If you have a front loader (don't know about top loading HE washers) the volume of water used is the same regardless of the actual amount of clothing so it makes sense to fill the washer completely whenever possible.

I would agree with Grainlady in that a lot of clothing doesn't need to be washed after every wearing, especially things like sweaters. I think someone, somewhere wore 1 pair of jeans for an entire year without washing.

If you happen to live in an older home, changing to low flow faucets and shower heads can save water (and the associated energy costs too). As can 1.6L flush or less toilets.

Grainlady- To answer your questions I needed to see where I was willing to reduce water costs. There is 2 in my household but occasionally I will help and wash clothes for my grown children. I need to shower daily- that is something I just need to do to feel I have a high quality of life. DH showers about 4 times a week. I targeted two areas that I could reduce water. I could stop washing two small loads of clothes daily (DH's work clothes and towels for one load, my work clothes and delicates for another) and stop running water when I brush my teeth (6 minutes daily). So now I wait until I have a full load of either delicates or hardy clothes and that reduces my washes to every other or every third day. One simple change to reduce my water costs.

Mike- there is a low flow faucet on my first floor but I prefer my basement shower. It is like Niagra Falls and perhaps a guilty luxury of mine. I think that I am selfish in that way.

Grainlady I do follow the California flush system as best I can. DH finds it gross so I need to make sure he is gone for the day. lol Your other suggestions leave me intrigued. I wonder how I can "catch" the shower water. Need to research this and if you can direct me to how to do this I would appreciate it.

When I was a kid, once and a while Dad would insist on "Navy" showers. Basically you turn on the shower to get wet, turn off the water, lather up, then turn on the water to rinse off. It does save a lot of water (and the cost of heating the water) but it's not very enjoyable.

When New guy started spending a lot of time at my home, he told me he needed to do laundry every other day. I was puzzled, and finally was clued in to the fact that he had two work shirts. Exactly two. This was kind of an issue, as I'm on a budget, and water comes from a somewhat limited well.

By the next summer when he was spending even more time, and I had a new washer. I told him it was silly for the washer to be run every two nights, when he could just buy three more shirts. It turned out he actually had more shirts, they just needed to be mended or have the stains treated.

I almost wish I hadn't purchased that particular new washer. It's a front loader, but absolutely huge. If I put two pairs of pants in it, all New guy's shirts, all the underwear and socks for a week, a week's worth of washcloths, it's almost full. It irks me to run it when it's not.

Grainlady- of course! Silly I didn't think of that so thanks. :) I actually tried the Navy shower, brrrr......I got cold quick. lol.

oldgeezer- I hear you. I did not used to think twice about running small loads of laundry because the HE washer is supposed to use less water, but now that I've changed my ways it bugs me to run a small load.

Mike, my front loader measures the load size and uses water accordingly. I'm not sure if other brands are the same or different. Even for those using a full water fill up no matter the size of the clothes load, most front loaders will still use much less water than the old style top loaders. And, they do a better job of washing the clothes.

I agree with your other suggestions - spending some bucks for low use toilets and replacement of faucets and shower heads with newer low flow models can often reduce water usage at these points by more than half.

In my drought-hit area, a substantial percentage of residential water use is for landscaping because we get essentially no rain from April to October. The severest cutbacks being discussed by the state and water districts are easily achieved by restricting outdoor watering.

As far worrying about this or that gallon, or not taking showers when one desires to - life's too short. Saving a penny here and a penny there still only adds up to pennies, not dollars, and for most people, such small efforts aren't worth it.

Snidely,

Hmmm. The old front loader (Kenmore/Frigidaire/Electrolux) just filled with water and based on my casual observation was the same amount for any size load. The new one (Kenmore/LG) takes about 10 minutes to fill and futzes around with some small movements of the drum and spritzes of water. Maybe it does somehow calculate the amount of laundry...

Mike, even on a very full load, a complete fill-up for my washer (a Miele) is probably just a few minutes in total, done in perhaps 30 second increments. For partial loads, the fills are still multiple but are shorter in duration. Except on gentle cycles, the water is no higher than the very bottom of the front glass window.

The current energy star standard for washers is 13 gallons per load. I'm sure my washer (purchased in April of 2001) uses rather less than this.

grainlady, I think we've discussed this before, no need to do so again. Saving pennies is saving pennies. If the woman you cite needs to be so frugal on her food budget because of limited family means, what made her think it was a good idea to have 6 children?

Some people need to be careful because of limited family income, others may do so because it becomes an end in itself. There's a big range of possibilities in between being carelessly wasteful and being obsessively extremely frugal. Everyone is free to choose what feels comfortable for their own conduct. One size does not fit all.

Snidely,

I have no idea what the darn washer is doing for ten minutes but it seems an absurd waste of time. Not to mention the constant cycling of the fill valves has to shorten their lives. The old one filled continuously then agitated for 5 minutes or so and the filled again for a short period for the addition of bleach. I've opened the door of the new one after it's stopped filling and there isn't much water in there at all; the clothes barely seem wet. They come out clean so I guess it works...

Now if they could just make one without a million cycles, bells, and whistles. Without looking I think there's 10 options with some additional possibilities for each setting like water temperature, soil level, and extra rinses. Yet I can't seem to wash anything with hot water. Does laundry really need to be this complicated? The dryer is the same way.

Grainlady,

40 cents per person, per day. Uh huh. I think Stalin spent more than that on prisoners in the gulags. {lol}

Stalin had the extra money to spend, because they only needed to furnish one-way transportation (no round trip tickets were issued). Plus, they saved money on water because the living quarters had no toilets, dishwashers or top loading washing machines.

As before, I looked at the website you cite. I really don't understand many of the decisions and choices that woman has made. I don't think her approach and lifestyle offer much that most people would want to emulate. WIth all the time she says she has for the website, you'd think she'd try to find a job that pays money for her efforts. If her household has an income deficiiency, that would make a greater contribution to her family's well-being than taking flower photos for a blog page. Another way would be to not continue having children they can't afford.

I think some of your ideas are reasonable. But I can't help but wonder if your game is really to advocate an ascetic lifestyle. Eating less? Sure, that's a good health decision. But something like "If you don't particularly care for an inexpensive food, like oatmeal as a cooked cereal, find ways to fix it that you do like" is really pretty extreme. Are you really suggesting people must eat what they don't like solely because it's cheap? You won't find too many takers for that.

Money is no good if you don't spend it or use it for something worthwhile. Saving just to save doesn't make sense.

You don't want facial hair in any body crevices, for example.

But if you shave using that water after washing your ...uh... body crevices ... that doesn't seem too hygienic. What's the correct sequence? Or is it an impossible puzzle?

Back in my day most of we Submariners had beards - while no one else in the Navy was so permitted. But, even with the beard there was the need to periodically shave some areas.

Quite the enigma, eh?

Frontloader washers do vary the amount of water used per the load size. They have a pressure sensor to regulate the fill level same as toploaders. The clothes absorb water until saturated, which amount varies per fabric type and load size. The additional water beyond saturation is what triggers the pressure sensor so the overall volume varies accordingly. Some machines have a flow sensor that measures how much total water was required to trigger the pressure sensor on the first fill (when the clothes are initially dry), which data is used to calculate how much longer to run the water for cycles that fill higher such as delicate or bulky items, or for the final rinse if it also fills higher.