The principles discussed in the previous papers [23, 28] and [48] can be used to estimate the water consumption in a residential building. On this basis, it is also possible to estimate the water savings, resulting from the use of taps with coefficients of efficiency in accordance with Table 2. The results of water consumption calculations for different faucets and taps are presented in Tables 3 and 4.
Table 3 Water consumption of different faucets and taps determined by the water efficiency calculator used for new dwellings—model 1 [23]
Table 4 Water consumption of different faucets determined on the basis of the benchmarks for estimating residential end-uses of water—model 2 [48]
In the calculations, the following basic sanitary appliances designed for a typical household were used: a washbasin mixer (tap) for basic sanitary activities, a shower for bathing and a sink mixer (sink tap) used in the preparation of meals. The analyses focused on the above-mentioned groups of sanitary appliances because they are characterized by significant differences in the level of water consumption. In other household sanitary appliances such as toilet bowls, washing machines and dishwashers, the water flow rate depends mainly on their water capacity and technical and economic solutions.
As can be seen, depending on the assumed level of water efficiency rating, correspondingly lower values of water flow rate were observed. The analysed models are characterized by the identical tap water flow rates for different use factors per day.
The comparison of water consumption of these two models shows slight discrepancies. Model 2 calculation procedure results in higher average water consumption. Analysing the data of both models (Tables 3, 4) obtained for level 0, it is possible to have the impression that model 2 (129 l/person/day) shows very high level of accuracy with the guidelines for daily water consumption (125 l/person/day) (Table 1). However, it is worth noting that these data also take into account toilets that are flushed several times a day. Assuming a toilet water use ratio of 6–7 times per day and an average water flow rate per flush of ~ 3.4 l (for 1 large flush 6 l and for 6 small flushes 3 l), a water consumption of about 24 l/person/day can be obtained. Taking into account the flushing water used for the toilet in relation to the total water consumption, it is possible to obtain for the model 1 → ~ 126 l/person/day and for the model 2 → 154 l/person/day. Therefore, the model 1 will have a much better accuracy for level 0. The highest levels of water efficiency rating for both models are close to (slightly lower than) the 80 l/person/day from maximum water consumption guidelines (model 1 → ~ 46 + 24 l/person/day, model 2 → 48 + 24 l/person/day). The values obtained from the models for the different levels are sufficiently compatible with the actual water consumption in buildings. On the basis of reports of water consumption for 252 households, Beal et al. [15] found that the consumption for taps was 22.7–30.6 l/person/day and for showers 29.6–52.4 l/person/day. Willis et al. [14] reported that in 151 households 50% used less than 40 l/person/day of water for showering, 37% of households used between 41 and 80 l/person/day, 13% consumed on average more than 80 l/person/day in the shower. These studies did not specify the water efficiency rating for installation type.
The use of these models can be helpful in the design stage of new buildings. Estimation of water consumption at the preliminary design phase allows to apply the appropriate water-saving solutions (e.g. selection of faucets with high water efficiency rating). It should be emphasized that during the application of both models special attention should be given not only to the results of the calculations but also to the total water consumption in the household.
Based on the results obtained from two different water consumption models (Tables 3, 4) and (Fig. 1a, b), it can be concluded that the assumption of specific efficiency levels 1–3 for individual faucets allows for significant savings in water consumption in households.
As can be seen in Fig. 1, depending on selection of the model, different percentages of water savings have been achieved. The differences are in the range of 5–8%. This was caused by different results obtained from the models (Tables 3, 4) of the total water consumption. Furthermore, it should be noted that in the above considerations 100% of the value refers to the total water consumption for level 0, which is the model 1 → ~ 102 l/person/day and for the model 2 → 129 l/person/day, respectively. This gives the incorrect assumption that the model 2 has the highest level of savings despite the use of the same mixing valves. A quantifiable assessment of the effect of using faucets with a higher water efficiency rating should be carried out in conjunction with an in-depth analysis of previously developed data (Tables 3, 4).
A lot of manufacturers of sanitary appliances inform the customers about the efficiency of faucets providing incomplete data concerning the water flow. In practice, the value of water consumption reduction rates for which a percentage savings are determined is never completely clear. Sometimes, this percentage is determined on the basis of assumed value of the reduced water flow rate from a single tap with reference also to the assumed maximum value.
In conclusion, it should be noted that these two models are characterized by a clearly visible reduction in water flow rate in relation to level 0. Depending on the faucets and taps used, it is therefore possible to achieve water savings of more than 50%.
The next step of the analysis is to determine the energy demand on the basis of the data from the developed models (for water heating and pumping purposes, i.e. supply to customers).
The energy consumption (in kWh) of the showers, internal taps and baths is calculated using Eq. (1) [26]:
$$E = \frac{{m \cdot c_{\text{w}} \cdot\Delta T}}{{3.6 \cdot 10^{6} \cdot \eta }}$$
(1)
where \(E\) energy requirement, kWh, \(m\) mass of the water used, kg, cw specific heat capacity of water, 4190 J/(kg K), \(\Delta T\) change in water temperature, K, \(\eta\) the efficiency of the heating system, dimensionless, the constant is a conversion factor from Joules to kWh.
For taps and faucets, it has been assumed that the ratio of domestic hot water to cold water is 1:1, i.e. its consumption will constitute 50% of cold water and 50% of hot water, respectively. The other components of equation were taken as follows: \(\Delta T = 50{\text{K}}\) (domestic hot-water preparation from 10 to 60 °C) and average efficiency of the heating system \(\eta = 0.7\) according to [49]. Then, the energy requirements of the pumps should be analysed.
The following equation is used for this purpose:
$$E_{\text{p}} = \frac{m \cdot g \cdot H}{{10^{3} \eta_{\text{p}} }} \cdot \tau$$
(2)
where \(m\) mass of the pumped water, kg, \(g\) acceleration due to gravity, m/s2, \(H\) head (the hydraulic energy of water in metres), m, \(\tau\) time of pump operation per day, h, \(\eta_{\text{p}}\) the efficiency of the pumping system, dimensionless.
The following assumptions are made in Eq. (2):
-
hydraulic energy of water in metres equal to \(H = 1{\text{m}}\),
-
efficiency of the pumping system \(\eta_{\text{p}} = 0.8\) [50],
-
time of pump operation per day \(\tau =\) 20 h.
Properly selected pumping system should operate within the range of high efficiency. Pumps in multi-family buildings operate at different performances depending mainly on the pressure and required water flow rate. For this reason, the average efficiency of the pumping system available in the literature \(\left( {\eta_{\text{p}} = 0.8} \right)\) has been used to calculate the energy demand [50].
Both Eqs. (1) and (2) were supplemented with the data from the two models (Tables 3, 4). The results of energy consumption per person are shown in the charts (Fig. 2a, b).
As can be seen (Fig. 2), the use of high-level taps and faucets results in significant energy savings both for domestic hot-water preparation (Fig. 2a) and pumping water to consumers (Fig. 2b). Particular attention should also be paid to the fact that the energy consumption of both models is almost the same in the case of level 3 of water efficiency rating. This is mainly due to the fact that in this case, these two models have similar water demand data: model 1 \(\left( {46.24\,{{\text{l}} \mathord{\left/ {\vphantom {{\text{l}} {\left( {{\text{person}}\,{\text{day}}} \right)}}} \right. \kern-0pt} {\left( {{\text{person}}\,{\text{day}}} \right)}}} \right)\) and model 2 \(\left( {48\,{{\text{l}} \mathord{\left/ {\vphantom {{\text{l}} {\left( {{\text{person}}\,{\text{day}}} \right)}}} \right. \kern-0pt} {\left( {{\text{person}}\,{\text{day}}} \right)}}} \right)\).
The highest energy demand for hot-water preparation and water pumping is at level 0. The reason for this is the highest water flow rate for the two analysed models. In addition, there are also significant differences in the results of the models due to different values of total water consumption. This confirms that similar results are achieved as the level of water efficiency rating increases. The energy demand for hot-water preparation obtained from the analysed models is comparable to the demand reported by Fidar et al. [26].
In summary, it is worth noting that the issue of saving water in households facilitates the implementation of modern technologies introduced by manufacturers of sanitary appliances and faucets. The problem is that there is currently no unification of technologies reducing water consumption and assigning to them precise indicators or efficiency rating classes. The technical solutions mentioned in this paper are mainly based on the reduction in the water flow rate directly before the draw-off point. It is worth noting that the authors of this paper only consider single-handle faucets. As a continuation of the research, it would be useful to make similar analyses based on the application of modern solutions for households and public sanitary fittings in commercial, service and industrial buildings. A good example may be the application of thermostatic mixer faucets for showers. The replacement of traditional shower heads with modern overhead showers characterized by different modes of economic operation can also bring measurable profits. Similarly, automatic flow regulators that react to changes in water pressure reduce the water flow rates to approximately 4 l/min. The same procedure should be used when analysing the equipment of washbasins with special mixers with electronic control that reacts to the appearance of hands. It is worth noting that time, non-contact (electronic) and thermostatic systems can be used in all types of faucets. All the above-mentioned solutions can be implemented without restrictions in newly designed buildings or during the modernization of existing buildings. In addition, consideration should be given to using leak detection devices which have a water shut-off function and also notify the user of any leakage. It is very important because such failures, in addition to generating damage, also cause the irretrievable loss of significant amounts of water. Moreover, water consumption monitoring devices should be equipped with motion sensors, which in cooperation with electromagnetic valves control the flow rate of water, eliminating leaks and leakages. Attempts to implement such solutions should ideally be made at the design or early construction stage. This will allow for the proper installation of monitoring equipment in the piping system.
The above proposals for the study of water use are important in view of the constantly diminishing water resources and for this reason should be in focus of further research.