Shower heads may be a monkey's paw to see if the admin can overrule state- or municipalty-wide bans on gas in new builds in favor of electrification. It's got fossil fuel industry fingerprints all over it.
Well, that depends on two things. One is how the local/State govts write their ordinances and laws - with the actual words in them being VERY important. If they flout existing Federal law, which is preeminent, the bans are then (heh!) banned.
The second is the Judge overseeing the likely lawsuit. I've gotten to the point where it seems that the black and white Letter of the Law seems to be irrelevant and some Judges (both Right and Left) do what they want based on their OUTLOOK and not actual Law. Which level of lawmaking would be upheld?
I have been flabbergasted and gobsmacked at some decisions that have been handed down lately as there seems to be no rhyme or reason at how they were arrived.
That alone gives rise to the legitimacy (or illegitimacy) of both the Law itself and how it is written and those are supposed to adjudicate cases by ONLY using the Law.
"Twice in the last 12 years, those administrations put out massive regulations defining the word “showerhead.” The Biden definition was a staggering 13,000 words. The Oxford English Dictionary, by contrast, defines “showerhead” in one short sentence."
One sentence vs 13,000 words. So tell me again that Government is efficient? And what would be the upfront, embodied, and on-going carbon and emissions to write that tome about showerheads?
So I will ask one of my favorite questions for which NO one has an answer: is there ANY part of your life that is "govt free"? Any where and at any time, from birth to death? How much energy is expended by govt in doing all of that?
Is there ANY point where the exclamation of "Enough is ENOUGH!" should hold true? Or, as some DO hold, we are all too stupid to manage our own lives and need that "guiding Hand" always?
Lloyd, is there not an opportunity here to meet both sides halfway.
That is to say, allow people to have large quantities of water at the showerhead whilst drawing limited, or reasonable quantities from the supply system.
I remember, back in the day, that being treehugger days, that you did an article on recirculating showers and clothes washing machines. Do you still have that article?
I can't remember seeing anything more about this since then, in any media outlets. I do remember that certainly the initial products or trials resulted, in considerable reductions in the use of freshwater (in the order of 75%) without any of the test users complaining about the quality of the water.
This one will solve itself since after tariffs no one can afford six shower heads and all the piping anyway!!! 😂😂😂
Maybe another slide for the “American Dream Home” tho 😉
Lloyd,
Shower heads may be a monkey's paw to see if the admin can overrule state- or municipalty-wide bans on gas in new builds in favor of electrification. It's got fossil fuel industry fingerprints all over it.
Well, that depends on two things. One is how the local/State govts write their ordinances and laws - with the actual words in them being VERY important. If they flout existing Federal law, which is preeminent, the bans are then (heh!) banned.
The second is the Judge overseeing the likely lawsuit. I've gotten to the point where it seems that the black and white Letter of the Law seems to be irrelevant and some Judges (both Right and Left) do what they want based on their OUTLOOK and not actual Law. Which level of lawmaking would be upheld?
I have been flabbergasted and gobsmacked at some decisions that have been handed down lately as there seems to be no rhyme or reason at how they were arrived.
That alone gives rise to the legitimacy (or illegitimacy) of both the Law itself and how it is written and those are supposed to adjudicate cases by ONLY using the Law.
"Twice in the last 12 years, those administrations put out massive regulations defining the word “showerhead.” The Biden definition was a staggering 13,000 words. The Oxford English Dictionary, by contrast, defines “showerhead” in one short sentence."
One sentence vs 13,000 words. So tell me again that Government is efficient? And what would be the upfront, embodied, and on-going carbon and emissions to write that tome about showerheads?
So I will ask one of my favorite questions for which NO one has an answer: is there ANY part of your life that is "govt free"? Any where and at any time, from birth to death? How much energy is expended by govt in doing all of that?
Is there ANY point where the exclamation of "Enough is ENOUGH!" should hold true? Or, as some DO hold, we are all too stupid to manage our own lives and need that "guiding Hand" always?
Lloyd, is there not an opportunity here to meet both sides halfway.
That is to say, allow people to have large quantities of water at the showerhead whilst drawing limited, or reasonable quantities from the supply system.
I remember, back in the day, that being treehugger days, that you did an article on recirculating showers and clothes washing machines. Do you still have that article?
I can't remember seeing anything more about this since then, in any media outlets. I do remember that certainly the initial products or trials resulted, in considerable reductions in the use of freshwater (in the order of 75%) without any of the test users complaining about the quality of the water.
I'd agree. Flip a switch for "wash and clean" and then swap to "luxuriate" for a long shower.