, installation

height, and other factors must be correct

for new fixtures and appliances. Make

sure, too, that controls are adjusted

properly. 

In older facilities, sewer and drain lines

can become fouled or constricted from

many years of use. Older technologies

usually keep enough water flowing

through a drain line to move waste

material. However, the quantity of water

used with low-flow technologies can be

substantially less, and in older facilities,

this could increase clogs and backups.

To prevent them, you could snake or

clean out older sewer and drain lines

before installing low-flush toilets to

make sure there is sufficient line capacity for waste removal.

Most of the technologies can be integrated successfully with various kinds of

piping. There is some anecdotal evidence that the undiluted urine in waterless urinals can have a negative effect on

copper piping, although at least one

manufacturer disagrees with this.

Maintenance

Even the simplest water-efficient technologies need some maintenance. And

some need more than others. Check to

see that parts are 

readily available for 

all new water-using

equipment. And make

sure that maintenance

staff receive training 

in the care of new 

technologies.

Faucets—Faucet filters

need to be unclogged,

cleaned, and replaced

periodically, and fixtures and pipes need to

be checked regularly

for leaks or damage.

Many leaky faucets

can be fixed simply by

replacing the washer at

the spout. This low-cost, high-savings

measure should be part of a maintenance program. A leak of 0.09 gpm (0.34

lpm), if not fixed for a year, would add

approximately $160 to your water costs,

assuming that the water rate is about

$3.34 per 1000 gallons or $2.50 per hundred cubic feet (CCF). An installed cost

of $15-$20 for a new washer would have

a payback of 1–2 months. If wastewater

and energy savings were taken into 

consideration, the payback would be

considerably less than a month.

Leaks can also develop in faucet handles, in part because the washer inside

the handle mechanism wears out over

time. One manufacturer, Sloan, has

replaced the washer with a diaphragm

that has a long, leak-resistant life. In

addition, Chicago and Zurn have developed ceramic cartridges that can be used

to retrofit many of their faucet models.

The cartridges have an installed cost of

approximately $30-$50. This is a very

cost-effective measure, assuming water

costs of about $2.50/CCF. However, 

not all faucets can be retrofitted with

ceramic cartridges; you will need to

determine the make and model to

choose the correct cartridge. An experienced plumber or other specialist can

provide assistance. 

Toilets—Large amounts of water can be

lost when toilet flappers or diaphragms

leak. Some leaks can be detected by 

simply listening, but some are not

noticeable. In such cases, you can place

dye tablets in the tank, if there is one,

when you know the toilet will not be

used. If there is dye in the toilet bowl

when you return about half an hour

later, there is a leak. It is a good idea for

maintenance staff to conduct a dye

tablet test on tank toilets every year. 

You can also check Web sites such as the

one maintained by Water Management,

Inc. (www.toiletology.com/index.shtml)

for valuable tips on how to maintain and

repair the tank toilets in your facilities or

in staff housing. For example, flappers

in tank toilets deteriorate when maintenance crews use chlorine-based bowl

cleaners but not when nontoxic products

are used. Also, replacing flappers with

ones not designed for the toilet can

cause the flush volume to increase. 

Waterless urinals—Urinals that don’t

require flush water need much less

maintenance than other kinds, primarily

because they lack moving parts.

Maintenance for one model involves

replacing a few ounces of trap liquid on

a regular basis and replacing the trap

one to six times a year, depending on

usage. The unit should also be cleaned

periodically by pouring hot water in it.

Pouring soft drinks and other liquids

into these units can compromise their

effectiveness, however, so these units 

are not always suitable for large, public

buildings.

14

Graham Knight, KnightScenes, Inc./PIX06840

Workers make fixtures more water-efficient at the Carl Hayden

Visitors Center.
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Appliances—New water- and energysaving appliances should be cleaned 

and maintained according to the manufacturer’s instructions.

Warranties, Standards, and Codes

Warranties should be available for most

of these technologies. Product warranties will probably not guarantee the

amount of water savings possible with

each product, although manufacturers

of most fixtures and appliances usually

indicate the water consumption rates

that consumers can expect. 

For reasons of public health, there are

many laws, rules, and codes governing

the installation and use of water management systems at the municipal, state,

and national level. Goleta, California,

was one of the first U.S. cities to establish modern water conservation standards when it specified consumption

rates for toilets, urinals, and faucets in

1983. Since then, many other communities and states have followed suit. EPAct

has established standards for fixtures

manufactured in 1994 and beyond, and

it required that manufacturers mark

flow or consumption rates indelibly 

on their fixtures.

Local plumbing codes must also be followed. In some places, plumbing codes

discourage the use of composting toilets

or regulations prohibit them. Local 

utilities or water boards can provide

specific information.

Costs

The costs of water-efficient technologies

vary widely. Costs depend on the size,

quality, and complexity of the product

or system, among other factors. They

can range from about a dollar for a 

simple faucet aerator to several thousand dollars for special fixtures and

appliances. 

Regional variations in prices and installation costs can be significant, even for

specific products. For this reason, consider your needs for product quality,

durability, and performance when evaluating each technology and requesting

bids for multiple installations. Table 2

lists the retail cost ranges associated

with some of the major technologies

described in this report. It is important

to note that aesthetics, and not quality

differences, are often the cause of these

large ranges in cost. For example, a color

toilet often costs much more than a

white one, though the basic design and

materials are the same. 

Purchasing products in bulk orders can

also reduce the cost per product. The

costs listed here do not necessarily

reflect the discounts you could obtain

through high-volume purchases.

Savings also vary widely among and

within technologies. The water and cost

savings provided by sensored faucets,

for example, depend on good estimates

of the amount of time, and the number

of times per day, that a faucet is on.

Assuming that a faucet runs 20 minutes

longer than necessary every day at a 

rate of 2 gpm, then 14,600 gallons, or

19.5 CCF, of water would be wasted per

year. At a rate of $3.34 per 1000 gallons

(3785 liters), this wasted water would

cost $48.75. The payback period would

thus be about 10 years on the basis of the

value of the water saved. 

Fitting an older faucet with a sensor

would cost about $150-$200 for materials and another $100 or so for installation. Assuming the same water costs as

those in the example above, this retrofit

could have a payback of 5.6 years on 

the basis of water cost savings.

Nevertheless, it is worth considering 

for facilities in which a considerable

amount of water is wasted. In general,

sensor-controlled faucets appear to be

most cost-effective in facilities where

they are used continually every day,

such as in airport lavatories.

See also Appendix B for three analyses

of the savings and costs associated with

replacing some domestic water-efficient

technologies.

Procurement

FEMP provides procurement information for faucets, showerheads, toilets,

and urinals in the Product Efficiency

Recommendations series. These are

guides for Federal purchasers that recommend efficient levels for commonly

purchased energy- and water-using

products. FEMP recommends levels that

roughly represent the top 25% of the

market, in terms of energy and water

efficiency, for all similar products (e.g.,

2.2 gpm for showerheads). The top 25%

is the threshold targeted in E.O. 13123

and Federal Acquisition Regulations

(FAR) section 23.704.

Each recommendation, in addition to

delineating the recommended level of

efficiency, identifies a Federal supply

source (at GSA or the Defense Logistics

Agency), provides "Buyer Tips" for

selection and use of the product, 

demonstrates a cost-effective example,

and includes a list of additional sources

of information. The recommendations

are available through FEMP's Buying

Energy-Efficient Products binder, 

which can be ordered free by calling 

800-363-3732. You can also access this

information online (www.eren.doe.gov/

femp/procurement).

Utility Incentives and Support

Both water and energy utilities sponsor

incentive programs for water efficiency.

Before undertaking a water efficiency

project, contact your water utility to

determine if they have a program that’s

right for you. It is important to contact

them before you start a project, because

many utilities will not provide rebates

after products are installed. States in

which comprehensive water and energy

efficiency programs have been conducted include California, Connecticut,

Texas, and Washington. 

In Southern California, a number of

retail water providers have funded conservation projects. Financial incentives

have included a specific rebate per lowflow fixture installed in commercial

projects (e.g., $75 per low-flush toilet).

For large water-using processes, the utilities have provided a rebate per unit of

water conserved over a specified period.

For example, Metropolitan Water

District has provided a rebate of $154

15
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

per acre-foot for five years if a project is

expected to save at least 10 acre-feet 

per year. (One acre-foot equals about

326,000 gallons.) In addition to financial

incentives, local water utilities may also

provide training in conservation methods and technologies, such as efficient

landscaping and cooling tower operation, as well as technical assistance with

projects.

Connecticut has required that utilities

promote conservation by providing

retrofit kits. A few years ago, Northeast

Utilities and three water utilities joined

forces to provide customers with kits

that included showerheads, faucet aerators, toilet dams, compact fluorescent

lamps, and wraps for water heaters and

pipes. 

In Texas, the Water Commission's decision to conduct a statewide retrofit 

program prompted the city of Austin's

Water Department to begin commercial,

industrial, and institutional conservation activities. The city has provided

rebates of up to $40,000 for new domestic products such as efficient toilets,

clothes washers, and irrigation systems,

depending on the size of the installation.

There is also a rebate for large systems,

such as single-pass cooling equipment

and water reuse or recycling systems.

Qualifying projects had to reduce water

use by at least 500 gallons (about 1893

liters) per day.

In Washington State, a conservation-oriented collaboration was formed in 1992

by the Seattle Water Department, Seattle

City Light, Puget Sound Power & Light,

Washington Natural Gas, and Metro, the

regional sewer authority, to help deliver

almost 800,000 retrofit kits in the Seattle

area. The kits included low-flow showerheads, faucet aerators, and wraps for

water heaters.

In addition to joint programs like these,

other utilities in many states, cities, and

communities have supported water conservation with education and incentive

programs. Some water utilities provide

rebates and other incentives to those

who reduce consumption in areas where

rapid growth strains local water supplies. FEMP is working with local utilities in its Water Utility Partnership

program to establish partnerships and

facilitate communication among Federal

agencies, utilities, and service companies. For more information on the program and other utility partnerships, see

FEMP’s Web site.

Technology Performance

The true test of a new technology usually takes place in the field rather than in

the lab. This section reports on some

users’ experiences with the waterconservation technologies described 

in this report. 

Field Experiences

High-efficiency, low-flow

showerheads—A number of utilities,

such as Boise Water Corporation, have

proactively installed water-efficient

showerheads for their residential customers. The Rocky Mountain Institute

has calculated that retrofitting one

household with water-efficient showerheads and faucet flow controls (averaging 1.6 showerheads and 2 faucet flow

controls per household) saves about

5,600–15,000 gallons (21,198–56,781

liters) of water each year, and cuts utility

bills by $25–$170 per year.

In one program, the Seattle Water

Department followed up with users 

in 93 multifamily housing units that

installed low-flow showerheads to check

on the resulting savings. They found

that the new fixtures saved an average

of 4.5 gallons (17 liters) per day.

Sensored faucets and ultra-low-flush

toilets and urinals—According to field

studies, sensored faucets and low-flush

toilets and urinals can reduce indoor 

residential water use by about 35%. And

some results have been much better. 

For example, new toilets installed in a

16

Table 2. Cost Ranges for Domestic Water Conservation Technologies

Technology Estimated Installed Approximate Average

Cost Range a Installed Price b

Low-flow sensored faucets $100–$1,300 $330

Low-flow showerheads $15–$75 $31

Pressure-reducing valve $100

Horizontal-axis clothes washer, $600–$1,000 $850

residential size

Water-efficient dishwasher, $200–$1,600 $700

residential size c

Low-flush tank toilets $150–$1,000 $240

Low-flush flushometer toilets $300–$800 $450

Low-flow urinals $300–$800 $450

Waterless urinals d $600–$800

____________

a Cost ranges provided by the Rocky Mountain Institute, Consumer Reports, FEMP,

and WaterWiser, the Water Efficiency Clearinghouse (a program of the American

Water Works Association, operated in cooperation with the Bureau of Reclamation). 

b Most average installed prices are based on Seattle Public Utilities, Water

Conservation Potential Assessment, Draft Summary Report, December 4, 1997.

c Consumer Reports, December 2000.

d Data obtained from the Waterless Company's quotations for the GSA price list,

1996; includes fluid traps and seal.
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

project sponsored by Seattle Public

Utilities used approximately 60% less

water than older models.

FEMP and other groups sponsored a

retrofit project in which several different

water-efficient fixtures were installed in

restrooms in a high-rise office building

in the Denver Federal Center. These

included ultra-low-flush toilets that 

consume 0.5 gpf (1.9 lpf), and sensored

lavatory faucets that control the amount

of hot water used in hand washing.

Water consumption was monitored

before and after the retrofits were

installed in several restrooms. 

Water-use monitoring showed that

usage quickly dropped by about 50% 

in the three men's restrooms and about

35% in one women's restroom, according to Richard Bronowski, assistant

buildings manager. He said that most

users seem to like the fixtures. However,

because it takes only 3-5 seconds for the

faucet system to reset, some people were

using faucets more than once, which

reduced water savings. An information

campaign may have helped to show

people how to use water-conserving 

fixtures more efficiently.

Field studies have also shown that lowflush toilets reduce indoor residential

water use by at least 35%. In fact, toilets

installed in a project sponsored by

Seattle Public Utilities used about 60%

less water than older models.

In many surveys, consumers have said

that low-flush toilets are very acceptable

or satisfactory. A recent Consumer

Reports article evaluated 13 residential

low-flush toilets, and all received an

overall score of “good” or better.

Potomac Resources, Inc., recently completed a study of low-flush toilets in the

United States and found that most users

were satisfied with newer models. For

example, 83% of residents polled in 

San Diego, California, 95% of those in

Austin, Texas, and 87% of those in

Denver, Colorado, found the low-flush

toilets to be as good as, or better than,

their old toilets. Most surveys have

shown an acceptance or satisfaction rate

exceeding 80%. 

Waterless urinals—Hundreds of waterless urinals have been tested in recent

years in more than 40 Federal facilities;

many of these facilities are either in

national parks or in Department of

Defense (DoD) installations. In 1996,

DoD staff conducted a survey to determine the level of satisfaction in about 

a dozen installations. Joseph Dooley of

the Secretary of Defense Energy and

Engineering Department reported that

the overall response to these fixtures has

been quite favorable.

Actual water savings vary at each installation because of differences in the types

of urinals replaced and the amount of

water used. But in general, waterless

urinals appear to save an average of

1.5–3 gallons (about 5.7–11.4 liters) of

water per use in comparison to rates 

for conventional urinals, Dooley said.

Savings in maintenance costs vary as

well. Although these urinals must be

17

Sara Farrar, NREL/PIX06463

The City of Austin’s water utility encouraged residential customers to conserve water by

conducting water audits, replacing old fixtures, and providing educational materials.

400

350

300

250

200

150

100

50

0

Gallons per day

02279905m

Pre-Retro Urinals and Toilets Post-Retro Urinals and Toilets

Wednesday

T

Sunday

Monday

uesday

Weekend

Weekday

Thursday

Friday

Saturday

Average water use for toilets and urinals in the men’s room at the Denver Federal Center

changed from 310 gallons per day to 125 gallons per day, a reduction of 60%.
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

cleaned and the fluid trap replaced 

regularly, Kirtland Air Force Base staff

reported that the units showed little

wear and tear or effects of vandalism

after a period of time. This might be in

part because the units lack flush mechanisms or valves that have to be repaired

or replaced. 

Dooley also said that some personnel

hesitated to use the unfamiliar new 

fixtures at first. Posting informational

notices solved that problem. Here are

some of the lessons that the staff learned

from their experiences with the urinals:

• Be sure the drain is clear before

installing the fixture; snake it out, if

you need to.

• Make sure that both the urinal and

trap are properly installed. 

• Train custodians to clean the urinals

regularly and completely. 

• Expect that it will take a little time for

personnel to be comfortable using

these urinals.

Some waterless urinals were removed a

few years ago from the Denver Federal

Center water efficiency project because

they were not working out well. The

cause could have been an installation

problem or a building ventilation problem. The urinals were later shipped to

the National Park Service’s Glen Canyon

Dam Visitors Center, where they have

been satisfactory. Rusty Gattis of the

Glen Canyon Dam Visitors Center

reported that, after about a year of use,

there were no major problems with three

waterless urinals installed there. 

Case Study 

Portland VA Hospital

A few years ago, the Veterans

Administration Hospital in Portland,

Oregon, appeared to be a very good candidate for a water efficiency project. It is

a large (1,364,000 ft2) facility, and it had

a wide range of aging water-related fixtures and equipment. The equipment

experienced a high volume of use, as

well. The facility consumed 64.6 million

gallons (244.5 million liters) of water

from August 1995 through July 1996. To

determine which equipment would be

cost-effective to retrofit or replace, the

DOE FEMP SAVEnergy Program conducted a water audit. 

In the audit, data on water use rates and

times of use were collected for toilets,

urinals, faucets, single-pass watercooled equipment (vacuum pumps and

air compressors), cooling towers, boilers, the irrigation system, sterilizers,

dishwashers, the laundry, and other

water-using equipment. Usage rates

were compared with rates for newer,

commonly available equipment. The

auditors determined how much water

the new equipment would save in performing the same tasks as the old equipment, and the cost to install it. Cost

estimates were based on their experiences with similar projects and on estimates from contractors. New equipment

was recommended that had a discounted payback of 10 years or less. The recommendations for domestic water-using

equipment are presented here.

Toilets and urinals in the hospital were

found to use 3.5–5 gallons (13.2–18.9

liters) of water per flush. The auditors

measured flush volumes in representative toilets by plugging the toilet drain

with a plunger, flushing the toilet, marking the level to which the toilet filled,

draining the toilet, plugging it again,

and filling it to the marked line using 

a bucket with volume measurements.

Because low-flush toilets use 1.6 gallons

(6.1 liters) per flush and urinals use

about 1 gallon (3.8 liters), a significant

amount of water could be saved by

replacing most toilets and urinals with

water-efficient models. Savings resulting

from replacing 346 toilets and urinals

were estimated at $33,800. The estimated cost of installing the toilets was

$104,000, for a simple payback of 3 years

and a discounted payback of 4 years.

Most of the faucets in the facility used

5–6 gpm (18.9–22.7 lpm) of water, a

much greater flow than is needed in a

restroom. So, the auditors recommended

installing faucet aerators with flow rates

of 2.5 gpm (9.5 lpm) on all patient room

and restroom faucets that did not have

them. The estimated cost of retrofitting

the faucets with low-flow aerators was

approximately $8,000. Estimated savings were about $10,000, for a simple

payback of 0.7 year and a discounted

payback of about 1.5 years. Since the

audit was conducted, a number of highquality, 0.5 gpm (1.9 lpm) aerators have

become available that save even more

water, energy, and money. 

Most of the facility’s showers used 5–6

gpm (18.9–22.7 lpm) of water. This was

also much more than necessary. The

flow rate of faucets and showerheads

was measured using a timer and a plastic bag with volume measurements. The

auditors recommended replacing most

of the old showerheads with low-flow

models having a flow rate of 2.5 gpm

(9.5 lpm). Replacing 51 showerheads

would save an estimated $6,500; the

installed cost was estimated at $2,100.

The estimated simple payback was

0.3 year, and the discounted payback,

1 year.

The Technologies in

Perspective

Technology Development

The efficiency of most domestic water

conservation technologies is improving

constantly. Some products—such as

composting toilets, waterless urinals,

and horizontal-axis washers—are relative newcomers to mass U.S. markets,

though they have been purchased here

in limited quantities for several years.

All these technologies can help to conserve water unless they are installed or

used incorrectly. Nearly all are available

in models that meet local and national

standards for water and energy 

efficiency.

Technology Outlook

We can expect these and other waterrelated technologies to make a much

greater contribution to conservation

efforts in the future, as water management begins to have greater priority in

our nation. Water rates will probably

continue to climb as prices come closer

to reflecting the real value of water, and

18
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

users will continue to find ways to use

water more efficiently. 

According to a recent article in Energy

User News, water utilities will spend

$138 billion in the next 20 years to

upgrade their infrastructures. Subsidies

for water-wasting behavior are likely 

to be reduced as a growing population

places greater demands on a limited

resource. Idaho, Maryland, New

Mexico, Oregon, Virginia, Washington,

and several other states are already

experiencing conflicts over who has

access to limited water resources. 

New legal and political protection for

aquatic wildlife could further limit

sources of water and increase prices. For

example, endangered species protection

efforts for salmon in Washington and

Oregon are expected to have major

impacts on how water is used in those

states.

Regarding specific water conservation

technologies, it seems clear that ultralow-flow showerheads will be used

more frequently. Many models consume

1–1.5 gpm (3.8–5.7 lpm) or less. And

some have one plastic orifice that does

not usually clog even with hard water.

So, these products are becoming more

attractive to consumers every year.

Some new dishwashers adjust the

amount of water according to the size

and food content of the load, as mentioned earlier. Ultrasonic dishwashers

save both water and energy, and are

finding buyers among U.S. consumers.

Ultrasonic clothes washers are likely to

be widely available soon; they save a

considerable amount of water, energy,

and detergent. And enzymatic dishwasher detergents are available now

that digest protein, starch, and fat; they

clean dishes better with less water (especially less hot water) than other kinds. 

In addition, more rainwater collection

systems are likely to be used for domestic purposes. In most areas, the pure,

naturally distilled water that falls on

roofs is carried off to storm drains and

treated, at a high cost to consumers.

Saving and using this rainwater for

domestic use requires appropriately

sized, nontoxic collection and storage

systems, periodic water quality testing,

and, in some cases, some water 

treatment.

In many areas, it is cheaper to build a

rainwater collection system than to drill

a well. In Hawaii, Australia, Bermuda,

Hong Kong, and several other areas,

rainwater collection is already a common practice. A rainwater collection system can be more sustainable over the

long term than a well, which draws

down the water table and creates a number of new problems. In the recently

built King Street Center in Seattle, rainwater is captured and reused for flushing toilets; this saves 1.4 million gallons

(5.3 million liters) of water per year. The

King Street system allows more river

water to be available to native species

such as salmon.

The number of graywater systems

should also increase. Graywater systems

collect bath, shower, restroom sink,

washing machine, and wet-bar sink

water and reuse it, usually for irrigating

landscapes and flushing toilets. In one

example, using graywater to flush toilets

at an office park in Essex County, New

Jersey, has cut potable water use there

by an impressive 62%. Hundreds of

projects already reclaim wastewater to

irrigate golf courses and other large

lawn areas. States like California have

passed laws allowing the use of graywater systems that meet certain health

standards.

Composting toilets will probably be purchased more often, as well. Many people

realize how wasteful it is to use valuable

drinking water to dilute and flush toilet

waste, especially when the waste could

be composted and used as high-quality

fertilizer. In one example, a Swedish

composting system separates the liquid

and solid waste, collecting both for use

as fertilizer. Codes and laws governing

rainwater collection, graywater, and

composting toilets vary from state to

state, so be sure to check them when

considering a system for your facility.

To help conserve the considerable

amount of water that is wasted because

of leaky fixtures and pipes, automated

leak-detecting equipment is also becoming available. This equipment activates

an alarm when a leak occurs. 

Because of their many environmental

and economic benefits, water-saving

technologies are worth considering for

Federal facilities everywhere. Even in

areas where water resources are not

scarce, we are likely to see increases in

the use of these and other practical,

water-saving technologies in our homes,

places of business, and government

facilities because they are cost-effective,

they help us conserve our natural

resources, and they work. 

19

Warren Gretz NREL/PIX060654

Infrared sensors help to save water at the

Denver Federal Center.
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Water Efficiency Service

Companies and Equipment

Manufacturers

Note that the water efficiency products

and services companies listed here were 

identified at the time this document was

published. The list does not purport to

be complete, to indicate the right to

practice the technologies, or to reflect

future market conditions.

Water-Saving Toilets, Urinals, and

Flush Valves

American Standard, Inc.

1 Centennial Avenue

Piscataway, NJ 08855

800-223-0068

Briggs Industries

4350 W. Cypress St., Suite 800

Tampa, FL 33607

800-888-4458 

Crane Plumbing

1235 Hartrey Ave.

Evanston, IL 60202-1056

847-864-9777; 800-955-0316

Eljer PlumbingWare, Inc.

14801 Quorum Dr.

Dallas, TX 75254

800-423-5537

Falcon Waterfree Technologies, LLC

10900 Wilshire Blvd., 15th Floor

Los Angeles, CA 90024

310-209-7250

Gerber Plumbing Fixtures Corp.

4600 W. Touhy

Chicago, IL 60646

847-675-6570 

Geberit Mfg., Inc.

1100 Boone Dr., P.O. Box 2008

Michigan City, IN 46360-8008

219-879-4466

Jade Mountain

P.O. Box 4616

Boulder, CO 80306

800-442-1972

Kohler Co.

444 Highland Dr.

Kohler, WI 53044

920-457-4441; 800-4KOHLER

Mansfield Plumbing Products

150 First St.

Perrysville, OH 44864 

419-938-5211

Microphor, Inc.

P.O. Box 1460

Willits, CA 95490

707-459-5563; 800-358-8280

Niagara Conservation Corp.

45 Horse Hill Rd.

Cedar Knolls, NJ 07927 

800-831-8383

P-Knows, Inc.

2233 South Choctaw

Baton Rouge, LA 70815

888-275-2291

Peerless Pottery, Inc.

P.O. Box 145

Rockport, IN 47635-0145

800-457-5785

Sloan Valve Company 

10500 Seymour Avenue

Franklin Park, Ill. 60131-1268

847-671-4300

www.sloanvalve.com

Titon Industries Inc

P O Box 566858

Atlanta, GA 31156

770-399-5252

Toto Kiki USA, Inc

1155 Southern Rd.

Morrow, GA 30260-2917

770-282-8686

U.S. Brass

P.O. Box 37

Plano, TX 75074 

800-USBRASS

Waterless Co.

1549 Idlewood Rd.

Glendale, CA 91202

800-969-6364

Water-Saving Showerheads,

Faucets, and Related Products 

American Standard, Inc.

1 Centennial Ave.

Piscataway, NJ 08855

800-223-0068

AM Conservation Group, Inc.

R.D. 3, Box 920, Rt. 517

Hackettstown, NJ 07840

908-852-6464

Beacon Valve Co.

P.O. Box 540478

Waltham, MA 02454

800-325-2032

Bradley Corp.

9101 Fountain Blvd.

Menomonee Falls, WI 53051

414-251-6000

Briggs Industries

4350 W. Cypress St., Suite 800

Tampa, FL 33607

800-627-4447

Chatham Brass Co., Inc.

5 Olsen Ave.

Edison, NJ 08820-2498

732-494-7101

Chicago Faucet Co.

2100 S. Clearwater Dr.

Des Plaines, IL 60018-5999 

847-803-5000

Chronomite Laboratories Inc.

1420 W. 240th St

Harbor City, CA 90710-1307

310-534-2300

Coyne & Delany Co.

P.O. Box 411

Charlottesville, VA 22902

434-296-0166

Eljer PlumbingWare, Inc.

14801 Quorum Dr.

Dallas, TX 75254

800-423-5537

Gerber Plumbing Fixtures Corp.

4600 W. Touhy Ave.

Chicago, IL 60646

847-675-6570

20
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Interbath

665 N. Baldwin Park Blvd.

City of Industry, CA 91746-1502

800-423-9485

Kohler Co.

444 Highland Dr.

Kohler, WI 53044

920-457-4441; 800-4KOHLER

Melard Mfg. Corp.

153 Linden St.

Passaic, NJ 07055

800-635-2731

Moen Inc.

25300 Al Moen Dr.

North Olmsted, OH 44070-8022

216-962-2000; 800-321-8809

Niagara Conservation Corp.

45 Horse Hill Rd.

Cedar Knolls, NJ 07927

800-831-8383

Resources Conservation Inc.

P.O. Box 71

Greenwich, CT 06836

203-964-0600; 800-243-2862

Sloan Valve Co.

10500 Seymour Ave.

Franklin Park, IL 60131

847-671-4300

Symmons Industries Inc.

31 Brooks Dr.

Braintree, MA 02184

800-SYMMONS

Teledyne Water Pik

1730 E. Prospect St.

Fort Collins, CO 80553

970-484-1352

Ultraflo Valves & Controls

#8 Trautman Ind. Dr.

Ste. Genevieve, MO 63670

800-950-1762

U.S. Brass

P.O. Box 37

Plano, TX 75074

800-USBRASS

Composting Toilets

Advanced Composting Systems

195 Meadows Rd.

Whitefish, MT 59937

406-862-3854

Biolet Interamericas

550 North Sam Houston

PO Box 592

San Benito, TX 78586

888-5-BIOLET

Biolet USA

45 Newbury St.

Boston, MA 02116

800-5-BIOLET

Clivus Multrum

104 Mt Auburn St, 5th floor

Cambridge MA 02138-5051

1-800-4CLIVUS

Composting Toilet Systems, Inc.

PO Box 1928

Newport, WA 99156

888-786-4538

Ecotech Composting Toilets

152 Commonwealth Ave.

Concord, MA 01742

978-369-3951

ECOS-Water Conservation Systems

152 Commonwealth Ave.

Concord, MA 01742

508-369-3951

Equaris Corp.

1740 Magnolia Lane N.

Plymouth, MN 55441

763-383-5136

Jade Mountain Inc.

PO Box 4616

Boulder, CO 80306

800-442-1972

Lehman's Hardware and Appliances

One Lehman Circle

PO Box 41

Kidron, OH 44636

330-857-5757

Mountain Lion Trading Co.

2404 N. Columbus St.

Spokane, WA 99207

509-487-0765

Real Goods Trading Co.

555 Leslie St.

Ukiah, CA 95482

707-468-9292

Sancor Industries Ltd, USA

6391 Walmore Rd.

Niagara Falls, NY 14304

800-387-5126

Soiltech

607 E. Canal St.

Newcomerstown, OH 43832

800-296-6026

Sun-Mar Corp.

600 Main St.

Tonawanda, NY 14150

800-461-2461

Clothes Washers and Dishwashers

See the EPA ENERGY STAR® Web site for 

water- and energy-efficient models:

www.energystar.gov

See also the Web sites and numbers

below for more information; many 

efficient appliances can be ordered from

local appliance distributors. 

Frigidaire

www.frigidaire.com; 800-Frigidaire

General Electric

www.ge.com

Maytag

www.maytag.com; 800-688-9900

Staber

www.staber.com; 800-848-6200

Whirlpool

www.whirlpool.com; 800-253-1301

Water-Efficient Commercial Laundry

Systems

Florida Water Solutions

2936 S. Semoran Blvd.

Suite 108

Orlando, Fl 32822

407-249-5668

Pellerin Milnor Corp.

P.O. Box 400

Kenner, LA 70063

504-467-9591, Ext. 222

Wascomat of America

461 Doughty Blvd.

Inwood, NY 11096-1344

516-371-4400

Other Water Conservation Products

Acorn Engineering Company

(Drinking fountains)

15125 E. Proctor Ave.

City of Industry, CA 91744-0527

800-488-8999

21
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Jade Mountain

(Demand water heaters)

P.O. Box 4616

Boulder, CO 80306

800-442-1972

Keltech, Inc.

(Tankless water heaters)

9285 N. 32nd, P.O. Box 405

Richland, MI 49083-0405

800-999-4320

Wolter Systems, Inc.

(Instantaneous water heaters)

1100 Harrison Ave.

Cincinnati, OH 45214-1805

513-651-2666

Metropolitan Water Saving Inc.

(Water-saving devices)

4701 Sangamore Rd.

Bethesda, MD 20816-2579

301-229-1980 

Whole Energy & Hardware, Inc.

(Water conservation equipment and

supplies)

1620 Audubon Rd.

Chaska, MN 55318

800-544-2986

Audits and Retrofits

American Water & Energy Savers

4431 N. Dixie Highway

Boca Raton, FL 33431

800-950-9058

Amy Vickers & Associates, Inc.

800 Main St., Suite 4

Amherst, MA 01002-2402

413-253-1520

Atlas Enterprises of America, Inc.

8143 Richmond Hwy.

Alexandria, VA 22309

703-780-1101

Ayres Associates

8875 Hidden River Pkwy.

Tampa, FL 33637

813-978-8688

Battenkill Group

90 Main St.

Charlestown, MA 02129

617-241-0077

BRACO Resource Services

155 NE 100th St.

Seattle, WA 98125

206-729-6034

California Water Conservation Co.

7277 Hayvenhurst Ave., Suite B-5

Van Nuys, CA 91406

818-787-5588

Consumers Applied Technologies

5858 S. Semoran Blvd.

Orlando, FL 32822

800-362-9964

CTSI Corporation

2722 Walnut Ave.

Tustin, CA 92780

800-660-8028

Diversified Conservation Inc.

22-24 W. Main St.

Freehold, NJ 07728

800-4-0-WASTE

ERI Services, Inc.

8380 Old York Rd.

Elkins Pk., PA 19027

215-887-7100

The Fuller Group (Aqua Saver)

3461 Summerford Ct.

Marietta, GA 30062

770-565-8539

H20 Matrix

2 Oliver St.

Boston, MA 02109

617-574-1180

Heath Consultants

9030 Monroe Road

Houston, TX 77061-5229

713-844-1300

Honeywell DMC Services, Inc.

299 Washington St.

Woburn, MA 01801

781-933-9558

John Olaf Nelson Water Resources

Management

1833 Castle Drive

Petaluma, CA 94594 

707-778-8620

Koeller and Company

5962 Sandra Drive

Yorba Linda, CA 92886-5337

714-777-2744

Lombardo Associates

49 Edge Hill Rd.

Newton, MA 02167

617-964-2924

Margiloff & Associates

6221 Royalview St.

Duarte, CA 91010-1346

626-303-1266

Metropolitan Resource Management

516 Fifth Ave., Suite 1500

New York, NY 10036

1-888-542-7586

MSA Professional Services

1230 South Blvd.

Baraboo, WI 53913

608-356-2771

National Exemption Services, Inc.

10810 72nd St. North, Suite 207

Largo, FL 33777

800-780-8848

Sloan Hydronomic Systems, Inc. (East)

44 Granite St.

Medway, MA 02053

800-671-6973

Utility Services Associates

10013 Martin Luther King Jr. Way So.

Seattle, WA 98178

800-621-9292

Volt VIEWtech

3430 E. Miraloma Ave.

Anaheim, CA 92806

800-355-VIEW

WaterTech International, Inc.

200 High St., 6th Floor

Boston, MA 02110

617-592-8224

Water Loss Systems, Inc.

26409 Aiken Dr.

Clarksburg, MD 20871

800-330-8905

Water Management, Inc.

117 Claremont Ave

Alexandria, VA 22304

703-370-9133

Water Savers, Inc.

9672 Via Excelencia

San Diego, CA 92126

800-459-2837

Wellspring Water Management

6333 Greenwich Dr. #140

San Diego, CA 92122

858-824-0900

22
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Who Is Using the

Technologies

This list provides a sampling of the

many Federal agencies that are using

water-efficient technologies. 

Bureau of Reclamation

U.S. Department of the Interior

Glen Canyon Dam, Arizona

Contact: Larry Gordon

Phone: 801-524-3657

Department of Energy

Sandia National Laboratories

Albuquerque, New Mexico

Contact: Darell Rogers

Phone: 505-844-5842

U.S. Air Force

Air Force Civil Engineering Support

Agency

Contact: Michael Clawson

Tyndall AFB, Florida

Phone: 850-283-6362

U.S. Navy

Navy Facilities Engineering Service Ctr.

Port Hueneme, California

Contact: Dan Magro

Phone: 805-982-3529

For More Information

American Water Works Association

6666 W. Quincy Ave.

Denver, CO 80235

303-794-7711

www.awwa.org

California Energy Commission (CEC) 

916-654-4287

See the “Consumer Tips” Web pages:

www.consumerenergycenter.org/flex/

index.html

Rocky Mountain Institute Water

Program

1739 Snowmass Creek Road

Snowmass, CO 81654-9199

970-927-3851

www.rmi.org

U.S. Department of Energy

Federal Energy Management Program

(FEMP)

Help Line: 1-800-363-3732

www.eren.doe.gov/femp

FEMP Water Efficiency Program: 

202-646-5218

WaterWiser, the Water Efficiency

Clearinghouse

(A program of the American Water

Works Association operated in

cooperation with the U.S Bureau of

Reclamation)

6666 W. Quincy Ave.

Denver, CO 80235

800-926-7337

www.waterwiser.org

Third-Party Information and Guide

Books

Air Force Civil Engineering Support

Agency

Information for Air Force bases that

other agencies can use: 

www.afcesa.af.mil/Directorate/CES/

Civil/Water/Water.htm

(See especially the Water Conservation

Guidebook)

General Services Administration

www.gsa.gov

(See especially Water Management: A

Comprehensive Approach for Facility

Managers)

Navy Facilities Engineering Service

Center

Information for Navy bases that other

agencies can use:

energy.navy.mil/key-areas/

WaterWeb.html

(See especially the Water Conservation

Military Handbook, MIL-HDBK-1165)

New Mexico Office of the State Engineer

Phone: 800-water-nm

(See especially A Water Conservation

Guide for Commercial, Institutional and

Industrial Users)

References

“A new spin on clothes washers.” (July

1998). Consumer Reports, pp. 50-53.

Arnold, Marilyn L.; Gray, Don. (1993).

Water Efficiency in Federal Facilities and

Programs. Prepared by the

Environmental and Energy Study

Institute under grant no. X-816389-01-0

for the U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency. Washington, DC:

Environmental and Energy Study

Institute.

City of San Jose, Environmental Services

Department. (n.d.) Water Conservation

Guide for Cooling Towers. San Jose, CA;

phone 408-277-5533.

“Clean enough for you?” (March 2000).

Consumer Reports, pp. 47-50

Dieckmann, J.; Murphy, W. (December

1995). Laboratory Testing of Clothes

Washers. Report No. TR-105098.

Prepared by Arthur D. Little, Inc., for the

Electric Power Research Institute. Palo

Alto, CA: EPRI.

“Dishing it out.” (March 1999).

Consumer Reports, pp. 50-53. 

Dooley, Joseph W. (1996). Waterless

Urinals. Report to the Office of the

Deputy Under Secretary of Defense,

Energy and Engineering, 400

ArmyNavy Drive, Suite 206, Arlington,

VA 22202.

Dyballa, Cynthia; Connelly, Christopher.

(1993). "Electric and Water Utilities:

Building Cooperation and Saving."

Proceedings of the ACEEE 1992 Summer

Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings.

Washington, D.C.: American Council for

an Energy-Efficient Economy, pp. 5-

51–5-61.

Edgemon, Sandi D.; Gregg, Tony T.;

Baechler, Michael C. (1998). "ENERGY

STAR®‚ Partnerships Clothes Washer

Volume Purchase: Partnering with the

City of Austin." Conference paper.

Richland, WA: Pacific Northwest

National Laboratory.

Electric Power Research Institute. (1995).

Horizontal-Axis Residential Washing

Machine. EPRI Technical Brief no.

RP3872. Palo Alto, CA: EPRI, December.

23
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Gelinas, C. Gary; Brant, Benjamin.

(November 1995). "A Systems Approach

to Saving Water and Energy." Presented

at the 18th World Energy Engineering

Congress, Atlanta, GA.

How to Buy a Water-Saving Faucet.

(February 1997). Washington, DC: U.S.

Department of Energy, Federal Energy

Management Program.

How to Buy a Water-Saving Replacement

Toilet. (February 1997). Washington, DC:

U.S. Department of Energy, Federal

Energy Management Program.

How to Buy a Water-Saving Replacement

Urinal. (February 1997). Washington,

DC: U.S. Department of Energy, Federal

Energy Management Program.

How to Buy a Water-Saving Showerhead.

(February 1997). Washington, DC: U.S.

Department of Energy, Federal Energy

Management Program.

"In Search of a Better Toilet: How Well

Do Low Flush Models Work? And Do

They Save Water?" (May 1998).

Consumer Reports, Volume 63, No. 5;

p. 44.

Jenkins, Joseph. (1999). The Humanure

Handbook. Second edition. Grove City,

PA: Jenkins Publishing.

Jones, Andrew P. (1993). High-Efficiency

Showerheads and Faucets. Water

Efficiency Technology Report #2.

Snowmass, CO: Rocky Mountain

Institute.

Kesselring, John; Gillman, Richard.

(1997). "Horizontal-Axis Washing

Machines." EPRI Journal, January/

February, pp. 38–41.

Laird, Colin. (1991). Water-Efficient

Technologies. A Catalog for the

Residential/ Light Commercial Sector.

2nd edition. Snowmass, CO: Rocky

Mountain Institute.

Laurie, Michael (1996). Commercial

Water Auditing Workshop, Seattle, Wa.

BRACO Resource Services.

Lombardo Associates. (June 1997). Draft.

Federal Facilities Water Use and

Water/Energy Conservation Potential.

Task 1 Report: Water Use Estimates.

Prepared under contract no. AAR-7-

17778-01. Golden, CO: National

Renewable Energy Laboratory.

Osann, Edward; Young, John. (April

1998). Saving Water, Saving Dollars:

Efficient Plumbing Products and the

Protection of America’s Waters.

Washington, DC: Potomac Resources,

Inc. Available from the American

Council for an Energy Efficient

Economy, 202-429-0063. 

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory.

(1995). Ozone Treatment for Cooling

Towers. Federal Technology Alert .

Prepared for the Federal Energy

Management Program by PNNL.

Online: www.pnl.gov/fta/6_ozone.htm.

Postel, Sandra. (April 1997). "Dividing

the Waters." Technology Review,

pp. 54–62.

U.S. General Services Administration.

(n.d.) Water Management: A

Comprehensive Approach for Facility

Managers. Prepared by U.S. GSA, Office

of Real Property Management and

Safety, and Enviro-Management &

Research, Inc., 1015 18th St., N.W.,

Washington, DC 20036, phone 202-293-

5300.

24
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Appendixes

Appendix A: Guidelines for Domestic Water Technology Applications in New Federal 

Construction and Retrofits

Appendix B: Estimating Water Use and Savings Associated with Domestic Fixtures and 

Appliances

Appendix C: Comparative Economic Analyses for Selected Water Conservation Technologies

Appendix D: Estimating Savings with WATERGY

Appendix E: Guidelines for Conducting a Water Audit

Appendix F: Commercial Self-Audit Checklist

25
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

26

Appendix A: Guidelines for Domestic Water Technology Applications in New Federal 

Construction and Retrofits

Technology Best choice for Best choice for Best choice for Best choice for Best choice for Best choice for

new construction new construction new construction retrofits at sites retrofits at sites retrofits at remote 

with water and with water and at remote sites with water and with water and sites without water

sewer lines sewer lines; very without water sewer lines sewer lines; very and sewer lines

likely that users and sewer lines likely that users 

will waste water will waste water

Faucet Restrooms: 0.5 gpma Restrooms: 0.5 gpm Restrooms: 0.5 gpm Restrooms: 0.5 gpm Restrooms: 0.5 gpm Restrooms: 0.5 gpm 

(1.9 lpm); (1.9 lpm); faucet (1.9 lpm); (1.9 lpm); (1.9 lpm) faucet (1.9 lpm);

Kitchens: 2.5 gpm with a timer; Kitchens: 2.5 gpm Kitchens: 2.5 gpm with a timer; Kitchens: 2.5 gpm 

(9.5 lpm) Kitchens: 2.5 gpm (9.5 lpm); (9.5 lpm) Kitchens: 2.5 gpm (9.5 lpm) 

(9.5 lpm) Consider graywater (9.5 lpm)

system for wastewater disposal

Showerhead 1.5 gpm (5.7 lpm) 1.5 gpm (5.7 lpm) 1.5 gpm (5.7 lpm) 1.5 gpm (5.7 lpm) 1.5 gpm (5.7 lpm) 1.5 gpm (5.7 lpm)

Tank toilet 1.6 gpf b (6.1 lpf) 1.6 gpf (6.1 lpf) Consider compost 1.6 gpf (6.1 lpf) 1.6 gpf (6.1 lpf) 1.6 gpf (6.1 lpf) 

pressure-assisted pressure-assisted toilet or 1.6 gpf (6.1 lpf) pressure-assisted pressure-assisted pressure-assisted 

model model pressure-assisted model model model

model

Flushometer 1.6 gpf (6.1 lpf) 1.6 gpf (6.1 lpf) Consider compost 1.6 gpf (6.1 lpf) 1.6 gpf (6.1 lpf) 1.6 gpf (6.1 lpf)

toilet toilet or 1.6 gpf 

(6.1 lpf)

Urinal 1 gpf (3.8 lpf) or 1 gpf (3.8 lpf) or 1 gpf (3.8 lpf) or 1 gpf (3.8 lpf) or 1 gpf (3.8 lpf) or 1 gpf (3.8 lpf) or 

waterless waterless waterless waterless waterless waterless

Clothes 25 gpu c (94.6 lpu) 25 gpu (94.6 lpu) 25 gpu (94.6 lpu) 25 gpu (94.6 lpu) 25 gpu (94.6 lpu) 25 gpu (94.6 lpu) 

washer or less or less or less consider or less or less or less

graywater system for 

wastewater disposal

Dishwasher 5 gpu (18.9 lpu) 5 gpu (18.9 lpu) 5 gpu (18.9 lpu) 5 gpu (18.9 lpu) 5 gpu (18.9 lpu) 5 gpu (18.9 lpu)

or less consider graywater or less or less or less

system for wastewater 

disposal

____________

a gpm = gallons per minute; lpm = liters per minute

b gpf = gallons per flush; lpf = liters per flush 

c gpu = gallons per use; lpu = liters per use
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

27

Appendix B: Estimating Water Use and Savings Associated with Domestic Fixtures and 

Appliances

This appendix includes three examples of analyses of water, energy, and cost savings associated with installing water-efficient

technologies to demonstrate their cost-effectiveness. Example 1 analyzes the savings and costs associated with replacing toilets

and urinals and installing faucet aerators. The water rates and occupancy levels used in the example are average rates for GSA

facilities. Example 2 analyzes the savings and costs associated with replacing two dishwashers with different usage patterns.

Example 3 analyzes the savings and costs associated with replacing a showerhead and installing faucet aerators.

Example 1: Toilets, Urinals, and Faucet Aerators

This example presents savings, simple paybacks, and discounted paybacks obtainable with a total of 30 water-saving fixtures installed

as retrofits in six restrooms.

Annual Energy Use Annual Water Use

(kWh/yr) (gallons) _________________ _________________

Existing fixtures 10,502 1,125,000

Proposed retrofits 2,100 450,000 

Average Water Use Before Retrofits

(gallons) _________________

Males (average use per worker per workday)

1 toilet use (at 3.5 gal. per flush) 3.5

2 urinal uses (at 2 gal. per flush) 4

3 lavatory uses (at 2.5 gal. per min., 0.17 min. per use) 1.3

Total 8.8

Females (average use per worker per workday)

3 toilet uses (at 3.5 gal. per flush) 10.5

3 lavatory uses (at 2.5 gal. per min.,

0.17 min. per use) 1.3

Total 11.8

Average water use per person per 8-hr workday before retrofits: 10 gallons

Average Water Use After Retrofits

(gallons) _________________

Males (average use per worker per workday)

1 toilet use (at 1.6 gal. per flush) 1.6

2 urinal uses (at 1 gal. per flush) 2

3 lavatory uses (at 0.5 gal. per min., 0.17 min. per use) 0.3

Total 3.9

Females (average use per worker per workday)

3 toilet uses (at 1.6 gal. per flush) 4.8

3 lavatory uses (at 0.5 gal. per min.,

0.17 min. per use) 0.3

Total 5.1

Average water use per person per 8-hr workday after retrofits: 4.5 gallons

Daily water savings after retrofits: 5.8 gallons

Annual water savings: 675,000 gallons

Annual cost savings (at $3.88 per 1000 gallons): $2,619

Annual energy savings: 8,237 kWh/yr (Using 250 workdays for 450 people; 112,500 gal./yr; 30% hot water, 8.33 lb/gal., water 

temp. increase, 100°; 3,413 Btu/energy unit; 100% electric water heater efficiency) 

Annual water cost savings: $2,619

Annual energy cost savings: $577

Total annual savings: $3,196

Total installation cost: $8,268 (Assuming 6 restrooms and total of 15 toilets and 3 urinals at $450 each, 12 sinks at $14 each)

Simple payback (using $8,268 installed cost, $3,196 savings/yr): 2.6 years

Life-cycle-cost discounted payback: 1 year
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Example 2: Dishwashers

This example presents savings, simple paybacks, and discounted paybacks for water-saving dishwashers with different usage rates.

Assumptions: Water/wastewater rate of $3.88 per 1000 gallons

Electric rate of $0.07 per kWh

Energy and Water Use for Existing Dishwashers ___________________________________________

Energy Use Water Use _________________ ____________________

First dishwasher 547 kWh/yr 13 gal./use; 5000 gal./yr

(1 use per day)

Second dishwasher 1824 kWh/yr 13 gal./use; 12,500 gal./yr

(2.5 uses per day)

Energy and Water Use for Proposed Dishwashers ___________________________________________

Energy Use Water Use _________________ ____________________

First dishwasher 173 kWh/yr 5 gal./use; 2080 gal./yr

(1 use per day)

Second dishwasher 701 kWh/yr 5 gal./use; 5200 gal./yr

(2.5 uses per day)

First Dishwasher Second Dishwasher

(1 use per day) (2.5 uses per day) _________________ ____________________

Water saved per use (gal.) 8 8

Water saved daily (gal.) 8 20

Percent hot water 75 75

Hot water saved daily (gal.) 6 6

Pounds/gal. 8.33 8.33

Water temp. increase (deg.) 70 70

Btu/energy unit 3413 3413

Water heater efficiency 1 1

Daily energy savings (kWh) 1.03 2.56

Annual water savings (gal.) 2920 7300

Annual water cost savings $11 $28

Annual energy savings (kWh) 374 935

Annual energy cost savings $26 $65

Installed cost $600 $600

Simple payback (years) 16 6

Life-cycle-cost discounted payback (years)* 1 1

*Life-cycle-cost savings are so good in comparison to the simple paybacks because this example assumes that water and wastewater

rates will increase 5% per year for the life of the measures.

28
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Example 3: Showerhead and Aerator

This example shows the savings obtainable with a water-saving showerhead and faucet aerator, as well as their simple paybacks and

discounted paybacks.

Energy Use Water Use

(kWh/yr) (gallons)

___________ ___________

Existing fixtures (one of each fixture) 4,706 32,960 per year (3.5 per use)

Proposed retrofits (one of each fixture) 3,361 23,543 per year (2.5 per use)

Showerhead Aerator

___________ ___________

Number of people per household 4.3 4.3

Average showers per day per person 1

Average handwashings per day per person 6

Average time per shower (min.) 6

Average time per handwashing (min.) 0.17

Water savings per min. (gal.) 1 1

Water savings per year (gal.) 9,417 1,601

Installed cost $31 $14

Totals for both fixtures*:

Installed costs: $45

Annual water savings (gal.): 11,018

Annual energy savings (kWh): 1,345

Annual water cost savings (at $3.88 per 1,000 gal.): $43

Annual energy cost savings (at $0.07/kWh): $94.12

Simple payback: 0.3 yr

Discounted payback: 1 yr

*Using 50% hot water, 8.33 lb/gal., water temp. increase, 100°; 3,413 Btu/energy unit; 100% water heater efficiency.

29
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

30

Appendix C: Comparative Economic Analyses for Selected Water Conservation Technologies

Toilets

NIST BLCC 5.0-01: Comparative Analysis

Consistent with Federal Life Cycle Cost Methodology and Procedures, 10 CFR, Part 436, Subpart A

Base Case: Toilet

Alternative: Low-Flow Toilet

General Information

Project Name: Toilet / Low-Flow Toilet

Project Location: Colorado

Analysis Type: Federal Analysis, Agency-Funded Project

Analyst: NREL

Base Date of Study: April 1, 2001

Service Date: April 1, 2001

Study Period: 20 years 0 months (April 1, 2001 through March 31, 2021)

Discount Rate: 3.3%

Discounting Convention: End-of-Year

Comparison of Present-Value Costs

PV Life-Cycle Cost

Base Case Alternative Savings from Alternative

Initial Investment Costs:

Capital Requirements as of Base Date $0 $339 -$339

Future Costs:

Energy Consumption Costs $0 $0 $0

Energy Demand Charges $0 $0 $0

Energy Utility Rebates $0 $0 $0

Water Costs $902 $361 $541

Recurring and Non-Recurring OM&R Costs $926 $926 $0

Capital Replacements $0 $0 $0

Residual Value at End of Study Period $0 $0 $0

------------ ------------ ------------

Subtotal (for Future Cost Items) $1,828 $1,287 $541

------------ ------------ ------------

Total PV Life-Cycle Cost $1,828 $1,626 $202

Net Savings from Alternative Compared with Base Case

PV of Non-Investment Savings $541

- Increased Total Investment $339

------------

Net Savings $202

Savings-to-Investment Ratio (SIR)

SIR = 1.60

Adjusted Internal Rate of Return

AIRR = 5.75%

Payback Period

Estimated Years to Payback (from beginning of Service Period)

Simple Payback occurs in year 10

Discounted Payback occurs in year 11
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Urinals

NIST BLCC 5.0-01: Comparative Analysis

Consistent with Federal Life Cycle Cost Methodology and Procedures, 10 CFR, Part 436, Subpart A

Base Case: Urinal

Alternative: Low-Flow Urinal

General Information

Project Name: Urinal / Low-Flow Urinal / Flushless Urinal

Project Location: Colorado

Analysis Type: Federal Analysis, Agency-Funded Project

Analyst: NREL

Base Date of Study: April 1, 2001

Service Date: April 1, 2001

Study Period: 20 years 0 months (April 1, 2001 through March 31, 2021)

Discount Rate: 3.3%

Discounting Convention: End-of-Year

Comparison of Present-Value Costs

PV Life-Cycle Cost

Base Case Alternative Savings from Alternative

Initial Investment Costs:

Capital Requirements as of Base Date $0 $318 -$318

Future Costs:

Energy Consumption Costs $0 $0 $0

Energy Demand Charges $0 $0 $0

Energy Utility Rebates $0 $0 $0

Water Costs $1,353 $451 $902

Recurring and Non-Recurring OM&R Costs $926 $926 $0

Capital Replacements $0 $0 $0

Residual Value at End of Study Period $0 $0 $0

------------ ------------ ------------

Subtotal (for Future Cost Items) $2,279 $1,377 $902

------------ ------------ ------------

Total PV Life-Cycle Cost $2,279 $1,695 $584

Net Savings from Alternative Compared with Base Case

PV of Non-Investment Savings $902

- Increased Total Investment $318

------------

Net Savings $584

Savings-to-Investment Ratio (SIR)

SIR = 2.84

Adjusted Internal Rate of Return

AIRR = 8.83%

Payback Period

Estimated Years to Payback (from beginning of Service Period)

Simple Payback occurs in year 6

Discounted Payback occurs in year 6

31
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Flushless Urinals

NIST BLCC 5.0-01: Comparative Analysis

Consistent with Federal Life Cycle Cost Methodology and Procedures, 10 CFR, Part 436, Subpart A

Base Case: Urinal

Alternative: Flushless Urinal

General Information

File Name: c:\program files\blcc5\projects\DFCUrinals.xml

Run Date: Wed Jan 30 14:08:07 MST 2002

Project Name: Urinal / Low-Flow Urinal / Flushless Urinal

Project Location: Colorado

Analysis Type: Federal Analysis, Agency-Funded Project

Analyst: NREL

Base Date of Study: April 1, 2001

Service Date: April 1, 2001

Study Period: 20 years 0 months (April 1, 2001 through March 31, 2021)

Discount Rate: 3.3%

Discounting Convention: End-of-Year

Comparison of Present-Value Costs

PV Life-Cycle Cost

Base Case Alternative Savings from Alternative

Initial Investment Costs:

Capital Requirements as of Base Date $0 $495 -$495

Future Costs:

Energy Consumption Costs $0 $0 $0

Energy Demand Charges $0 $0 $0

Energy Utility Rebates $0 $0 $0

Water Costs $1,353 $0 $1,353

Recurring and Non-Recurring OM&R Costs $926 $478 $449

Capital Replacements $0 $0 $0

Residual Value at End of Study Period $0 $0 $0

------------ ------------ ------------

Subtotal (for Future Cost Items) $2,279 $478 $1,801

------------ ------------ ------------

Total PV Life-Cycle Cost $2,279 $973 $1,306

Net Savings from Alternative Compared with Base Case

PV of Non-Investment Savings $1,801

- Increased Total Investment $495

------------

Net Savings $1,306

Savings-to-Investment Ratio (SIR)

SIR = 3.64

Adjusted Internal Rate of Return

AIRR = 10.19%

Payback Period

Estimated Years to Payback (from beginning of Service Period)

Simple Payback occurs in year 4

Discounted Payback occurs in year 5

32
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Sensored Faucets

NIST BLCC 5.0-01: Comparative Analysis

Consistent with Federal Life Cycle Cost Methodology and Procedures, 10 CFR, Part 436, Subpart A

Base Case: Sink

Alternative: Low-Flow Sink

General Information

File Name: c:\program files\blcc5\projects\DFCSinks.xml

Run Date: Wed Jan 30 14:13:01 MST 2002

Project Name: Sink / Low-Flow Sink

Project Location: Colorado

Analysis Type: Federal Analysis, Agency-Funded Project

Analyst: NREL

Base Date of Study: April 1, 2001

Service Date: April 1, 2001

Study Period: 20 years 0 months (April 1, 2001 through March 31, 2021)

Discount Rate: 3.3%

Discounting Convention: End-of-Year

Comparison of Present-Value Costs

PV Life-Cycle Cost

Base Case Alternative Savings from Alternative

Initial Investment Costs:

Capital Requirements as of Base Date $0 $339 -$339

Future Costs:

Energy Consumption Costs $390 $65 $3250

Energy Demand Charges $0 $0 $0

Energy Utility Rebates $0 $0 $0

Water Costs $677 $113 $564

Recurring and Non-Recurring OM&R Costs $926 $926 $0

Capital Replacements $0 $0 $0

Residual Value at End of Study Period $0 $0 $0

------------ ------------ ------------

Subtotal (for Future Cost Items) $1,993 $1,104 $889

------------ ------------ ------------

Total PV Life-Cycle Cost $1,993 $1,443 $550

Net Savings from Alternative Compared with Base Case

PV of Non-Investment Savings $889

- Increased Total Investment $339

------------

Net Savings $550

Savings-to-Investment Ratio (SIR)

SIR = 2.62

Adjusted Internal Rate of Return

AIRR = 8.40% 

Payback Period

Estimated Years to Payback (from beginning of Service Period)

Simple Payback occurs in year 6

Discounted Payback occurs in year 7

33
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Energy Savings Summary

Energy Savings Summary (in MBtu)

Energy Average Annual Consumption Life-Cycle

Type Base Case Alternative Savings Savings

Natural Gas 7.7 Mbtu 1.3 Mbtu 6.5 Mbtu 129.2 MBtu

Emissions Reduction Summary

Energy Average Annual Emissions Life-Cycle

Type Base Case Alternative Reduction Reduction

Natural Gas

CO2 409.38 kg 68.14 kg 341.24 kg 6,823.84 kg

SO2 3.30 kg 0.55 kg 2.75 kg 55.07 kg

NOx 0.48 kg 0.08 kg 0.40 kg 8.04 kg

Total:

CO2 409.38 kg 68.14 kg 341.24 kg 6,823.84 kg

SO2 3.30 kg 0.55 kg 2.75 kg 55.07 kg

NOx 0.48 kg 0.08 kg 0.40 kg 8.04 kg

34
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Assumptions

Basic Assumptions:

1. 28 male users; daily fixture use increases if women users assumed.

2. 1 toilet flush/man/day; 2 urinal flushes/man/day; 2 hand washes/man/day

3. Water and wastewater costs are based on Denver Federal Center rate schedule:

Cost of water = $1.24 per 1000 gallons

Cost of wastewater = $0.90 per 1000 gallons

4. For sink water use:

50% of the water used is heated hot water

Each wash lasts 30 seconds

Natural gas water heating assumed

5. Natural gas costs $3.66/MBtu

6. Results are for a 20-year life cycle

7. 20-year lifetime assumed for all fixtures.

Toilet / Low-Flow Toilet

Toilet L.F.Toilet

Capital Cost: $0 $289

Set-up Cost: $0 $50

Annual Recurring Costs: $64 $64

Water Use: 4 gpf (29,120 gal/yr) 1.6 gpf (11,650 gal/yr)

Other:

Assumes one valve/yr in maintenance, approximately $64.

Urinal / Low-Flow Urinal / Flushless Urinal

Urinal L.F. Urinal Flushless Urinal

Capital Cost: $0 $268 $495

Set-up Cost: $0 $50 included in capital cost

Annual Recurring Costs: $64 $64 $33

Water Use: 3 gpf (43,680 gal/yr) 1 gpf (14,560 gal/yr) 12 gal/yr (for cleaning) 

Other:

Flushless urinals require about 1 gallon of hot water per month for cleaning.

Sink / Low-Flow Sink

Sink L.F. Sink

Capital Cost: $0 $289

Set-up Cost: $0 $50

Annual Recurring Costs: $64 $64

Water Use: 0.5 gpm (3,640 gal/yr) 3 gpm (21,840 gal/yr)

Energy Use (Heat): 1.29 MBtu/yr 7.75 MBtu/yr

Other:

L.F. sink replaces three ordinary sinks and includes sensored faucets and durable basin as one unit; comparison is for three 3-gpm

stand-alone sinks to one Bradley Express unit.

35
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Appendix D: Estimating Savings with WATERGY

The WATERGY program is a spreadsheet model for estimating the savings that can result from using water conservation measures. It makes use of assumptions about the water-energy relationship to analyze potential water savings and associated energy

savings in a facility. Users incorporate two kinds of data as input into the spreadsheet: (1) utility data, which include energy and

water costs and consumption for the most recent 12-month period, and (2) facility data, which include the number and kind of

water-consuming or water-moving devices and consumption rates or flow rates.

The program calculates annual direct water, direct energy, and indirect energy savings, as well as the total cost and payback periods for a number of conservation methods, including the following:

• Toilets consuming 1.6 gpf (6 lpf) or less; urinals consuming 1 gpf (about 4 lpf) or less

• Automatic faucets; faucet aerators; low-flow showerheads

• Efficient dishwashers and washing machines

• Boiler blowdown optimization

• Landscape irrigation optimization.

Most of the assumptions that WATERGY uses for energy and water calculations can be grouped into the following categories:

• The heating values of fuels

• The efficiencies of energy- and water-consuming devices or processes [for example, the number of kilowatt-hours consumed

per gallon for electric hot water heaters, or the number of kilowatt-hours consumed per 1,000 gallons (3785 liters) of treated

wastewater]

• Time-of-use estimates for fixtures (for example, the number of minutes per use of infrared sensor faucets) and percentage of

hot water use in machines or fixtures (for example, the percentage of water usage that is hot water for a typical faucet).

WATERGY also makes simple assumptions about capital and labor costs of equipment and fixture replacements. The user can

modify all the assumptions that WATERGY applies. To obtain a copy of the program, contact the FEMP Help Desk, 1-800-363-

3732.

36
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Appendix E: Guidelines for Conducting a Water Audit

Choosing a Facility for a Water Audit

The first step in completing a water efficiency project is to complete a water audit of a facility that you think will likely have costeffective water savings opportunities. Here are a few guidelines to follow when you, as a facility manager, want to choose a

building to receive a water audit. Select a facility that has older water-using equipment with a high volume of use. Graph water

bills for two years and analyze usage trends. When water use increases, is there a good reason, such as a higher occupancy rate or

increases in irrigation in summer? Or is there a hard-to-explain spike in water use? Buildings with inexplicable water use patterns are good candidates for a water audit. 

Preparing for a Water Audit

If you do not have capabilities in house to conduct your water audit, you can contact the FEMP SAVEnergy Program about audit

services for Federal agencies. Your local water utility may also offer free or low-cost audits. If you want to conduct the audit

yourself, please see the guidelines below. To ensure the success of a water audit, here are some steps to take before beginning:

• Obtain two years of water and wastewater usage records, names and phone numbers of staff who know how your facility is

operated and used, and information about experienced consultants to assist you, if necessary.

• Contact appropriate facility staff and ask them to accompany you on the audit. 

• Obtain lists of all water-using equipment and where it is located, the operating schedule of the facility, a schedule of outdoor

water use and irrigation, and records of water use for all equipment. 

Where to Focus the Audit

If you have time and the budget, it is best to walk through the whole facility, measuring the water use flows and usage rates of all

water using equipment. At the end of the audit, you can total the water use from all the equipment you measured and analyzed

and compare it to the water usage from 12 months of billing records. The two numbers should be within 10% of each other. If the

numbers vary by more than 10%, there are several possibilities; you have under-or-over estimated water-usage, you missed some

water using equipment, you are not being billed accurately for your water use or there is a leak. In facilities that are at least 6

years old that have not had major water efficiency projects, this complete audit approach is worth the effort; use the checklist in

Appendix H to guide you in looking for savings opportunities. 

If you do not have the time or budget for a full water audit, focus on areas that are the most likely to provide opportunities for

cost-effective savings. Your water audit efforts should focus on (1) equipment having a high volume of use and (2) equipment

that presents the best prospects for savings. 

In regard to volume of use, studies show that toilets, urinals, and faucets are associated with 40% or more of the water consumed

in most buildings. So, restrooms are a good place to look for opportunities. If the facility was built after 1997, it probably already

has low-flush toilets and urinals and low-flow faucets. However, even if the faucets are new, there might be opportunities to save

more water and energy by installing aerators with flows of 0.5 gpm.

Second, equipment that provides good opportunities for cost-effective savings is usually associated with high-energy-using

processes, such as doing laundry. For example, you may use a number of residential-size washing machines several times a day.

If they are old, inefficient machines, they represent a good savings opportunity. If they are new, water-saving, horizontal-axis

models, there is not much opportunity for saving except in ensuring that machines are run only with full loads. 

Water Audit Analysis 

After you have collected information on your facility’s water-using equipment, flow rates, usage, schedules, and so on, you can

determine which equipment is cost-effective to retrofit or replace. Before you begin the analysis, talk to the finance staff in your

agency to determine the type of payback or rate of return required to obtain funding. Contact your local water utility about any

grant, loan, or rebate programs that could help pay for the cost of installing the equipment. Obtain a copy of the Federal life-cycle

cost analysis software, BLCC5. You can download it for free from the Web

(www.eren.doe.gov/femp/techassist/softwaretools/softwaretools.html).

You can use spreadsheet calculations to determine savings opportunities. The calculations in Appendix B of this document are

good examples of an appropriate analysis. DOE’s WATERGY tool can assist you in the analysis process. You may download it

free from the Web: (www.eren.doe.gov/femp/techassist/softwaretools/softwaretools.html).

37
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Obtain a source for estimated installed costs for your project. This Federal Technology Alert and the WATERGY tool can provide

some estimated costs. For actual costs, contact people in your agency that have recently implemented water efficiency projects.

Local plumbers and other contractors can give you estimated per-item installed costs, although they may want to visit a facility

before giving a cost estimate. Actual costs can differ from estimated costs for a variety of reasons, including unexpected plumbing replacement costs, the expensive of retrofitting some existing equipment, and discoveries of hidden leaks. 

38
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Appendix F: Commercial Self-Audit Checklist

If your facility contains one or more of the following types of equipment, there may be some very good opportunities for water,

energy, and money savings. If you need help in reviewing your equipment for opportunities, contact your local water utility, a

consultant, or FEMP to request or schedule a water audit.

Items in italic type below are either low-cost measures or operation and maintenance measures you can take to reduce water and

wastewater costs.

Items in regular type are capital expenditure measures that cost more to implement but can save considerable amounts of water

and energy.

Toilets

❏ For Flushometer toilets, check flush valve diaphragms for leaks and replace diaphragms every few years, if necessary.

❏ For tank toilets, check flappers for leaks and, if necessary, replace flappers every few years.

❏ Replace toilets using 3.5 gallons (13.2 liters) or more per flush with toilets using 1.6 gallons (6.1 liters) per flush. 

Urinals

❏ Check flush valve diaphragms and, if necessary, replace them every few years.

❏ Replace urinals using 2 gallons (7.6 iters) or more per flush with urinals using 1 gallon (3.8 liters) or less per flush.

Restroom Faucets

❏ Install 0.5 gallon-per-minute (about 2-liter-per-minute) aerators on restroom faucets that have flows of 1 gallon (about 4 liters) per

minute or greater.

Showers

❏ Install showerheads with flows of 2.5 gallons (9.5 liters) per minute or less on showers with flows greater than 3 gallons (11.4 liters)

per minute.

Garbage Disposal

❏ Eliminate the use of commercial kitchen garbage disposals and replace them with composting of food waste. 

Leak Repair

❏ Look at water bills to find sudden, inexplicable increases in water use, and look for obvious or suspected leaks; repair leaks.

Residential-Size Laundry

❏ Replace vertical-axis machines that are used regularly with horizontal-axis machines.

39
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

40

Disclaimer

This report was sponsored by the United States Department of Energy, Office of Federal Energy Management

Programs. Neither the United States Government nor any agency or contractor thereof, nor any of their employees,

makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would

not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by

trade name, mark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency or contractor thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any

agency or contractor thereof.
FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

The Energy Policy Act of 1992, and subsequent Executive Orders, mandate that

energy consumption in Federal buildings be reduced by 35% from 1985 levels

by the year 2010. To achieve this goal, 

the U.S. Department of Energy’s Federal

Energy Management Program (FEMP) 

is sponsoring a series of programs to

reduce energy consumption at Federal

installations nationwide. One of these

programs, the New Technology Demonstration Program (NTDP), is tasked to

accelerate the introduction of energyefficient and renewable technologies 

into the Federal sector and to improve

the rate of technology transfer.

As part of this effort FEMP is sponsoring

a series of publications that are designed

to disseminate information on new and

emerging technologies. New Technology

Demonstration Program publications

comprise four separate series:

Federal Technology Alerts—longer

summary reports that provide details 

on energy-efficient, water-conserving,

and renewable-energy technologies 

that have been selected for further 

study for possible implementation in 

the Federal sector. Additional information on Federal Technology Alerts (FTAs)

is provided in the next column.

Technology Installation Reviews—

concise reports describing a new technology and providing case study results,

typically from another demonstration

program or pilot project.

Technology Focuses—brief information

on new, energy-efficient, environmentally friendly technologies of potential

interest to the Federal sector.

Other Publications—the program also

issues other publications on energysaving technologies with potential use 

in the Federal sector.

More on Federal Technology Alerts

Federal Technology Alerts, our signature

reports, provide summary information

on candidate energy-saving technologies

developed and manufactured in the

United States. The technologies featured

in the FTAs have already entered the

market and have some experience but

are not in general use in the Federal 

sector.

The goal of the FTAs is to improve the

rate of technology transfer of new 

energy-saving technologies within the

Federal sector and to provide the right

people in the field with accurate, up-todate information on the new technologies so that they can make educated

judgments on whether the technologies

are suitable for their Federal sites.

The information in the FTAs typically

includes a description of the candidate

technology; the results of its screening

tests; a description of its performance,

applications and field experience to 

date; a list of manufacturers; and important contact information. Attached

appendixes provide supplemental 

information and example worksheets 

on the technology.

FEMP sponsors publication of the FTAs

to facilitate information-sharing between

manufacturers and government staff.

While the technology featured promises

significant Federal-sector savings, the

FTAs do not constitute FEMP’s endorsement of a particular product, as FEMP

has not independently verified performance data provided by manufacturers.

Nor do the FTAs attempt to chart market

activity vis-a-vis the technology featured. Readers should note the publication date on the back cover, and consider

the FTAs as an accurate picture of the

technology and its performance at the

time of publication. Product innovations

and the entrance of new manufacturers

or suppliers should be anticipated since

the date of publication. FEMP encourages interested Federal energy and 

facility managers to contact the manufacturers and other Federal sites directly,

and to use the worksheets in the FTAs to

aid in their purchasing decisions.

Federal Energy Management Program

The Federal Government is the largest energy consumer in the nation. Annually, in its 500,000 buildings and 8,000 locations

worldwide, it uses nearly two quadrillion Btu (quads) of energy, costing over $8 billion. This represents 2.5% of all primary

energy consumption in the United States. The Federal Energy Management Program was established in 1974 to provide

direction, guidance, and assistance to Federal agencies in planning and implementing energy management programs that

will improve the energy efficiency and fuel flexibility of the Federal infrastructure.

Over the years, several Federal laws and Executive Orders have shaped FEMP's mission. These include the Energy Policy

and Conservation Act of 1975; the National Energy Conservation and Policy Act of 1978; the Federal Energy Management

Improvement Act of 1988; the National Energy Policy Act of 1992 (EPACT); Executive Order 13123, signed in 1999; and, most

recently, Executive Order 13221, signed in 2001, and the Presidential Directive of May 3, 2001.

FEMP is currently involved in a wide range of energy-assessment activities, including conducting New Technology

Demonstrations, to hasten the penetration of energy-efficient technologies into the Federal marketplace.

About FEMP’s New Technology Demonstration Program
Produced for the U.S. Department

of Energy, Office of Energy

Efficiency and Renewable Energy,

by the National Renewable Energy

Laboratory

DOE/EE-0264

October 2002

FEDERAL ENERGY MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

Printed with a renewable-source ink on paper containing at least 50% wastepaper, including 10% postconsumer waste

For More Information

FEMP Help Desk

(800) 363-3732

International callers please use

(703) 287-8391

Web site: www.eren.doe.gov/femp

General Contacts

Ted Collins

New Technology Demonstration 

Program Manager

Federal Energy Management 

Program

U.S. Department of Energy

1000 Independence Ave., S.W., 

EE-92

Washington, DC 20585

Phone: (202) 586-8017

Fax: (202) 586-3000

theodore.collins@ee.doe.gov

Steven A. Parker

Pacific Northwest National 

Laboratory

P.O. Box 999, MSIN: K5-08

Richland, WA 99352

Phone: (509) 375-6366

Fax: (509) 375-3614

steven.parker@pnl.gov

Technical Contacts

Ab Ream

Federal Energy Management 

Program

U.S. Department of Energy

1000 Independence Ave., S.W., 

EE-92

Washington, DC 20585

Phone: (202) 586-7230

Fax: (202) 586-3000

ab.ream@ee.doe.gov

Stephanie Tanner

National Renewable Energy 

Laboratory

Washington Office

901 D Street, S.W., Suite 930

Washington, DC 20024-2157

Phone: (202) 646-5218

Fax: (202) 646-7780

stephanie_tanner@nrel.gov

Log on to FEMP’s New Technology Demonstration Program

Web site

www.eren.doe.gov/femp/prodtech/newtechdemo.html

You will find links to

• An overview of the New Technology Demonstration Program

• Information on the program’s technology demonstrations

• Downloadable versions of program publications in Adobe

Portable Document Format (pdf)

• A list of new technology projects under way

• Electronic access to the program’s regular mailing list for new

products when they become available

• How Federal agencies may submit requests for the program to

assess new and emerging technologies