Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New, slippery toilet coating provides cleaner flushing, saves water

phys.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 156 posts

Re: New, slippery toilet coating provides cleaner flushing, saves water

#21

Post by michaelt »

dwyerm wrote: post #11
michaelt wrote: post #3

> The researchers also predict the coating could last for about 500 flushes in a conventional toilet before a reapplication of the lubricant layer is needed. It's a neat idea - especially the fact the bowl remains white, unlike a coating of PTFE or similar. I wonder if it's an idea they can develop further into a permanent coating?

...which is strange, since PTFE is naturally white. I think we've become used to seeing it on silver and grey frying pans. But that said, what's wrong with a dark-colored toilet?

Merely that a coating that retains total choice in colours is more flexible than one that limits the range of colours possible.

And presumably that's part of the contribution here - a nonstick toilet that doesn't look like the ones you get on planes and trains already.

Also, the current fashion in my country is for white toilets - you go to a bathroom showroom, ~95% of what's on display will be white. A design that doesn't require a change in fashions is simpler than one that needs tastes to change.

Re: New, slippery toilet coating provides cleaner flushing, saves water

#22

Post by papreclip »

More chemical waste in our water system. There's nothing wrong with the amount of water we currently use to flush our toilets. Now, there's something to be said for a cleaner flush, but another solution to that problem - with many other benefits - is to consume more fiber

Re: New, slippery toilet coating provides cleaner flushing, saves water

#23

Post by TeMPOraL »

hanniabu wrote: post #19

Why don't we use grey water to flush toilets? It can use water either from the bathroom sink or shower.

Honestly, I do. I've placed a bucket in the sink to capture waste water from washing hands, which is then reused for flushing the toilet after depositing... liquid contents in it. It saves a bit off the water bill and also made me realize just how much water I use up when washing hands...

Of course I hide the bucket when guests come, it's too weird a thing - but in all honesty, I've wished many times for a system for capturing sink & shower water in a tank, for use in toilet. The standard practice is inefficient.

EDIT: I didn't know the term "greywater" before, and after reading https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greywater I'm having second thoughts about my scheme. If the city is actually treating greywater and water from toilets separately, then I guess it makes sense to let the sink water drain. But then again, that's a huge if. I'll need to take a closer look at my indoor plumbing and read up on the water treatment scheme in my area.

Re: New, slippery toilet coating provides cleaner flushing, saves water

#24

Post by war1025 »

tenebrisalietum wrote: post #13
glofish wrote: post #2

Unpopular opinion warning! Getting people to save water is one of the simplest things in the world! Water is the cheapest material that people have access to. It is so cheap it has been devalued to the extreme. Fill a backyard pool? That'll be less than $100... Raise the price a little bit, all of a sudden people will use less water, they won't even notice any effect and have the same quality of life. Framing a scien…

> Water is the cheapest material that people have access to. You don't live in the American South. I actually suspect you live near one of the Great Lakes where the water is dirt cheap. My water bill is higher than my Internet bill.

Something I have wondered a couple times when this comes up: When people say "Water bill", do they mean solely water, or water + sewer?

Where I live, the two are bundled, and the total bill is also higher than our internet bill. (~$100 for water vs $75 for internet)

I live in Iowa, which doesn't have Great Lakes levels of water lying around, but we also have no shortage of the stuff.

Re: New, slippery toilet coating provides cleaner flushing, saves water

#25

Post by [deleted] »

glofish wrote: post #12
throwaway5752 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Water should be cheap, it's less expensive overall that society dealing with poor water sources (healthcare, developmental). There should be a two tier price system. Cheap up to a threshold, then expensive beyond that, like with mobile internet. And even then, tech to reduce waste is great and should be celebrated and is not mutually exclusive.

I think saying here is toilet where your poop does not smear is a much better slogan.

[deleted]

Re: New, slippery toilet coating provides cleaner flushing, saves water

#26

Post by ping_pong »

glofish wrote: post #2

Unpopular opinion warning! Getting people to save water is one of the simplest things in the world! Water is the cheapest material that people have access to. It is so cheap it has been devalued to the extreme. Fill a backyard pool? That'll be less than $100... Raise the price a little bit, all of a sudden people will use less water, they won't even notice any effect and have the same quality of life. Framing a scien…

It should be tiered, which it is but not to the degree that it sound.

But really the problem is businesses and especially farmers growing non-essential crops, especially in California. The drought we experienced over the last several years was mainly exacerbated by farmers who were growing non-essential but expensive crops like almonds. I would rather the almond farmers go bankrupt than have them spend 1 gallon per almond in water.

Businesses should pay more for water, and if it causes inflation in prices, maybe that's okay if the cost of almonds double. The amount of money that Nestle pays to bottle water for free is far too low. If it drives bottled water out of service because the costs are too high, I also think that's okay.

Re: New, slippery toilet coating provides cleaner flushing, saves water

#27

Post by haklriueo »

hanniabu wrote: post #19

Why don't we use grey water to flush toilets? It can use water either from the bathroom sink or shower.

Probably because it requires extra plumbing, not to mention a storage tank. And most places don't have a fresh water shortage.

Re: New, slippery toilet coating provides cleaner flushing, saves water

#28

Post by haklriueo »

> When we put that coating on a toilet in the lab and dump synthetic fecal matter on it

This reminds me of a documentary about toilets, and one factoid was that American toilets were much worse at flushing than Japanese ones, and would block more frequently, and it turns out that American ones were tested with a small standardized rubber ball, while Japanese ones with the real deal, including big productions.

Re: New, slippery toilet coating provides cleaner flushing, saves water

#29

Post by JoshTriplett »

war1025 wrote: post #24
tenebrisalietum wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Water is the cheapest material that people have access to. You don't live in the American South. I actually suspect you live near one of the Great Lakes where the water is dirt cheap. My water bill is higher than my Internet bill.

Something I have wondered a couple times when this comes up: When people say "Water bill", do they mean solely water, or water + sewer? Where I live, the two are bundled, and the total bill is also higher than our internet bill. (~$100 for water vs $75 for internet) I live in Iowa, which doesn't have Great Lakes levels of water lying around, but we also have no shortage of the stuff.

Yes, they're often combined, on the basis that it's easier to measure water usage than sewer usage and the latter is presumed to be proportional to the former.
Post reply on HN