Government fucking up our showers
The Plumbing Distributors Association of New Zealand has sent me this PR:
“Having a great shower will be a thing of the past”.
The Plumbing Distributors Association of New Zealand (PDANZ) is very concerned with the Department of Building and Housing’s proposed changes to the flow rates of showers and the effect it will have on New Zealanders.In the “NZBC H1 Compliance Document for hot water systems and HVAC systems” the DBH propose to have maximum shower flows of 6 litres a minute for gas and electric water heaters when a house is bigger than 150m2. A house with mains pressure water and a quality showerhead would be using 16-19 litres a minute. That is a good quality shower. Under the DBH’s proposal the shower would need to be restricted back to only allow 6 litres per minute. To understand what your shower would be like, knock your shower mixer back by 2/3rds. The small amount of water dribbling out would be what the DBH call a “comfortable and effective shower”. The PDANZ believe this is not acceptable. Having a good quality shower should not be compromised in the name of Kyoto Protocol. Where do we draw the line?
First they came for our light bulbs, and then they came for our showers!!
Is there no limit to nanny state?
October 9th, 2008 at 8:50 am
Talk about the proverbial cold shower from Labour.
Thanks to the ETS(Why aren’t National scrapping it)a cold shower is closer than we think.
Will the nanny state end with a change of government on 8 November? ACT wouldn’t come up with lame laws like this.
October 9th, 2008 at 8:51 am
Ahh just run a nice deep bath instead… f’ck ‘em
But DBH know best [yeah right], weren’t they the ones that changed the building code to allow houses with flat roofs, no eaves, etc – the leaky stylz.
October 9th, 2008 at 8:55 am
Here is why.
It’s that sustainable word again – the word which is undefinable and means everything and nothing but allows the regulators to do what ever they want.
Changes to the New Zealand Building Act
The 1991 Building Act has been revamped and replaced with a revised Act in November 2004 (see the Building Act 2004 website). The new Act aims to encourage better practices in building design and construction, and to tighten industry controls to avoid the ‘leaky buildings’ syndrome in the future.
Importantly, the new Act includes a number of sustainability measures, which will require changes to the way we currently design and construct homes.
The Building Code is being reviewed to ensure that it reflects the new purposes and principles of the 2004 Act. These are wider than those in the Building Act 1991, particularly as buildings need to be designed, constructed, and able to be used in ways that promote sustainable development. This means that the Code review will address energy and water efficiency, the use of renewable sources of energy, the efficient, safe and sustainable use of materials, and construction waste.
Sustainability Measures in the revised Building Act (2004)
Ensure harmful building designs, methods or products are prevented or minimised
Ensure the building is durable for its intended use
Consider the costs of a building – including its maintenance – over the whole of its life
Use renewable energy sources in the building to facilitate efficient energy use and conservation
Facilitate the efficient use of water in the building
Reduce waste during the construction process
Changes to the Building Code are likely, with a review of the Code scheduled for completion by November 2007. The review is expected to include regulations to enforce the sustainability measures in the Act.
The Department of Building and Housing has developed the Building Act 2004 website to inform people about the new Act and ways in which it affects the construction industry.
ENDS
NZ will not grow and develop unless this word is removed from all legislation except where it actually means something as in “the sustainable management of fishery” etc. In other words the sentence has an object which is itself definable.
October 9th, 2008 at 8:56 am
Right. So if I put in solar hot water heating, and have a rainwater supply on my farm, the government is still going to control what sort of shower I can have? This is insane.
October 9th, 2008 at 8:57 am
Fucking knob ends – Ask Hulun if she has eco bulbs and a cats piss shower head.
October 9th, 2008 at 9:01 am
Isn’t Labour already doing a bang up job of fucking the economy up?
October 9th, 2008 at 9:02 am
Owen said” “NZ will not grow and develop unless this word is removed from all legislation except where it actually means something as in “the sustainable management of fishery” etc. In other words the sentence has an object which is itself definable.”
That is absolutely, positively 100% correct.
October 9th, 2008 at 9:07 am
all i’m waiting for now is the greens to come out and say “showers are a recent invention. for millions of years man went without them…”
October 9th, 2008 at 9:11 am
“all i’m waiting for now is the greens to come out and say “showers are a recent invention. for millions of years man went without them…”
Well most of the Greens I have met certainly seem to have gone without them.
October 9th, 2008 at 9:12 am
Nick Smith had a press relseas on this last night:
“There is no rhyme or reason to these regulations. . . These regulations apply even if you’re not connected to the national grid or town water supply. . .We don’t have to be so green that we can’t be clean. . . User-pays is a far better approach than nanny state.”
http://homepaddock.wordpress.com/2008/10/08/get-out-of-my-shower/
October 9th, 2008 at 9:12 am
I collect my own water and have a solar water heater.
Why should I have to have a meagre shower?
And when will they come to take away my spa pool?
October 9th, 2008 at 9:15 am
Nick Smith did a great job on this on Close Up last night. It was beautiful…Nanny State, kids lunchboxes, now they’re climbing in the bloody shower…
October 9th, 2008 at 9:16 am
So, its easier to regulate shower heads and light bulbs but its not feasible to take GST off core food items – yeah right.
Fuck Labour and the public service they have engendered are past it, well past it.
October 9th, 2008 at 9:17 am
Patio heaters are cool.
Light the fire.
October 9th, 2008 at 9:19 am
It’s a daft idea when there are so many more important things for the government to focus on. But as for enforcement, changing out a shower head isn’t rocket science. Look out for a booming black market in full-rate after market shower heads on TradeMe.
October 9th, 2008 at 9:32 am
I’ve just blogged on this. We’ve just installed a new Infinity system, and the water pressure is great
http://keepingstock.blogspot.com/2008/10/mary-holm-on-national-and-kiwisaver.html
The government is not welcome in my bathroom!!
October 9th, 2008 at 9:35 am
We should all stop complaining, and do exactly what Labour/Greens/NZ1 want us to do!
You have never had is so good.
The dollar in your pocket is the strongest that it has ever been.
Crisis, what CRISIS?
Inflation is steady at 2.1%
Who really needs a shower anyway. H1 is desperate that we don’t have a power shower, as she wants ALL the power!!!!
October 9th, 2008 at 9:37 am
Patio Heaters to be banned next!
But only to stop Global Warming. Sorry, Climate Change scam.
What else will be banned next?
Perhaps we could make a list between us?
October 9th, 2008 at 9:40 am
“Perhaps we could make a list between us?”
Don’t give them ideas.
October 9th, 2008 at 9:41 am
So Labour not only thinks NZders are the smelly, unwashed masses that need to be told what to do they actually want them to be smelly, unwashed masses.
October 9th, 2008 at 9:49 am
Sorry Brian, it was a momentary lapse!
Bugga.
Perhaps National, and ACT will put to-gether a plan to unban things.
Won’t hold my breath though.
October 9th, 2008 at 9:50 am
Jaysus, these Labour stooges are weak minded fools.
Sure, have your shower running at XX litres a minute at XX PSI/Bar – and spend twice as long getting clean, using just as much water!
DING DONG!
Alternately, the smart man will have a reserviour filled at 6 litres a minute from his cylinder, then pumped through his big ass full bore waterblast-me-into-next-wednesday-good-shit-shower-head, at 20 litres a minute and 1000 PSI.
Fuck these commie fools. Like my stash of incandescent light bulbs I hoarding, I’m going all out to melt the world! And next is my “shower 3000″ that will use EVEN MORE ENERGY.
October 9th, 2008 at 9:52 am
Sex will soon be banned!
It takes heat to get going
It creates heat when it is going
It steams things up
It makes people pant – creating more CO2
It can be addictive
It cannot be baubleised
October 9th, 2008 at 9:53 am
Would we be allowed to put in two or three shower heads to make up for the loss in pressure?
October 9th, 2008 at 9:54 am
Good to see with the global markets in crisis, the national accounts running close to bare and the costs of living about to skyrocket thanks to rushed environmental legislation, the government still finds time to give time to tinker with my shower. God Defend New Zealand.
October 9th, 2008 at 10:11 am
dave strings, you forgot also to mention that it is enjoyable —> ban it
I am sure this Government is worried that somebody out there, somewhere, might be getting a scintilla of pleasure from something. It reminds me of the Taliban and their banning of kite flying, music (apart from the drum), etc.
EDIT: dave, sex will only be banned for those who “abuse” it; voters in South Auckland with several children already (whether or not they are in their care) will continue to enjoy sex under a Labour-led government.
October 9th, 2008 at 10:20 am
6 lt per minute is defined as a good shower by UK standards.
http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/subjects/waterres/286587/286911/548861/862957/?lang=_e
The problem is, I do not want UK standards of personal hygiene. In an earlier life, I was in the NZ Navy, where close quarter living demanded an astute approach to personal hygiene, resulting in 2 showers a day while at sea. Of course as these ships produced their own fresh water this was doable.
The Frigate Wellington, on which I served, was in a earlier life the HMS Bacchante. When it was handed over to the NZ Navy, it still had brass plates in the showers making sure that Leading Hands made sure all ratings showered once a week.
Does this government have a mandate to mess around with our lives to this degree? Heck, we can’t smack our kids, now we can’t bathe them as we see fit either?
October 9th, 2008 at 10:22 am
Given 6L/H means I’ll be using less hot water, I think I’ll stay in the shower longer. Who would have thought that our government what start to change our cleaning habits?
Compared to the current economic crisis, this is a trivial matter, but it deserves much more attention.
October 9th, 2008 at 10:35 am
This is one of the more ridiculous threads I have seen on Kiwiblog.
Why are you guys equating setting standards with bans?
Next thing you’ll be calling for relaxing warrants of fitness for cars too, so people can drive polluting, noisy old rustbuckets if they choose. Suppose you also think it is okay for parties to carry on in residential neighbourhoods until 4am as well.
October 9th, 2008 at 10:45 am
Toad.
I have no problem with standards for motor vehicles, and quality controls for the necessary mechanisms of this country. We need standards for doctors for example, and the WOF for motor vehicles is needed to ensure these vehicles are safe not only for the drivers, but road users in general.
But when the state starts to dictate to the various minutiae of my life and wants to tell me what pressure my shower head should be, this raises my hackles somewhat. This thread is less about the specifics of the regulation, but more about the fact the government sees fit to do it in the first place.
October 9th, 2008 at 10:45 am
Toad, a warrant keeps non-functioning cars off the road for reasons of safety. There are so many more important things for the government to worry about than how much water comes out of our shower heads.
October 9th, 2008 at 10:48 am
Toad – that’s bollocks. Having just installed a new system with far improved water pressure I now spend much less time in the shower, so I use less power and less gas, and I feel a heck of a lot cleaner. Sorry, but I’m not going to hang my head in shame just because the Greens think I’m wasting water!
October 9th, 2008 at 10:55 am
Toad you plonker.
If they want to introduce a standard for showers it should be a minimum flow rate, not a maximum.
Trying to wash your wheels under a lukewarm dribble is positively third world. Welcome to New Zealand.
October 9th, 2008 at 11:05 am
What, now the Labour Party want to get in the shower with me? If they send Parekura I will need to build a bigger shower!
October 9th, 2008 at 11:11 am
If you listened to Fitzsimmons on Close-up she confessed her shower is 6 litres per SECOND.
That’s better than a fire hose!
October 9th, 2008 at 11:13 am
Just went and had a REALLY long shower – just to spite them. Bliss. Pressure was fantastic. All four jets powering out as much as they could…beautiful.
October 9th, 2008 at 11:24 am
Obese people obviously use more water to clean their far greater surface area.
So only people under a certain weight should be allowed to have showers.
October 9th, 2008 at 11:26 am
A female friend of mine has just said that banning her high pressure shower with the hand held shower head would be like banning her vibrator….
Note to Labour First and Green’s: Don’t f##k with the simple things in life, there are bigger fish to fry.
October 9th, 2008 at 11:41 am
Labour/Greens. What a shower!
Let’s ban anything apart from Dreds, (smelly), Ganja, old German uniforms, Lesbianism, Feminism, Horse racing , Boxing, Scampi Quotas, Opera, Ministerial cars speeding at twice the national speed limit, Art Fraud, and of course being Vindictive!
October 9th, 2008 at 11:55 am
Cheer up Toad, off to the city this afternoon. Have a nice puddle in the driveway and will roll in it for 10 minutes before I go, that should save the fucking world.
October 9th, 2008 at 11:59 am
Pissant water pressure showers might be OK for the hairless but us hobbits need high pressure showers to clean our hirsute bodies.
October 9th, 2008 at 12:15 pm
Bathing in Melbourne – my answer to the hydronazis here in Australia.
October 9th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
Low pressure showers as they are now are bad enough. This will not have many fans.
But as to the general principle of “Nanny State / Freedom” – get a life! Next, you’ll be complaining about being made to drive on the left and not being allowed to dump rubbish in the harbour.
October 9th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
Isn’t it extraordinary.
The world finance markets are in total disarray, NZ is staring downt he barrel of much higher inflation, large govt deficits, massive over expenditure of govt departments, much higher unemployment, massive increases in people living in hardship and yet all these dick heads can do is …. regulate how much water comes out of the shower and buy king country farms.
If ever something opitomised a lazy, arrogant govt who are incapable of governing when things get tough, then this is it. No wonder John Tamaheri said Clark collapses under pressure.
October 9th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
Bogus – What do you propose the Dept of Building and Housing should be doing about the world financial markets?
Not really their bag, is it?
They are, however, actively trying to encourage someone to design an innovative cheap new starter homes:
http://www.dbh.govt.nz/designcomp
October 9th, 2008 at 12:49 pm
How’s THIS for prediction? Note the DATE……
# PhilBest (2948) Vote: Add rating 0 Subtract rating 0 Says:
August 15th, 2008 at 4:48 pm
“Look, why don’t we look at regulating hot showers? That would save far more megawatts than changing our lightbulbs. Or what about insisting on a certain number of meals a week to be salads or other meals that don’t require the use of electricity? Once we let down the barrier to Nanny State interference in our lives, where do we stop?”
Thank you, everybody (bows left and right). Note the uncooked meals will be the socialists next policy………I’m not joking, any more……..
October 9th, 2008 at 12:59 pm
Has anyone measured their water flow today? 6 lpm might be more than they get now.
http://www.askthebuilder.com/564_Low_Shower_Head_Water_Pressure.shtml
http://mises.org/story/2007
I note that parts of the US have regulations for water flow already.
October 9th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
Where is the leadership. Have parliament installed tanks to catch rain water from their buildings to be used for watering the gardens? Has parliament installed solar panels on the roofs of their buildings ?
No…. They just want to regulate what we do so that they can pretend to be doing something. Muppets !
October 9th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
nice one O Fill best. What is the highest neg karma scored on farablog- i mean anti shower lobbiestToady features at -24 karmas so far is getting up there isnt it/she/he ?
Whats next on Auntys banning list ;air dryers in toilets shalt be able to blow cold air only ?
October 9th, 2008 at 1:30 pm
Phil – yes, a good call of yours on August 15th then!
Uncooked meal restrictions, unlike low-pressure showers, carry with them health risks that I think will see them remain safely in your imagination though
October 9th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
“I note that parts of the US have regulations for water flow already.”
Heres’ something else for you to note LLLLLLLLew, you and RRM and the rest of the left wing control freak lamer psychopaths can take your regulations and shove them up your 600lpm arses.
October 9th, 2008 at 1:46 pm
Will I be able to continue using my electric blanket and heated towel rail?
If the shower flow is not adequate won’t people tend to stay under longer particularly if they have jobs that leave them fairly grubby?
The whole thing is topsy turvy anyway. I live in an area which has gone from sleepy seaside hollow to a bustling city suburb in 15 years. Houses have gone up like mushrooms yet none have a solar water heater. If the government had required solar heaters to be installed I can’t see buyers objecting. After all the houses were mainly spec so buyers bought the package. With bulk buying and installation in the initial building the extra cost would not have been much. I certainly wouldn’t have minded an extra few thousand built into the price.
October 9th, 2008 at 2:00 pm
It gets worse: my friends just replaced all the windows in their house and were told that if they’d done it next year they would have had to buy double glazing because single glazing will no longer be allowed.
No incandescent light bulbs.
Shower heads that spit at you.
Compulsory double glazing.
Like the Emissions Taxation Scam, it all comes from the Watermelon Dictatorship (green on the outside, red on the inside).
http://kiwipolemicist.wordpress.com/2008/09/11/the-emissions-trading-scheme-global-socialism/
October 9th, 2008 at 2:00 pm
Not in the shower.
October 9th, 2008 at 2:27 pm
600 lpm? Yeah, that’s probably closer to how mine is. Looking (briefly) at the various regulations in the States & Oz, 6 lpm is at the lower end of the water conservation scale.
October 9th, 2008 at 2:27 pm
I was reading something very interesting the other day, about certain contradictions in the whole “sustainability” thing. Bureaucrats are generally assuming that urban development, from now on, means blocks of flats next to railway lines. High density good, sprawl bad. So what about stand-alone dwellings placed to catch the sun? And when we run out of electricity, which seemingly is to be expected (actually, this will be a self-fulfilling prophecy if the Greens have their way), do all the tenants of the flats light up their log fires to keep warm?
Communist Dystopias, anyone?
October 9th, 2008 at 2:44 pm
Yep, negative karma, more mindless abuse. Why don’t you guys look at the facts. This is not a ban on anything, just a standard that can be met in a number of ways.
October 9th, 2008 at 2:51 pm
Ha ha – I got mine for asking if anyone had measured their current water flow – how DARE I question their ignorance!
October 9th, 2008 at 2:55 pm
Toad
You just don’t bloody get it do you, most of us do NOT want you and the rest of the fucking Greens telling us how to live our bloody lives.
I am also getting heartily sick of being told “it is not a ban, it is just a standard” when the reality is that is IS a ban and it IS another instance of your parties arrogant assumption that they can run our lives better than we can.
October 9th, 2008 at 3:02 pm
big bruv, did you actually bother to read what I linked to. It is your sort of logic that got us leaky buldings in the 90s. It is your sort of logic that will get us more coal fired power stations in the next decade too if we don’t do something about energy efficiency.
October 9th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
I dunno Big Bruv – the incandescant lightbulb thing isn’t a proposed ban, that’s just showing YOU don’t get it. Of course, as it was presented here, it looked like a ban & you guys want it to be a ban.
Not sure about this – 6 lpm is too low for most, but probably is a higher flow than some people with old water heaters & a header tank are getting now. But I see no problem with regulating water use in the long run, so long as measures are sensible.
Of course, I do expect that I can use the water from my own bore and rain tank as I see fit (although I envisage local body caps on total bore usage eventually).
October 9th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
Well…. we do have an awful lot of coal… seems a pity not to use it for something.
October 9th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
Toad
Did somebody say coal fired power stations?
BRING THEM ON..we have tons of the stuff, we may as well burn it before the Chinese do.
October 9th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
Toad
Again you just don’t get it, you claim it is “just a standard” yet you fail to acknowledge that what many are objecting to is ANOTHER standard forced upon us by the Greens.
It does not help you when your parties approach to this is arrogant and condescending, in true Green fashion you attempt to belittle all those who oppose you.
October 9th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
I thought those leaky homes came about because the Greens “banned” treated timber?
October 9th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
The good old politiburo is at it again –
We cannot be trusted to organize our own light bulbs or our own showers.
Surely to goodness the State can charge something for the water if they have too!!! but what we do with after that is our own business isn’t it ??
She doesn’t trust us with anything but she expects us to trust her with the Government!!!!
A vote for Winston = a vote for Labour = a vote for corruption and nanny state
A vote for Winston First is a vote for Labour!!
A vote for Labour is a vote for Winston First!!
October 9th, 2008 at 3:27 pm
Perhaps a better option would be to make metering of water mandatory throughout the country…. then pricing indicators would be able to influence consumption patterns.
Simply making silly changes like this does nothing to change usage habits
October 9th, 2008 at 3:28 pm
The silly gummint should all be thrown into the offal pit – so we can permanently golden shower the moronic scum!
October 9th, 2008 at 3:28 pm
What were the others?
October 9th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
We live on islands. The wind blows. The ocean is always close by. What’s wrong with modern coal fired power stations?
OK, I’m being argumentative. I mean, why should we use a natural, abundant local resource to secure our power supply? Crazy idea. Almost as nuts as using thermal energy, which we’re also not allowed to do anymore. And why should we, all that precious naturally hot steam being used for energy….what a disgrace.
Far better we build butt ugly wind farms, rely on the rain to fall in specific places and pay a small fortune to power our homes. I’m sure the planet appreciates our sacrifices.
October 9th, 2008 at 3:54 pm
Why do we need standards to prevent leaky homes built in the nineties when my home built in the 40’s is still going strong? Could it be that the thousands of dollars added to the cost of building EVERY home built in the last 30 years due to the council and RMA involvement actually ends up exceeding the cost of simply re-doing the leaky homes (especially if we could get back all the money also spent on the endless inquiries, action plans, submissions and government bureaucracy surrounding this whole performance.) It’s 2008 and still this hasn’t been resolved by so-called ‘decisive’ government intervention. When will we learn?
October 9th, 2008 at 3:56 pm
Um… wild guess – because without them leaky homes were being built?
October 9th, 2008 at 4:22 pm
They’re in out wallets, our petrol tanks, our schools, our fridges and living rooms, now Clark wants to GET IN THE SHOWER WITH ME???????
Fuck the hell right off lady!
October 9th, 2008 at 4:54 pm
Heh – have a cold shower Murray, that’s not a picture to savour.
October 9th, 2008 at 5:10 pm
kiwipolemicist:
“It gets worse: my friends just replaced all the windows in their house and were told that if they’d done it next year they would have had to buy double glazing because single glazing will no longer be allowed.”
Being a raging righty, I am absolutely against legislation and regulation, yet the double glazing, I have long said that I would support some legislation that either, encouraged or stipulated this.
NZ houses are typically cold dumps, and the best way to make them warm is through double glazing, adds about ~30% to the total cost of glazing for a new place, and in my opinion, adds 10% to the total value of the place once installed. A no brainer really.
Us kiwis are too bloody Scottish with our short arms and deep pockets, and will not spend a few extra bob to do the right thing, when it is required. Yet will happily moan about our cold damp houses.
In this instance, legislation may be the only way forward, or at least some incentive program, as is currently being offered with solar hot water. An incentive towards double glazing would do a damn site more for the environment than shit for brains Jeanettes, solar or this new shower scheme ever will!
October 9th, 2008 at 5:14 pm
You’re telling me Llew, my brother is already telling me I’m getting his shrink bill for dealing with that that image.
October 9th, 2008 at 5:29 pm
This is what really pisses me off about the media in this country. I have work mates (who are supposed to be reasonably intelligent) yet claim their is no difference between Labour and National because the MSM paints them this was.
I keep telling them you need to scratch the paint to see what is underneath and that communist red colour is the rust eating out country.
October 9th, 2008 at 5:29 pm
Drought-ravaged Queensland has a regulated maximum of 9 L/min. Why is waterlogged NZ to be allowed a third less?
October 9th, 2008 at 5:32 pm
So we can quickly get decisions on shower flows, but 3 months on Cunliffe still hasn’t made a decision about allowing cell transplants from the Auckland Island pigs to begin which would improve/save the lives of 100,000’s diabetics world wide.
Nice to have priorities.
October 9th, 2008 at 6:07 pm
I see old Toad has 48 negative karma’s and counting, is that a record?
Any way labour has determined that if we won’t vote for em then they will make us smell like em as a parting shot.
Next they will ban razors so all our women have to be hairy, though I suppose that would remind Kiwis never to vote labour again. It could be marketed with the slogan “hair’s to labour ,99-08, lest we forget”
Seriously though it will probably take a while to weed out these PC nutters from the public sector, so me fears a whole lot more stupid rules yet to come.
October 9th, 2008 at 7:00 pm
Toad said:
Not a ban huh? Just taking away 66% of the current water flow level huh?.
Fair enough. So let’s also …
(a) drop the open road speed limit to 33km/h, and;
(b) limit aircraft movements to 33% of what we have today, and;
(c) reduce maximum supermarket transaction to 33% of todays average spend today, and;
(d) reduce fast food outlets by 66%, and;
(e) apply a limit to the maximum income anyone can earn, and set benefit level maximums to 33% of what they are today, and;
(f) reduce maximum prison sentences by 67%, and;
(g) and, and, and …
No, no these aren’t bans… there are sensible measures. Toad, as much as I disagree with almost everything you say, in the past it has usually been well reasoned. Not this time.
October 9th, 2008 at 7:48 pm
William
Perhaps a better option would be to make metering of water mandatory throughout the country…
Excellent point. That would be the sensible solution.
The problem however is this: Socialist mentality and moronic ideology gets in the way. You see a filthy rich couple who work long hours or stop at the gym on the way home won’t use nearly as much water as a family of 7 with nobody working. So the policy would be said to “unfairly punish low earners”. So you would need a special ‘water rates’ benefit component because why should big users pay for all they use when rich pricks can afford way more than they can ever use….
All logic tells us that if you use a lot of a resource then you should pay more for it than somebody who uses piss all of the same resource, but socialism and logic/reason don’t work well together.
October 9th, 2008 at 7:53 pm
Toad,
do you wear jackboots?
October 9th, 2008 at 8:00 pm
These leftwing control freaks are self-righteously “pro choice” when it comes to exterminating a specific segment of humanity, otherwise they are quite happy to make any other law to control people and *limit* choice. Yes, kids: choice extends to destroying life but *not* having a good shower!
October 9th, 2008 at 8:13 pm
From Stalin, to Mao, to Pol Pot, to Helen Clark, Commies have always gotten their rocks off on mass murder and micro-controlling those that are left.
October 9th, 2008 at 8:20 pm
DPF asks: “Is there no limit to nanny state?”
No.
October 9th, 2008 at 8:20 pm
Talk-back radio’s been going off about this. People are not happy about losing their high pressure showers. Could be the issue to terminate this scummy government once and for all.
October 9th, 2008 at 8:25 pm
Lee
Is that the same Pol Pot who Keith Locke supported?
October 9th, 2008 at 8:30 pm
FFS, tknorriss, no-one is losing their high pressure shower! I don’t want to be accused of link-whoring, but look again, if you have not already, at what I posted on g.blog about how this standard works.
Are you guys so thick that you don’t understand, or are you just pretending to be for the sake of political expediency? The standard applies only to new buildings or renovations, and there are several options to meet it. It is really just common sense – if you want a high pressure shower, then you do something else to ensure you meet the standard.
October 9th, 2008 at 8:36 pm
Toad
Most of us know all that, but the question we are asking, which you seem to be overlooking, is” why are they bothering with this at all?”
G
October 9th, 2008 at 8:42 pm
Toad did you not see the Campbell Live show where the daycare centre in Invercargill couldn’t get a building consent because the outside gate was 10cm too high to meet the disability act yet was low enough to allow the kids to get out?
Standard do become mandatory because otherwise you can’t get code of compliance for the work done.
You are such a wanker. Earlier on you said it wouldn’t effect anyone and now you are saying it has to be done. Is that like your can discipline your child just don’t dare to touch them?
Fuck off out of our lives and go back to your peasant village.
October 9th, 2008 at 8:43 pm
Mental note to self: Engage an industrial designer to design a shower unit with rapid interchange head units. One for the inspector and one for the family.
October 9th, 2008 at 8:44 pm
And in Auckland we already pay through the nose for water.
Metrowater made a $21 million profit which then goes to the council to subsidise left wing nut job projects that add no value to ratepayers. In just the same way as the ARC rapes the Ports of Auckland to subsidise uneconomic transport plans.
October 9th, 2008 at 9:07 pm
Southern Raider said: Earlier on you said it wouldn’t effect anyone and now you are saying it has to be done.
You know that’s bullshit SR. Don’t be more of a dork than you can help.
But I agree with you that Metrowater is a rip-off, and should be returned to direct Council control.
October 9th, 2008 at 10:18 pm
Toad. Having just got back from another trip to China the thing that strikes anyone visiting there is the mind-blowing development. Three things that are obvious to anyone who spends time there.
1. No matter what we do here environmentally – they will undo it by 10,000 %.
2. It will be the go-to country to advance yourself sooner or later
3. The lack of bullshit regulation has allowed their economy to advance to the proportion it has.
I’m not going to sit back and watch a bunch of luddites destroy our growth and economy through the further regulation -including diminishing my personal choice and freedoms.
October 9th, 2008 at 10:52 pm
Patrick Starr I fell off the couch laughing.
You are so starry-eyed about China!
And at the same time you are so titchy about your own “personal choice and freedoms” being “diminished”!
That’s a crack up. Take the blinkers off mate.
October 9th, 2008 at 11:04 pm
“if you want a high pressure shower, then you do something else to ensure you meet the standard.”
Sorry, Toad, most people will prefer to not vote Green and hence dump the standard. There is no doubt that the “thickest” people involved are those that let this hit the news 4 weeks from election day. I’ve always thought that the Greens would make 5%, but I think it’ll be a close run thing now.
October 9th, 2008 at 11:18 pm
Next Labour will be rationing toilet paper to one sheet per visit.
October 9th, 2008 at 11:22 pm
If the Green party want to ban high pressure showers aren’t the children in their billboards far to clean to accurately represent Green policy.
A case for false advertising me thinks.
October 10th, 2008 at 4:29 am
Honey badger. You obviously either haven’t been there, or don’t do business there.
I cant see where I an starry eyed about China, simply making an observation that people in a fucken communist governed country have far less regulation and more personal choice than we do.
When you climb back onto the security of you couch you may care to give me some examples to the contrary ( that you’ve experienced?)
October 10th, 2008 at 7:52 am
“simply making an observation that people in a fucken communist governed country have far less regulation and more personal choice than we do. ”
Damn right. And those people live under a totalitarian dictatorship, and here are NZers, supposedly a nation of people that value freedom and liberty and democracy, (concepts that many of their fore fathers died bravely fighting for) and led by a surfeit of dipshits such as RRM Radar and LLLLew and Honey Badger, they vote themselves into tyranny and slavery like a collection of jelly backed one cell amoebas.
October 10th, 2008 at 8:22 am
You irresponsible idots make me puke with your stupid moans about a very sensible requirement. The country is facing a water shortage and it is plain silly to treat water to drinking standard for it to be wasted by gushing down on stupid fools.
I have been using an Amway ‘fine’ shower for probably a couple of decades now and when occassionally I shower away from home with the wasteful normal shower I am disgusted at the irresponsible wastage by the owners of the motels etc.
If you twits cannot adopt responsible practice then you need to be educated by regulation. If you were responsible there would be no need for regulation … it is as simple as that.
October 10th, 2008 at 8:24 am
Patrick Starr, there are squillions of examples to the contrary if you’d care to look past the facade. In six months in 2000 alone, the Yellow River Control Bureau issued more than 60 orders concerning water management. That’s more than ten regulations introduced per month. And that example doesn’t even begin to scrape the surface.
I can see where you’re coming from, but you have your argument our of all proportion, and you have blinkers on if you think there are fewer regulations on the Chinese than there are in NZ.
I do business with China. I have ties to China – my parents are over there at the moment. We are doing business with a “totalitarian dictatorship” as Redbaiter so rightly puts it, but unlike you I simply don’t hold them up as a paragon “go-to country to advance yourself sooner or later”.
That’s just ridiculous. Your rose-coloured specs will sooner or later smog up, it’s indubitable.
October 10th, 2008 at 8:33 am
“If you were responsible there would be no need for regulation … it is as simple as that.”
Except it isn’t that simple. Studies have shown that over-regulation causes irresponsibility. Constantly reaching for the device of regulation to every case of perceived “irresponsibility” is self defeating in that it engenders a dependency mentality amongst people wherein they do not develop any responsibility at all. For example, putting traffic lights at every intersection would after a couple of generations produce a country of people who were unable to proceed across an uncontrolled intersection. The reality is that there is no real shortage of water in New Zealand. Any water shortage, perceived or real is a by product of socialism, that disease that is always at the heart of every problem in NZ, and one that gives rise to excessive regulation and a corresponding diminished sense of responsibility. On a massive scale.
October 10th, 2008 at 8:46 am
“but unlike you I simply don’t hold them up as a paragon “go-to country to advance yourself sooner or later”
That is not what he is doing. He is saying that in his opinion, NZers are so harassed and bitched at by regulators, they are worse off than if they lived in the totalitarian dictatorship of Red China. He is not holding China as any kind of paragon. He’s saying that both countries are bad, but he is making the point that in his experience, NZ (a supposed democracy), where regulations are concerned, is worse than China (a totalitarian dictatorship).
October 10th, 2008 at 8:50 am
I see where you’re coming from Redbaiter but the lights were down at a major intersection in Taranaki St a couple of days ago, and the drivers actually became more cooperative, cautious and courteous than if they’d been operating, to get through the situation.
So I guess you have to trust peoples’ enduring initiative a little bit.
However, water consumption awareness has been publicised, highlighted, etc. and I think a hell of a lot of people still can’t join the dots, and our water is wasted something terrible. Don’t you agree?
October 10th, 2008 at 8:52 am
The labour adminstration of do gooders is simply nicking all the ideas of the UK labour party and ramming them in in about 1/3 of the rollout time eg eco lightbulbs being phased into the UK over three years…
Labour doo gooders know they are out and are fast tracking all sorts of stuff that they think will gain greenie votes this year.
Sad really.
October 10th, 2008 at 8:55 am
But Redbaiter did you see the parentheses? They indicated that I was actually quoting Patrick’s words, literally, when he spoke about self advancement, and China being a mandatory destination for this.
Far be it from me to let the facts get in the way of Patrick’s romantic adventure wonderland romps, but as far back as 1992 in China, the controversial Three Gorges project dictated water controls on the upper Yangtze River. In 1996, 730,000 “government allocated” units and individuals in China had permits to allow access to water. According to Zhu Dengquan, vice-minister of water resources, these permits accounted for 80 percent of the total water consumption in the whole country.
Now if this isn’t regulation on an unprecedented scale (and it is entirely necessary in China, where the south is wet and the north is dry and water access and quality are dubious at the best of times) then what is?
October 10th, 2008 at 8:56 am
“but the lights were down at a major intersection in Taranaki St a couple of days ago, and the drivers actually became more cooperative, cautious and courteous than if they’d been operating, to get through the situation.”
Doesn’t that undermine your own argument? Lets take down all traffic lights. (I’m serious).
I agree that water is sometimes wasted, but regulation is not the answer. See people wasting petrol? Perceived water shortages in NZ are the result of socialism- any commodity controlled by government suffers shortages of supply. In the USSR before it collapsed, they (the government) couldn’t even supply panty hose.
October 10th, 2008 at 8:58 am
What’s Labour going to do next?
Set up a “Water awareness council”.
Chuck in some taxpayer money, find a local “celebrity” and start airing patronising television adverts informing us what water is and what we “must” do to save the planet.
October 10th, 2008 at 8:59 am
“Now if this isn’t regulation on an unprecedented scale (and it is entirely necessary in China, where the south is wet and the north is dry and water access and quality are dubious at the best of times) then what is?”
Many countries have water allocation schemes for industrialists and farmers. So what regulations exist in China regarding shower head volumes?
October 10th, 2008 at 9:20 am
“Set up a “Water awareness council”.”
Very accurate, but there’s another essential part of the process- Cronyism.
Management of subject council staffed with smug mealy mouthed insufferably self important overpaid Labour Party apparachiks who if not for this cronyism would have very little chance of real employment.
October 10th, 2008 at 9:22 am
more standard trolls out today – nor much union representation going on for those union dues at the moment huh
October 10th, 2008 at 9:31 am
I have no problem with sensible regulation – and in this instance, it doesn’t mean I’ll have to replace my 30 litre per minute shower (although if water metering & user pays gets introduced I probably will).
But 6 litres per minute is too low – everyone else (that I can find – California, Australia) allow bands of up to twice that.
October 10th, 2008 at 9:32 am
Shower heads… what luxury you speak of, Redbaiter. This is China, not New Zealand.
The Guangdong Provincial Bureau of Water Conservancy are working on propositions to supply all residential closestools (existing AND new) with valves to restrict wasted water flow. Almost precisely what’s being proposed in NZ, in fact. From March last year, Guangzhou residents pay premium excess charges if they use more than 210 litres of water a day per household: hardly enough for one bath.
I don’t really know how many more examples you need that a) water consumption is precious, and regulated wherever its value is recognised, and b) favourably comparing restrictions and regulations for Chinese with water regulations for new NZ buildings was ludicrous, coming from ignorance.
Anyway… *yawn!*
“Lets take down all traffic lights.”
I like this idea! However what I observed the other day was drivers experiencing a novelty: a chance to prove themselves, and it all went smoothly and considerately. But I don’t think it would last if we took traffic lights away altogether, unfortunately. I could be wrong.
October 10th, 2008 at 9:33 am
All the time!
October 10th, 2008 at 9:37 am
Crikey! No pantyhose!
October 10th, 2008 at 9:43 am
“But I don’t think it would last if we took traffic lights away altogether, unfortunately. I could be wrong.”
It never ceases to amaze me what NZers don’t know.
Do a Google search on “town takes down all road signs”. (I’d put the links in myself but they wouldn’t show up for hours)
October 10th, 2008 at 9:44 am
“All the time!”
Better start regulating car sizes too then LLLLLLLLLLew
October 10th, 2008 at 9:44 am
I still can’t quite give a toss what China is belatedly doing to conserve natural water resources when NZ taxpayers get screwed by ridiculous ETF tax programs that countries like China spit in the eye of.
October 10th, 2008 at 9:46 am
BTW, Honey Badge, can I ask my question again, as you seem to have missed it-
What regulations exist in China regarding shower head volumes? (in developed cities if you like)
October 10th, 2008 at 9:48 am
Why would I want to do that Rrrrrussell? I mean, are you so stupid? Or willfully miscomprehending?
October 10th, 2008 at 10:07 am
“I mean, are you so stupid? Or willfully miscomprehending?”
No I’m not LLLLLLLLLLLLew, you snivelling little arsewipe coward. You’re advocating that shower heads be regulated because water is wasted so why wouldn’t you by simple logic (seeing as you maintain petrol is likewise “wasted”) want to regulate car size?
October 10th, 2008 at 10:22 am
Personally, I think water metering & user pays will encourage people to go low-flow without regulation. But if they want to regulate sensibly (6 lpm is too low) then I would have no objections.
Petrol wastage? I was thinking of motor sports & being slightly tongue in cheek – regulating car size would have no effect.
Russell, you don’t mind if I call you Russell after each abusive flourish from you? Happy to use your surname if you like too.
Please feel free to leave me the fuck alone.
Peh, coward indeed. Let’s use real names.
Andrew llewellyn
October 10th, 2008 at 10:23 am
But allow me to add that you’re a true moron Russell.
October 10th, 2008 at 10:37 am
“Please feel free to leave me the fuck alone.”
What’s up yellaback? Need a regulation to help you stay away from blogs??
October 10th, 2008 at 10:46 am
Honey Badger. I was initially responding to Toad – hence the references that you found “out of proportion” but as you chose to poke your nose in I can only assume you are a female so when I ask an example of doing business with China I meant a little more than buying ‘made in China’ underwear.
I anticipate you’ve never become entangled in either the Building or Resource Management Acts if you don’t think we are regulated in NZ
Cheers RB. You’re wasting your time with Honey Badger. She can’t differentiate between ‘financial incentives/disincentives’ as in China and ‘absolute bans’ – as in NZ
BTW HB – next time you copy from the internet it’s courtesy to put the link in http://www.newsgd.com/news/Guangdong1/200702270010.htm
October 10th, 2008 at 10:47 am
Got a problem? Oh yeah, that’s right, everything’s a problem to whiners like you. Get off your arse & achieve something rather than bleat about how the government treats you. Real men take responsibility for themselves.
You don’t want less government, you want one that panders to you.
October 10th, 2008 at 10:48 am
phhhhwssssshhhhslap!
(the sound of a bitchslap goin upside someones face)
October 10th, 2008 at 10:56 am
“You don’t want less government, you want one that panders to you.”
Hate yourself don’t you Yellaback? Always the same old obsessive behaviour, followed by the same old diversions when you are defeated. Stalker.
October 10th, 2008 at 11:00 am
Er…? Don’t you have better things to do than track me down every time I post something? Defeated? Insulted sure? But how exactly was I defeated? I don’t even think I said anything anyone with half a brain could take offense at.
October 10th, 2008 at 11:02 am
phhhhwssssshhhhslap!
What do you say about that then Rd? Huh?
October 10th, 2008 at 11:05 am
I don’t hate, Russell. Why does hate come to mind? BTW, keep up the insults Russell J, it’s a really fucking brilliant idea.
Andrew L
October 10th, 2008 at 11:06 am
I think next on the list is mandating what we can wear on certian days.
She’s just a deranged socialist who is scared at the loss of power so sees the need to try make as many last gasp changes she can before she’s out.
I think John Keys first act as PM should be to get HC sectioned under the mental health act to diagnose her condition, as I’m sure she has something wrong with her, no sane person gets as bad & vindictive as she is
October 10th, 2008 at 11:10 am
Its the menopause.
Apparently its very vicious in childless women
October 10th, 2008 at 12:13 pm
Have many of you measured the flow rate of your existing shower head to get some bearing on what 6 litres per minute even means? Or more importantly, read the actual amendments that are taking place? I admit I haven’t done the first, but I have done the second.
The aim is not to regulate water use, so having tank water is irrelevant. It’s about energy efficiency. The amendments are designed to encourage more energy efficient water heating, something that will save the user in terms of their power bill (assuming something is done about power companies charging households more for their power if they don’t use power-guzzling hot water cylinders). The rules are also different for small houses (3 bedrooms or less) and larger houses (more than 3 bedrooms or >150m2). Here’s how it’ll work.
3 Bedrooms or Less:
Water Heating (Flow Rate in litres per minute)
Electric (7.5)
Instant Gas (9.0)
Gas with Storage (6.0)
Solar (9.0)
Heat Pump (12.0)
More than 3 Bedrooms or >150m2:
Water Heating (Flow Rate in litres per minute)
Electric (6.0)
Instant Gas (7.5)
Gas with Storage (6.0)
Solar (7.5)
Heat Pump (12.0)
So, by designing your hot water system to include an energy efficient method such as a heat pump, you’ll be allowed an increase in water flow, up to 12 litres per minute which is more than most modern shower heads use, and you will save money on power.
It’s all very easy to cry “nanny state” when you hear “6 litres per minute”. I agree that 6 is much smaller than many other numbers. But until you understand what it all means, and what the real story actually is, I plead with you not to automatically react to every news story at face value.
Now that some of you are hopefully a little wiser about all this, by all means recommence your personal attacks and pointless left-vs-right bi-partisan head-butting that most online blogs, and politics in general, inevitably dissolve into.
October 10th, 2008 at 12:55 pm
Perhaps they could tag on another clause to the regulation:
“Effective immediately, if it’s yellow let it mellow, if it’s brown flush it down”
October 10th, 2008 at 1:41 pm
With a webcam in every bathroom to ensure compliance.
October 10th, 2008 at 2:07 pm
Llew, with Feiyu Zhou heading the compliance unit.
October 10th, 2008 at 2:14 pm
Nice… someone out there with experience for the job.
October 10th, 2008 at 3:26 pm
And wow – google went through the roof on R… J today. sorry guys, I fibbed about that.
October 10th, 2008 at 4:28 pm
Crikey, better empty those flowers my wife put in the old copper….they might come for our bath tubs & washing machines soon. Buy up on Lynx and put Lavender in your pockets boys, the times are gonna be high….phew! The fucken morons!!
October 11th, 2008 at 5:47 am
No way no how are the Greens getting 9% on 8 November.
October 11th, 2008 at 6:17 am
as someone said on another thread, the greens are a bull market luxury item like champagne, coke, caviar and russian hookers.
in a bear market one readjusts and cuts back to lion red, a spliff, gurnard, razzle and the nats
October 11th, 2008 at 8:54 am
OK if you don’t want to be responsible then lets take another tack … the less hot water you use the less it costs you to heat it up so you win with your pocket. Now that TV3 story on this subject with the young lady washing her hair …if she cannot do it with a 6l/min shower then there is a simple solution … get a hair style which suits the shower … it is what is known as adapting to one’s surroundings.
I have measured the amount of water I use to shower and for a short one it was about 20 litres, washing my short hair takes longer so usually the water reaches the top of my toes instead of about half way up ….I have a plug in my shub .. helps to keep my feet warm
I would ban traffic lights except at railway crossings, the more you have the less attention you pay to them, like all the flashing lights every Ton Dick and Harry have on their vehicles. Once upon a time it was just emergency vechiles that were allowed to display a flashing light. Much better are roundabouts and every problem with them comes down to in-ept drivers not knowing how to use them properly. I was in a group looking forward to the damm fool Dunedfin City Engineers planning to install traffic lights as a replacement to a roundabout … every argument for its replacement arose out of the plain incompetance of the average Dunedin driver … the small town mentaility …. like the farmer who does a u-turn in the main street of Waimucau without looking let alone using his indicators. Roundabout create even flow while trafficlights create the ’stop-go’ result.
While many of the ideas of the Greens are admirable their problem is they are extremists … to hell with the world so long as they get their way.