Yeah, that was my first thought too. It's a very San Francisco solution... expensive and ineffective, if not outright counterproductive, but very virtuous looki

Yeah, that was my first thought too. It's a very San Francisco solution... expensive and ineffective, if not outright counterproductive, but very virtuous looking. A building being "self-sustaining" from an all-things-considered accounting perspective is not a bad goal, but there's no reason the "self-sustaining"-ness of a building needs to be physically co-located with the building. It's not like we anticipate the building taking off into space at some point in the future where it will need this functionality on its own. It is far more sensible to work proper water recycling into all the other fees they're paying anyhow.