4 ms·

If it's a micro-optimization that produces no real value, then perhaps it isn't crazy, but is irrational if the goal is to save meaningful amounts of money. Yo

If it's a micro-optimization that produces no real value, then perhaps it isn't crazy, but is irrational if the goal is to save meaningful amounts of money. You can also compress/save used aluminum cans and periodically sell them to a scrap metal dealership for money. Quick check shows scrap aluminum cans are selling for a national average of $0.45/lb, and it takes about 32-35 12 oz cans to accrue 1 lb of aluminum cans. Assuming you go through a 24 pack of cans per week, enjoy your ~$1.30/month savings for hours of effort!

stavros 4y ago
Yeah, well, to the millions of people for whom that's just "how one showers", your way seems needlessly wasteful, like heaping food on your plate only to throw most of it away. At least food is cheap, I guess!
TeMPOraL 4y ago
I remember the push for showers over bathtubs to be based on the argument that they're X% more water-efficient. I would imagine this refers to "Navy"[0] style, as not turning off the shower for the entire duration will easily waste a few bathtubs' worth of water. How cheap is water in your place you'd consider this a micro-optimization? In my country, unless you're tech-salary-equivalent-or-above, not doing it - and doubling or tripling your hot water (or water + gas) bill - would noticeably cut into whatever discretionary spending money you have. Micro-optimization would be "grey water reclamation" with a bucket placed in a sink, to reuse hand-washing water for flushing the toilet. Which is something my wife and I started to do a while ago, and while we don't need to do it, the drop in utility bills for near-zero effort is impressive enough that we continue anyway. ---- [0] - Or should I say "Standard Showers", as I literally can't think of anyone who doesn't turn off the water for soaping after being made aware that water and heating both cost money.
- scottLobster 4y ago
  I'm in Philadelphia, PA, USA. It's a convoluted formula based on your type of sewer hookup (https://water.phila.gov/pool/files/rates-and-charges-2022-09-01.pdf https://water.phila.gov/pool/files/rates-and-charges-2022-09...) and there are different tiers of usage, but the initial base rate is $48.96 for the first 1,000 cubic feet of water or 7,480 gallons, so about $0.0065/gallon + sewer cost. A "typical" household in the city (they estimate 500 cubic feet of water usage) is apparently around $70/month total. We typically come in under that at around $60. My gas bill runs about the same in non-winter months, but most of that is the clothes dryer and oven/range. So it's not a negligible amount of money, but it costs less than my combined streaming services. Cutting it by 20% would allow me to afford... another streaming service? A couple of days' groceries? I'm also not sure what kind of showers you're taking, but I know from experience being forced to shower with a mostly-clogged drain for a couple of days there's no way my shower head is filling the tub even over my ankles before the shower is done (5-10 minutes). So "several bath tubs" is an exaggeration unless you're taking extremely long showers or your showerhead has the efficiency of a fire hydrant. And I guess we're just blessed with plentiful water on the US East Coast, because I've lived in several states on this coast for my entire life and I'd never even heard of "Navy Shower" until college, and only then as a reference to... the Navy! Or sometimes we hear about Californians being asked to do so when a drought hits. But whatever, you do you! If it actually does make a difference for you than go for it!
  - TeMPOraL 4y ago
    > So it's not a negligible amount of money, but it costs less than my combined streaming services. Cutting it by 20% would allow me to afford... another streaming service? A couple of days' groceries? Your math comes out similar to what I remember from the utility bill (which I currently don't have handy, so I won't provide exact calculation). It's not life-changing, but it's not nothing. A couple days of groceries worth of money we could use for arbitrary discretionary spending, at a cost of... pretty much nothing, I don't consider this habit to take noticeable effort over keeping the shower running. And with several more such "little to no effort saves you a Netflix subscription" habits, this adds up. You can probably ignore $100-$150 / month saved off utility bills and incidental costs when on a tech-equivalent salary, but many people wouldn't. (And yes, we mind the opportunity costs too.) > I know from experience being forced to shower with a mostly-clogged drain for a couple of days there's no way my shower head is filling the tub even over my ankles before the shower is done (5-10 minutes). That's an interesting data point. I may have exaggerated with "several tubs", though my actual shower, left on for the entire duration and with drain plugged, would fill a tub[0] to the level where, were I to lie down, the water would spill out[1]. We may have different sizes of the tub/showering compartments, and possibly different pressure levels and flow rates. Eyeballing it now, the bathroom faucet gives some 10-12 liters per minute, maybe a bit more; this is cut down to some 8 liters per minute when going through the shower head in default setting. > And I guess we're just blessed with plentiful water on the US East Coast, because I've lived in several states on this coast for my entire life and I'd never even heard of "Navy Shower" until college, and only then as a reference to... the Navy! Or sometimes we hear about Californians being asked to do so when a drought hits. I never heard it called this way until 'stavros mentioned it today! For me, it was always known as the "mom asking 'why are you wasting water in the shower?' shower" :). We don't need to do it, it just feels unnecessarily wasteful if we don't (and it makes noticeable difference in the bills for households on median salary or below). ---- [0] - The 32' x 60' like here: https://www.thespruce.com/bathtub-sizes-reference-guide-1821342 https://www.thespruce.com/bathtub-sizes-reference-guide-1821..., which is similar to "standard bathtub" of 70x170cm where I live. [1] - I admit I got confused by my intuition. A "standard bathtub" similar to [0] will hold over 200 liters of water, which is of course way more than the shower head would provide over the duration of my shower. When I wrote about filling bath tubs, I thought intuitively about the volume past which you can't lie down without it spilling out.
throwaway22032 4y ago
Turning the tap on and off in my shower is zero effort, though? It literally takes 0 seconds. I used to have a shower that didn't have a thermostat so it was fiddly to get the temperature right. That one I'd lean in and out, sure.

stavros 4y ago

Yeah, well, to the millions of people for whom that's just "how one showers", your way seems needlessly wasteful, like heaping food on your plate only to throw most of it away. At least food is cheap, I guess!

TeMPOraL 4y ago

I remember the push for showers over bathtubs to be based on the argument that they're X% more water-efficient. I would imagine this refers to "Navy"[0] style, as not turning off the shower for the entire duration will easily waste a few bathtubs' worth of water. How cheap is water in your place you'd consider this a micro-optimization? In my country, unless you're tech-salary-equivalent-or-above, not doing it - and doubling or tripling your hot water (or water + gas) bill - would noticeably cut into whatever discretionary spending money you have. Micro-optimization would be "grey water reclamation" with a bucket placed in a sink, to reuse hand-washing water for flushing the toilet. Which is something my wife and I started to do a while ago, and while we don't need to do it, the drop in utility bills for near-zero effort is impressive enough that we continue anyway. ---- [0] - Or should I say "Standard Showers", as I literally can't think of anyone who doesn't turn off the water for soaping after being made aware that water and heating both cost money.

scottLobster 4y ago
I'm in Philadelphia, PA, USA. It's a convoluted formula based on your type of sewer hookup (https://water.phila.gov/pool/files/rates-and-charges-2022-09-01.pdf https://water.phila.gov/pool/files/rates-and-charges-2022-09...) and there are different tiers of usage, but the initial base rate is $48.96 for the first 1,000 cubic feet of water or 7,480 gallons, so about $0.0065/gallon + sewer cost. A "typical" household in the city (they estimate 500 cubic feet of water usage) is apparently around $70/month total. We typically come in under that at around $60. My gas bill runs about the same in non-winter months, but most of that is the clothes dryer and oven/range. So it's not a negligible amount of money, but it costs less than my combined streaming services. Cutting it by 20% would allow me to afford... another streaming service? A couple of days' groceries? I'm also not sure what kind of showers you're taking, but I know from experience being forced to shower with a mostly-clogged drain for a couple of days there's no way my shower head is filling the tub even over my ankles before the shower is done (5-10 minutes). So "several bath tubs" is an exaggeration unless you're taking extremely long showers or your showerhead has the efficiency of a fire hydrant. And I guess we're just blessed with plentiful water on the US East Coast, because I've lived in several states on this coast for my entire life and I'd never even heard of "Navy Shower" until college, and only then as a reference to... the Navy! Or sometimes we hear about Californians being asked to do so when a drought hits. But whatever, you do you! If it actually does make a difference for you than go for it!
- TeMPOraL 4y ago
  > So it's not a negligible amount of money, but it costs less than my combined streaming services. Cutting it by 20% would allow me to afford... another streaming service? A couple of days' groceries? Your math comes out similar to what I remember from the utility bill (which I currently don't have handy, so I won't provide exact calculation). It's not life-changing, but it's not nothing. A couple days of groceries worth of money we could use for arbitrary discretionary spending, at a cost of... pretty much nothing, I don't consider this habit to take noticeable effort over keeping the shower running. And with several more such "little to no effort saves you a Netflix subscription" habits, this adds up. You can probably ignore $100-$150 / month saved off utility bills and incidental costs when on a tech-equivalent salary, but many people wouldn't. (And yes, we mind the opportunity costs too.) > I know from experience being forced to shower with a mostly-clogged drain for a couple of days there's no way my shower head is filling the tub even over my ankles before the shower is done (5-10 minutes). That's an interesting data point. I may have exaggerated with "several tubs", though my actual shower, left on for the entire duration and with drain plugged, would fill a tub[0] to the level where, were I to lie down, the water would spill out[1]. We may have different sizes of the tub/showering compartments, and possibly different pressure levels and flow rates. Eyeballing it now, the bathroom faucet gives some 10-12 liters per minute, maybe a bit more; this is cut down to some 8 liters per minute when going through the shower head in default setting. > And I guess we're just blessed with plentiful water on the US East Coast, because I've lived in several states on this coast for my entire life and I'd never even heard of "Navy Shower" until college, and only then as a reference to... the Navy! Or sometimes we hear about Californians being asked to do so when a drought hits. I never heard it called this way until 'stavros mentioned it today! For me, it was always known as the "mom asking 'why are you wasting water in the shower?' shower" :). We don't need to do it, it just feels unnecessarily wasteful if we don't (and it makes noticeable difference in the bills for households on median salary or below). ---- [0] - The 32' x 60' like here: https://www.thespruce.com/bathtub-sizes-reference-guide-1821342 https://www.thespruce.com/bathtub-sizes-reference-guide-1821..., which is similar to "standard bathtub" of 70x170cm where I live. [1] - I admit I got confused by my intuition. A "standard bathtub" similar to [0] will hold over 200 liters of water, which is of course way more than the shower head would provide over the duration of my shower. When I wrote about filling bath tubs, I thought intuitively about the volume past which you can't lie down without it spilling out.

throwaway22032 4y ago

Turning the tap on and off in my shower is zero effort, though? It literally takes 0 seconds. I used to have a shower that didn't have a thermostat so it was fiddly to get the temperature right. That one I'd lean in and out, sure.