HEALTH AND SANITATION: MIKE’S MESSAGE
33
The best and worst
of both worlds
Being of an age where I do not have young children around very
often (and if they are, they are someone else’s problem at bath
time), I have almost forgotten what it is like to use a bathtub.
By Mike Muller
While Helen Zille can boast about her skottel bath and
only showering twice a week, that is not really what we
want, unless perhaps we are camping in the Kalahari.
Bathing has always been a luxury — think Roman
baths and hot springs all over the world, from Japan to
Swaziland. Bathing is seen to be good for your health,
relaxing and, in some cultures, a very social occasion.
I was very happy to give up the tub in favour of the
shower, and if I want to save water, a 90-second shower
will work just fine. The problem is that, like most people, I
don’t want a 90-second shower. I want the equivalent of
a good long soak and that is what many people do — at
least 10 minutes is common. But a 10-minute shower is
likely to use more water than a reasonably full bathtub,
especially if you insist on a full-flow shower head, and,
let’s face it, the trickle from a water-wise shower head is
not enough to keep you warm in a cold bathroom.
So, I was interested to learn (from an American
colleague) of an innovation that is being developed in
California (where they do wetware as well as software).
This allows you to shower as long as you want but
still save water. The concept is simple: just recycle the
shower water. A sump in the shower floor collects the
first 10 litres of water and a pump then recirculates
it; but the clincher is an in-line heater that keeps the
recycled water at your desired temperature.
Yuk, I hear people say, showering in dirty, soapy water!
But of course, that is what bathing in a tub is all about.
You soaked and washed in the same water. So, what’s
the difference? If this was on the market today, I bet they
www.plumbingafrica.co.za
could sell thousands in Cape Town as winter approaches
and restrictions continue.
Of course, the downside is that you would have to do
quite a lot of remodelling of your bathroom to fit it into
existing showers — like so many water-efficiency
devices, they make more sense in a new build than
existing homes. But, once the principle is adopted, I am
sure some clever technician will find a way to install the
unit on top of existing shower trays.
It will be difficult to say no to the idea of a really nice,
long, hot full shower that also saves water. But to get
there, we will have to accept, once again, the idea of
bathing in used water. That is why I say, it is a solution
that offers the best and the worst of both worlds. But
if, next year, Gauteng takes over from Cape Town in the
“Oops, we forgot to build the dam” brigade, I will be
looking out for the kit in my local hardware store. PA
Mike Muller
Mike Muller is a visiting
adjunct professor at the
Wits University School
of Governance and a
former Commissioner
of the National Planning
Commission and Director
General of Water Affairs.
While Helen Zille can boast
about her skottel bath and only
showering twice a week, that is
not really what we want.
With Cape Town digging itself into its very dry hole,
everyone is talking about saving water, and the bath
versus bucket versus shower debate has got people
thinking. Which uses water more efficiently? And,
just as important, what is it that people want?
April 2018 Volume 24 I Number 2