Toronto to scrap low-flow toilet and efficient front-loading clothes washers rebates?

[W. K. Lis]

Now flushed with success, Rob Ford's clique want to scrap the low-flow toilet rebates.

From The Star:

Council urged to scrap rebates for low-flow toilets

Toronto is poised to scrap a program that provides homeowners a $60 or $75 rebate to replace water-guzzling toilets with modern, low-flow units.

“This is penny-wise and pound-foolish,” Councillor Joe Mihevc said of the recommended elimination by March 1 of city-sponsored grants: $60 for an efficient toilet and $75 for a high-efficiency model.

Toilets are the single biggest user of water in the average home.

Also on the chopping block is a $60 rebate for the purchase of efficient front-loading clothes washers. A final decision will be made when council passes the 2011 operating budget in late February.

Mihevc said the water efficiency plan is being gutted as part of Mayor Rob Ford’s cost-cutting mission.

“Rob Ford was never a supporter of environmental initiatives and he’s dismissed the idea that it’s even something cities should be involved in,” he said.

The program was introduced back in 2003 to reduce water consumption and avoid having to expand the water system at great cost, he added.

A staff report said that, as of last month, the program has cost a total of $37.3 million, while reducing water consumption and saving up to $180 million in future water system expansion costs.

Mihevc said avoiding those costs was a major reason council voted for the program in 2003.

“The choice you have is to add pipes or decrease consumption,” he said. “It’s terribly expensive digging all these pipes. This program has decreased consumption. It pays for itself.”

While the report from the water department’s general manager says efficient toilets are now the norm, Mihevc said there are hundreds of thousands of old-style units out there, so the grant program could continue to provide a reason to switch.

“What we’re trying to do is provide incentives to people that do not have low-flow toilets. The way to do that is to offer a grant, and sometimes it makes the difference between doing it and not doing it.”

While the building code stipulates new homes have low flow toilets, the concern was people remodeling bathrooms might choose the guzzling 13-litre model over the 6-litre, said Lou Di Gironimo, general manager of Toronto water.

But since 2003, suppliers have responded to increased public demand for water conservation by moving to six-litre models and even units that consume 4.8 litres or less per flush, Di Gironimo said.

The water efficiency program helped raise public interest in low-flow, and suppliers and retailers have responded, he said, adding that the province has indicated it is moving to ban the water guzzlers outright.

“When you look at the whole water efficiency plan that we put forward, it’s been successful,” Di Gironimo said. “From our perspective, we believe the water efficiency message has taken hold.”

In addition to saving by not having to build new capacity, reducing water consumption also means the city doesn’t have to pump as much water from Lake Ontario, and that saves energy, said Councillor Gord Perks.

“I’m profoundly upset,” Perks said. “Torontonians still consume an awful lot more water than we need to. It means we consume an awful lot of electricity pumping water uphill.”

Rather than scrap the program, Perks would support looking at expanding it instead. “I feel very strongly that we should look at the next step. Where’s the next big savings from water efficiency?”

Perks said people he talks to support water conservation.

“I think this is a really bad move and it doesn’t reflect how Torontonians feel about the environment and conservation. People I talk to want to see more of these kinds of programs, not fewer.”

Mihevc said he expects a big debate at council before a final decision is reached.

“I can’t imagine council not weighing in on this,” he said. “I expect council will want to consider an alternative.”

 

[toto]

Water rates are due to increase a fair bit over the next few years. Ford's logic must be, that the more water that is used, the more revenue for the city. If this keeps happening something tells me that the $60 that I saved on the VRT, will be offset by hundreds of $$, that I'll have to pay in new fees. The next four years are going to be very costly to those of us on the proverty line, those of use who us public transit, those of us who are concerned about our environment and those of us who want a city that is livable. Hopefully, councillors will vote against these kinds of backward thinking actions.

 

[W. K. Lis]

To those who still would like to get a rebate before its too late click on the following links:

Residential Toilet Replacement Program

Residential Washer Rebate

 

[MetroMan]

The stupidity of this man never fails to amaze me. Hopefully councillors who can do basic math will shut him down on this.

 

[js97]

Dumb cut, but I don't understand why the provincial government hasn't stepped in to introduce an industry standard.

All toilets sold must be dual flush/low flow toilets, that would solve all the problems.

(most residential toilets sold are already like this)


p.s. the 9% annual water increase is implemented under the Miller Administration - to a certain degree, a good idea. Canadians take water way too granted. Compared to other parts of the world, (Japan, Spain, etc)

 

[Eug]

Personally, I would have thought it's a good idea to scrap the rebates.

As long as any toilet in the store is 6L or less, that's fine. I do dislike the dual-flush toilets though.

Either that or cut the rebates by half or more.

BTW, I say this as someone who bought a 6L/flush toilet to replace a 13L/flush toilet. I got the rebate. I also say this as someone who bought a new front-load washer/dryer. I got the rebate there too.

---

Actually though, now that you mention it, the City of Toronto doesn't approve all 6L flush toilets for the rebate. Why not? What am I missing? IOW, why does there have to be a 239 page list of approved toilets? Maybe some of them aren't efficient enough?

Then, perhaps a rebate, but a smaller one would be enough.

 

[W. K. Lis]

...

Then, perhaps a rebate, but a smaller one would be enough.

Inflation has already done that. Adjusted for inflation, the difference between 2003 and 2010 would result in $60 being $68.38 and $75 being $85.48. However, there is a better selection of low-flush toilets that actually work today.

 

[TrickyRicky]

I'm OK with this. The cost of water is rising rapidly. People will adjust their behaviour accordingly.

 

[Eug]

Inflation has already done that. Adjusted for inflation, the difference between 2003 and 2010 would result in $60 being $68.38 and $75 being $85.48. However, there is a better selection of low-flush toilets that actually work today.

Which is why the rebates may be less necessary now then they used to be.

P.S. The toilet I bought was a toto.