Open Collections

UBC Undergraduate Research

An investigation into low­‐flow showerheads in Place Vanier's Tec de Monterrey Residence Chen, Brian; Tang, William Nov 27, 2014

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
18861-Chen_B_et_al_SEEDS_2014.pdf [ 512.56kB ]
Metadata
JSON: 18861-1.0108766.json
JSON-LD: 18861-1.0108766-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 18861-1.0108766-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 18861-1.0108766-rdf.json
Turtle: 18861-1.0108766-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 18861-1.0108766-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 18861-1.0108766-source.json
Full Text
18861-1.0108766-fulltext.txt
Citation
18861-1.0108766.ris

Full Text

 UBC Social Ecological Economic Development Studies (SEEDS) Student ReportBrian Chen, William TangAN INVESTIGATION INTO LOW-FLOW SHOWERHEADS IN PLACE VANIER’S TEC DE MONTERREY RESIDENCEAPSC 261November 27, 201411081715University of British Columbia Disclaimer: “UBC SEEDS provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student project/report and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Coordinator about the current status of the subject matter of a project/report”.  UBC Social Ecological Economic Development Studies (SEEDS) Student Report      AN INVESTIGATION INTO LOW-FLOW SHOWERHEADS IN PLACE VANIER’S TEC DE MONTERREY RESIDENCE  APSC 261 INVESTIGATION REPORT     Submitted to David Gill, SEEDS Coordinator  By Brian Chen, William Tang    University of British Columbia  Applied Science 261  November 27th, 2014      Disclaimer: UBC SEEDS provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student project/report and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Coordinator about the current status of the subject matter of a project/report.ii  ABSTRACT    This report provides insight to UBC Student Housing and Hospitality Services about possible alternative showerheads for Place Vanier’s Tec de Monterrey to decrease water consumption whilst providing a satisfactory experience to students living as residents. This report builds on previously conducted reports of showerheads and provides alternatives that are more affordable and provide long term benefits. Viability of shower heads will be assessed through a Triple Bottom Line (TBL) assessment. A TBL assessment evaluates the environmental, social, and economic impacts of each alternative. The report compares three proposed alternative shower heads: the Niagara Earth Massage, WaterPik Model ETC-411, and American Standard 1660.710.002 to the current replacement showerhead Delta RP44809BN. To assess environmental impacts, an estimate of average water consumption of each shower head is provided; the social impacts are determined through a satisfaction survey offered to TDM residents. The economic impacts are estimated using a life cycle cost analysis of each shower head.  The TBL analysis has determined that the American Standard 1660.710.002 has the most balanced performance compared to all other alternatives. Analysis of survey results and the TBL assessment agree with this result.          iii  TABLE OF CONTENTS  ABSTRACT...................................................................................................... ii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS............................................................................ iv GLOSSARY...................................................................................................... v LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS……................................................................... vi 1.0 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................... 1 2.0 METHODOLOGY...................................................................................... 3 3.0 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS............................................................. 5  3.1 Current Shower Head: Delta RP44809BN 2.0 GPM……………… 5  3.2 Alternative 1: Niagara Earth Massage 1.25 GPM…………………. 6 3.3 Alternative 2: American Standard 1660.710.002 1.5 GPM… …......7   3.4 Alternative 2: WaterPik Model ETC-411 1.6 GPM………………. 9 4.0 SURVEY RESULTS................................................................................... 11 5.0 TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE ANALYSIS....................................................... 15 5.1 Social Assessment.............................................................................15 5.2 Environmental Assessment...............................................................16 5.3 Economic Assessment.......................................................................18 6.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS........................................20 REFERENCES.................................................................................................. 22 APPENDIX ...................................................................................................... 24 iv  LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS  Figures Figure 1. Water Usage at UBC…………………………………………….….. 1 Figure 2. Delta RP44509BN Spray Pattern………………………………..….. 5 Figure 3. Niagara Earth Massage Spray Pattern………………………………. 6 Figure 4. American Standard 1660.710.002 Spray Pattern……………….…... 8 Figure 5. WaterPik Model ETC-411 Spray Pattern……………………….…... 9 Figure 6. Shower Time…………………………………………………….….. 11 Figure 7. Flow Pressure……………………………………………………….. 12 Figure 8. Spray Spread………………………………………………………... 13 Figure 9. User Satisfaction……………………………………………………. 14  Tables Table 1. Showerhead Models…………………………………………………. 3 Table 2. Delta RP44809BN Technical Specifications……………………..….. 5 Table 3. Niagara Earth Massage Technical Specifications………………..….. 7 Table 4. American Standard 1660.710.002 Technical Specifications…….…... 8 Table 5. WaterPik Model ETC-411 Technical Specifications……………. ….. 10 Table 6. Water Usage……………………………………………………...….. 15 Table 7. Cost and Lifetime………………………………………………... ….. 17 Table 8. Average Performance Rating……………………………………….. 18         v  GLOSSARY   Watersense:  A U.S. Environmental Protection Agency program designed to advocate water conservation by promoting and labeling water efficient products using watersense labels.       Low-flow showerhead:  A type of showerhead that uses significantly less water and energy than a conventional showerhead model.  Life-Cycle Costs:  The sum of all fixed and variable costs over the lifespan of a product.                            vi  LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS  GPM: Gallons Per Minute TBL: Triple Bottom Line UBC: University of British Columbia LCC:  Life Cycle Cost SEEDS: Social Ecological Economic Development Studies SHHS: Student Housing and Hospitality Services TDM:  Tec de Monterrey EPA: Environmental Protection Agency DR:  Delta RP44809BN NE:  Niagara Earth Massage WP:  WaterPik Model ETC-411 AS:  American Standard 1660.710.002 WAP:  Water Action Plan LFS:  Low-Flow Showerheads          1   1.0 INTRODUCTION  This report provides information on the use of low-flow showerheads in Place Vanier’s Tec de Monterrey of University of British Columbia’s Vancouver campus. The goal of this project is to assess the feasibility of low-flow shower heads in residence by considering their social, environmental, and economic factors.  The University of British Columbia (UBC) is currently working towards a sustainable campus; water conservation is a main focus as evidenced by UBC’s Water Action Plan (WAP) [UBC 2013]. Figure 1 shows the water usage distribution at UBC. Showers make up 13% percent of the total water usage [UBC Sustainability, 2011], the fifth highest amount on campus. Low-flow showerheads (LFS) have a significantly lower water consumption rate than regular shower heads while providing similar performance making them an attractive option for saving water.   Figure 1. Water Usage at UBC Source: <sustain.ubc.ca>        2   User satisfaction, water consumption, and showerhead cost were three major factors that influenced showerhead decisions. All alternatives: the Niagara Earth Massage (NE), WaterPik Model ETC-411 (WP), and American Standard 1660.710.002 (AS) have lower costs to the current Delta RP44809BN (DR) showerhead and also consume much less water. To test user satisfaction, the showerheads were set up temporarily for students in residence and surveys were given out to collect data on showerhead preference.  The next sections provide a description of the methodology used, technical specifications of each showerhead, survey results/calculations, a Triple Bottom Line (TBL) assessment, and recommendations.                      3  2.0 METHODOLOGY    In the selection process for alternative showerhead models, priority was given to showerheads that displayed exceptional water efficiency for its fixed cost. The reasoning behind this is that the selection for showerheads were made before any detailed investigation was conducted; although social, economic, and environmental components are ideally weighed equally, it is difficult to evaluate social aspects or variable costs without delving into further research. Therefore emphasis was first placed on water conservation because this was the most significant long-term variable. Then the product prices, as well as available of large-scale ordering, were considered. Table 1 displays the current showerhead replacement, and the selected alternative models along with their corresponding flow rate in GPM* and approximate prices online.  Table 1. Showerhead Models Showerhead Model Flow Rate (GPM) Price ($) Delta RP44809BN 2.0 14.99 Niagara Earth Massage 1.25 8.30 WaterPik Model ETC-411 1.6 12.99 American Standard 1660.710.002 Spray Pattern 1.5 12.99  After the model selection process was completed, Facilities Coordinator of SHHS* Ricky Biring, organized the installation of the alternative showerheads on the 3rd floor of TDM. Due to unforeseen circumstances however, the WP model was not purchased and tested on. Each of the other showerheads were installed and tested for 3 to 4 days.  The demographics of the residents subject to this test was co-ed UBC students.     4  Multiple showerhead project groups submitted survey questions to UBC SEEDS* Coordinator, David Gill. These questions were made to help evaluate each of the showerhead products. David selected the intersection of submitted questions and created the survey which also asked general questions. The general questions included obtaining user demographics, usual shower durations and patterns, and gauging the user’s value for water conservation. The main focus of the survey was to obtain data on user satisfaction of each showerhead. The users were asked to rate the pressure, spread, and overall functionality of the specified showerhead product.  These procedures were carried out so that an accurate TBL assessment could be carried out to represent the feasibility of each selected alternative showerhead.                          5  3.0 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS   3.1 Current Shower Head: Delta RP44809BN 2.0GPM    The Delta RP44809BN (Figure 1) shower head is the current replacement that is used in all residences. The Delta shower head passes the specifications required to obtain a Water Sense label. Any shower head with this label has a GPM of no more than 2.0 and performs better than its counterparts as evaluated by the EPA ( Environmental Protection Agency ). Although this product is Water Sense certified, there still exists more efficient alternatives.  Figure 2. Delta RP44509BN Spray Pattern Source: Home Depot, 2013 <www.homedepot.com>  Table 2. Delta RP44809BN Technical Specifications Flow Rate 2.0 GPM Weight 136 g Head Length 73.0 mm Head Diameter 50.8 mm 6  Angle Adjustable Angle Mounting Type Fixed Mount Spray Settings 10 - Jet Needle Material Brushed Nickel Source: The Home Depot, 2013 <http://www.homedepot.com>   3.2 Alternative 1: Niagara Earth Massage 1.25GPM            The Niagara Earth Massage 1.25GPM (Figure 2), manufactured by Niagara's Earth® Showerheads, are the leading product for saving water as they use 50% less water than other low-flow showerheads currently available on the market. To make up for its minimal water flow rate, the showerhead uses its patented pressure compensating technology to provide a feeling of greater force. The water stream of this showerhead is non-aerated, resulting in less temperature loss and greater energy savings. Below, Figure 2 represents the spray pattern and Table 2 provides the technical specifications for the Niagara Earth Massage 1.25GPM.       Figure 3. Niagara Earth Massage Spray Pattern Source: Amazon, 2010 <www.amazon.com> 7      Table 3. Niagara Earth Massage Technical Specifications Flow Rate 1.00-1.25 GPM Weight 90.7 g Head Length 105 mm Head Diameter 68  mm Angle Adjustable Angle Mounting Type Fixed Mount Spray Settings 9-Jet Needle, Massage, Combination Nozzle Quantity (Spray dependant) 9-45 Material White/Chrome Finish Maintenance Corrosion-Resistant, Maintenance-free Source: Ecofitt, 2014 <www.ecofitt.ca>   3.3 Alternate 2: American Standard 1660.710.002 FloWise Water Saving Showerhead 1.5 GPM            The American Standard 1660.710.002 FloWise Water Saving Showerhead, manufactured by American Standard®, features a single-function turbine spray that rotates on a swivel ball. This showerhead uses its patented turbine technology which pressurizes and spins water to provide a relaxing and vitalizing spray while producing only 1.5 GPM.  Below, Figure 3 represents the spray pattern and Table 3 provides the technical specifications for the American Standard 1660.710.002.  8   Figure 4. American Standard 1660.710.002 Spray Pattern Source: Amazon, 2009 <www.amazon.com>    Table 4. American Standard 1660.710.002 Technical Specifications Flow Rate 1.5 GPM Weight 181.4 g Head Length 125 mm Head Diameter 125  mm Connection Length 12.7 mm Angle Adjustable Angle Mounting Type Fixed Mount Spray Settings Turbine Spray Material Metal with Polished Chrome/Nickel Finish Source: The Home Depot, 2009 <www.homedepot.com>     9  3.4 Alternative 2: WaterPik Model ETC-411 1.6 GPM  The WaterPik Model ETC-411 (Figure 3) is an eco-friendly shower head that is WaterSense certified, using 20% less water than models with similar performance. This shower head has four settings: Pulsating Massage, Full Body Spray, Full Body and Massage, Water-Saving Trickle providing users with selection for an optimal showering experience. With its 1.6 GPM and 80 PSI, it provides superior water saving potential compared to the current Delta shower head. This model was chosen, but not used for the investigation due to insufficient time.   Figure 5. WaterPik Model ETC-411 Spray Pattern Source: Amazon, 2010 <www.amazon.com>            10  Table 5. WaterPik Model ETC-411 Technical Specifications Flow Rate 1.6 GPM Weight 226 g Head Length 95.25 mm Head Diameter 82.55 mm Angle Adjustable Angle Mounting Type Fixed Mount Spray Settings Pulsating Massage, Full Body Spray, Full Body and Massage, Water-Saving Trickle Material Plastic Source: <http://www.peaksalesandmarketing.com/docs/Waterpik_ETC-411.pdf>                           11  4.0 SURVEY RESULTS   The survey used in the investigation (can be found in Appendix A) targeted individuals of Tec de Monterrey, third floor, which consisted of co-ed individuals ranging from age 18 - 24. The sample size was approximately 10 people. Surveying spanned across three weeks. Each of the three sets of surveys (one for each showerhead) were distributed at the beginning of the week which was also the time of showerhead replacement. Results for each set were also collected before distribution of the next set of surveys. The questions on the survey assessed the following: ● shower time ● shower frequency ● factors that influence results (eg. spread, pressure, etc.) ● user satisfaction  Figure six shows the average shower duration of residence demonym with respect to each showerhead. The DR showerhead has the lowest shower duration, out of the three showerheads, likely resulting from the higher 2.0 GPM flow rate.   Figure 6. Shower Durations   Although the DR showerhead duration is the lowest, it does not necessarily save the most water as the NE and AS showerheads have significantly lower flow rates. However, having 12  shorter shower durations allows students to have more time for their busy schedules and is more efficient during high occupancy times.   The pressure evaluation of each showerhead is shown in Figure 7. An average rating of 3 is the ideal pressure; a rating more than three means too much pressure is exerted while a rating less than three means there is insufficient pressure. The NE showerhead shows a significant lack of pressure. This may be due to the extremely low 1.25 GPM. The patented pressure-compensating technology seems to be lackluster providing weak results.   Figure 7. Flow Pressure    Survey results showed that each showerhead had an ideal amount of spread. Figure 8 illustrates that both the AS and NE showerheads had slightly greater than ideal spreads, but both these showerheads have an adjustable spread setting. A lack of knowledge by the demonym may have resulted in these slightly imbalanced results.  13   Figure 8. Spray Spread   Figure 9 illustrates the user satisfaction. The DR showerhead shows the highest levels of user satisfaction. Because the DR showerhead has the highest flow rate, users may have more enjoyment when showering. Although results show that the DR showerhead may be slightly superior to the AS, many of the users are interested in saving water as survey results show that users value the importance of saving water at 3.8/5. Such high importance ratings suggest that users are indeed willing to try new alternatives to reduce water usage.  14   Figure 9. User Satisfaction                        15  5.0 TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE ASSESSMENT          The TBL is an assessment guideline which consists of three main sectors: environmental, financial, and social. Government and business owners have adopted the TBL assessment to evaluate their long-term performance and practices. Survey results will be used to provide a basis for the assessment.          5.1 Environmental Assessment  According to Table 6, all shower heads provide efficient flow rates of 2.0 GPM or less. In order to consider the most sustainable option, we will estimate the water usage per week using the formula:  (Water Usage / Week)  = (Flow Rate) * (Average Shower Duration) * (Average Showers/Week). The value calculated is the average water savings per person.  Table 6. Water Usage Showerhead Model Flow Rate (GPM) Water Usage (G / Week) Delta RP44809BN 2.0 156 Niagara Earth Massage 1.25  136 American Standard 1660.710.002 1.5  140.625  Delta RP44809BN:  Water Usage = (2.0 GPM) * (13 min/day) * (6 days/week) =  156 Gallons/week  16   Niagara Earth Massage: Water Usage = (1.25 GPM) * (16 min/day) * (6.8 days/week) = 136 Gallons/week  American Standard 1660.710.002: Water Usage = (1.5 GPM) * (15.625 min/day) * (6 days/week) = 140.625 Gallons/week         The NE is the most sustainable option providing 20 Gallons (~76 L) of water savings per week which is approximately 1040 Gallons (~3940 L) per year. The AS comes in a close second with about 16 Gallons (~60 L) of water savings per week, 835 Gallons (~3160 L) per year. The two alternative showerheads show significant water savings compared to the DR.    5.2 Economic Assessment   When the economic component of showerheads, we must consider the cost of water, showerhead cost, and replacement cost. We will assess this on a cost per annum basis. Cost/Annum = Cost/Lifetime + Water Cost/Year where Cost/Year = (Water Usage/year) * ( Rate) . The value calculated is the estimated cost per showerhead. UBC uses 2.97862*10^9 L of water annually (UBC Sustainability, 2013) and 13% per that is used for showers resulting in a 3.872206*10^8 L used on showers. With the average rate of $2.5/2830 L (City of Vancouver, 2014), we can see that UBC spends ~$342,000 on shower usage. Calculations will consider cost per person. The following calculations assume that showerhead replacement costs are negligible compared to the cost of water as the cost of the showerhead is distributed across each individual who uses it. 17  Table 7. Cost and Lifetime Showerhead Cost ($) Lifetime  (years) Delta RP44809BN 14.99 16 Niagara Earth Massage 8.30 10 American Standard 1660.710.002 Spray Pattern 12.99 14  Delta RP44809BN: Water Usage/Year = (156 Gallons/week) * (52.1775 weeks/year) = 8140 Gallons/year ≈  30813 L/year Cost/year = (30813 L/year) * ($2.5/2830 L) = $27.20/year   Niagara Earth Massage: Water Usage/Year = (136 Gallons/week) * (52.1775 weeks/year) = 7096 Gallons/year ≈  26861 L/year Cost/year = (26861 L/year) * ($2.5/2830 L) = $23.70/year  Water Usage/Year = (140.625 Gallons/week) * (52.1775 weeks/year) = 7337 Gallons/year ≈    27775 L/year Cost/year = (27775 L/year) * ($2.5/2830 L) = $24.50/year  Once again, we see that the Niagara has the highest savings due to its low flow rate, with saving $3.50 per year per individual. American Standard again comes in a close second with 18  savings of $2.50 per year per individual. Multiplying this result with the number of people on residence using the showerheads will lead to significant savings.  5.3 Social Assessment   In evaluating the social impact of implementing low-flow showerheads, the compiled ratings for the installed showerheads from the survey results were inspected. Table 8 represents the average performance ratings for each of the showerhead products on a scale of 1 to 5 with 1 being poor and 5 being exceptional.          Table 8. Average Performance Rating Showerhead Model Flow Rate (GPM) Average Performance Rating Delta RP44809BN 2.0 4.20 Niagara Earth Massage 1.25  1.20 American Standard 1660.710.002 Spray Pattern 1.5  3.25   It is apparent that survey recipients were disappointed with the performance of the NE. Not only did it lack ideal pressure and spread, it led to longer shower durations because of its incredibly low-flow rate. The DR performed remarkably well while the AS obtained a satisfactory rating. Both of these received recognition for their optimal pressure and spread.   It is important to take demographic consideration in regards to the survey responses. Males appear to take showers more frequently and at a higher duration than females. This may 19  be because males are generally more active and undergo perspiration more often, leading to the requirement of taking more showers. Females would also generally require more effort in washing their hair and the rating of a showerhead may reflect the showerhead’s performance of carrying out this task. Although these were factors that were not evaluated through measurements and calculations, they are important to consider.                     20  6.0 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS   From the selection of showerhead alternatives, the survey results followed by a TBL assessment, has provided clarity to which product models are most fitting for maximizing social, economic, and environmental benefit. The most significant consideration in the recommendation of a product was that they possess the ability to contribute both effectively and equally towards the aforementioned factors.  The survey results have made it evident that the NE faced great difficulty in satisfying user expectations. Even with its patented pressure compensating technology, it did not meet ideal pressure conditions. The information gathered on the NE’s spread however, was tremendously inconsistent and did not provide constructive feedback. On the other side, the survey recipients were content with the performance of the DR while the AS slightly trailed it in rating. Both of these models maintained consistent evaluations from the students of TDM.  There was a direct relationship between the user satisfaction of the showerhead and its costs although it shouldn’t be much of a surprise that luxury comes with greater expenses. The life cycle costs of the NE are the lowest and while the DR is the most expensive, it is still considerably cheap and reasonable. Once again, the AS ranks right in the middle between the other two.   From further analysis of the survey results, an inverse relationship was found between the flow rate of the showerhead and the duration of shower. Although the showerheads with lower flow rates extended shower durations, they still ended up saving more water. Despite not meeting 21  user expectations, the NE and AS saves an enormous amount of water when compared with the DR based on their substantially lower flow rate.  Since it was not possible to install and test the WP, this assessment could still be improved upon. However, within the restraints of this project, the AS model is the recommended product for fulfilling the social, economic, and environmental requirements. Overall, the AS is simply the most feasible and balanced product as it maximizes user satisfaction and water conservation for its cost. By implementing the AS showerhead, UBC can increase both economic and environmental savings.                            22  REFERENCES  BCHydro (2014). Use a Low-flow Showerhead. Retrieved from  https://www.bchydro.com/powersmart/residential/guides_tips/green-your-home/water_guide/low_flow_shower.html  City of Vancouver (2014). “Metered Utility Rates for Water, Sewer, and Energy”. Retrieved  from http://vancouver.ca/home-property-development/metered-rates.aspx  California Utilities Statewide Codes and Standards Team (2013). Multi-Head Showers and  Lower-Flow Shower Heads. Retrieved from http://www.map-testing.com/assets/files/CA_Statewide%20CodesStandards_2013_CASE_R_Shower_Heads_Sept_2011.pdf  Rona (2014). Fixed Shower Head. Retrieved from http://www.rona.ca/en/fixed-shower-head#  SEEDS Library (2014, Apr.). An Investigation Into Campus Water Conservation - Low Flow Shower Heads. Retrieved from http://sustain.ubc.ca/sites/sustain.ubc.ca/files/seedslibrary/APSC262_Project02%20Campus%20Water%20Conservation%20-%20Low-flow%20Showerheads%20--%20T2B%20Team%2001.pdf  The Home Depot (2013). Delta Single Setting Shower Head in Brushed Nickel. Retrieved  from http://www.homedepot.com/p/Delta-Single-Setting-Showerhead-in-Brushed-Nickel-RP44809BN/203331883#product_description  The Water Sense (2014, Oct.). The Water Sense Label. Retrieved from  http://www.epa.gov/WaterSense/products/showerheads.html  UBC. Water Action Plan Discussion Paper. Retrieved from  http://sustain.ubc.ca/sites/sustain.ubc.ca/files/uploads/CampusSustainability/CS_PDFs/Water/WaterActionPlan_DiscussionPaper.pdf  UBC Sustainability (2013). UBC Sustainability Annual Report 2013 Vancouver Campus.  Retrieved from  http://sustain.ubc.ca/sites/sustain.ubc.ca/files/uploads/CampusSustainability/CS_PDFs/PlansReports/Reports/UBCSustainabilityAnnualReport_12-13.pdf    23  UBC.(2011). Water Conservation. Retrieved from    http://sustain.ubc.ca/campus-initiatives/water/water-conservation  [Untitled photograph of WaterPik Shower Head]. Retrieved from:  http://perso.wanadoo.fr/jdtr/struc/chimp3.htm  Waterpik (2011). Specifications for Model: ETC-411. Retrieved from  http://www.peaksalesandmarketing.com/docs/Waterpik_ETC-411.pdf  U.S. Department of Energy. (n.d.). ENERGY COST CALCULATOR FOR FAUCETS AND   SHOWERHEADS. Retrieved October 21, 2014, from   http://energy.gov/eere/femp/energy-cost-calculator-faucets-and-showerheads-0  Gram-Hanssen, K. (2007). Teenage consumption of cleanliness: How to make it sustainable?   Sustainability : Science, Practice, & Policy, 3(2), 9-9.  Home Guides ( 2014). Ways to Clean Showers Without Harming the Environment.  Retrieved from   http://homeguides.sfgate.com/ways-clean-showers-harming-environment-78904.html                         24   APPENDIX    Showerhead Survey Questions  1) Please circle your gender:  Male   Female  Other   2) Which residence do you live in? ________________   3) Based on these images of showerheads, please identify the showerhead that you are using. For the following questions, please answer based on your opinion of that showerhead.  Original Showerhead                                 First Alternative                                Second Alternative   4) How long do you spend in the shower with the water flowing, on average? Please note that this is for the showerhead at your residence, not at home. Please circle from the following options:   Less than 3 minutes            3-6 minutes             7-11 minutes           12-15 minutes         More than 15   5) How often do you shower at your residence every week?  ________________   6) On a scale from 1 to 5, is the pressure from the showerhead sufficient for your needs? (1 meaning there is not enough pressure, and 5 meaning there is too much pressure)   1                       2                          3                          4                        5 Not enough pressure                        Good amount of pressure                           Too much pressure   7) Is the spread on the showerhead to your preference? (1 meaning “it can be more focused”, 5 meaning “it can be wider”). If not applicable, please indicate why (e.g. adjustable): ________________   1                        2                      3                       4                     5 Not focused enough                               Good                                             Too focused   8) Please rate your overall satisfaction with the showerhead:    1                   2                      3                                 4                           5 Very dissatisfied                                Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied                            Very Satisfied   9) How important would you say conserving water is to you?   1                                  2                                 3                                 4                                  5 Not at all important                                Somewhat Important                     Very Important  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.18861.1-0108766/manifest

Comment

Related Items