Hacker News Reader

Comment by mc32 | Hacker News Reader

One place you still need heat is the shower. Maybe some people are okay with taking a shower in 45F ambient temps, but I would resist it.

View on HN

One thing that's kind of silly about most of our shower stall designs is their open-top design. While a few are sold with caps most are not. Having a cap on top of the shower allows for lower ambient temperatures in the bathroom while showering in (relative) comfort. This also has the benefit of reducing condensation on the ceiling and walls of the bathroom.

Yeah I never got why this is the standard. Glad I’m not the only one

Probably because moisture is a much bigger problem in homes than heat or cold. If the shower stall were closed on top, when the door was closed, the moisture would sit in the shower and not evaporate. That can lead to mold problems.

It's much easier to deal with moisture when it's largely restricted to the interior of the shower! Easy to wipe down the sides and then leave the door open to allow the remaining moisture to evaporate. Seems superior to having the water vapours condensing on ceilings and walls in the bathroom that likely can't be wiped down.

You can also just have a small shower room, with a separate door, it's about equivalent. You see this in many houses where the sink vs shower & toliet are two separate 'rooms' connected to each other.

Do you mean water or air temps? I would hate a shower in 45F water, but a shower in hot water in 45F temps would be fine.

You’d be surprised how quickly you can get used to cold showers. I’ve been only cold showering for about 5 years now

How cold is cold?

When our gas went out in the summer, taking a 'cold' shower was bearable, some days even enjoyable.

In the freezing winter? Tried it once, never again. I'm not even sure it would be safe to shower in water that cold for any long periods of time.

I'm not personally advocating for this, but some argue for water conservation by taking a https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navy_shower which involves only about 2 minutes of time in the water.

>A Navy shower (also known as a "combat shower", "military shower", "sea shower", "staggered shower", or "G.I. bath") is a method of showering that allows for significant conservation of water and energy by turning off the flow of water in the middle portion of the shower while lathering.

Hold up - do you mean to tell me that people do not turn off the water while lathering? I've showered this way all my life, is this not the norm?

Often with combi boilers, if you turn off the water it takes a solid 30s to a minute for the water to come up to temperature again, sometimes longer if you account for the water in the pipes and the thermostat reaching equilibrium.

Obviously newer/better boilers come up to temperature quicker but you don't always have the luxury of choosing your boiler.

I came up with this method a few years ago and have used it ever since. I’ve never looked back; I’m no less comfortable now than before, and I enjoy using less energy even though my hot water use is included in the rent.

I’ve had little luck converting friends and family to it, though.

Honestly in the time it'd take to turn it off and on I could basically finish 'lathering', I don't belabour it or find particular pleasure in prolonged showers.

I can understand it for people that like a long shower, maybe.. except that surely it's the water they enjoy rather than just the process, so being there with it off wouldn't be any fun?

I think it’s a cultural and technical thing. But still, it’s weird hearing that people leave the water on and this “navy” shower isn’t the norm. Perks of growing up in a communist country, with constant outages.

Why would you ever do that in a developed country? You'd be saving like 3 cents per shower or less.

It's not a question of economics, it's about not purposefully wasting resources.

Perhaps you'll be surprised to hear that I also turn off the lights in rooms that I am not in, or that I don't keep cars running when I'm not using them to move around.

Counter-question: why would you ever keep the water running when you're not utilizing the water?

Because when you turn the water off it's cold. I would rather pay 1.5 cents to remain warm while I lather. If the resource was actually scarce, it wouldn't cost so little to use it.

The controls to get back to your proper temperature after a shutoff are unreliable. What you need is a shutoff valve on the shower head itself, so the temperature stays the same, which is not common on many showers unless they are using the navy shower head too. It's mostly a UI issue.

After you do it if or a while, your definition of cold changes. First it was cold during the summer, now in the summer the water doesn't feel cold at all. For me to really feel cold water (after years of doing this), it has to be well before freezing outside and even then I can be standing under this water for minutes at a time.

I love these ideas both just for the joy of tinkering (which many on HN will understand), to experiment with saving resources, and to actually save a little:

In the summer I take cold and cool showers. It struck me that it's a bit insane to consume energy cooling my home, and then using hot water to heat myself up again. Just leave home a little warmer and the cool shower feels great - less AC, less water heating, and happier results.

Also, I took a trip to a poorer country where people, lacking plumbing, bathed using buckets and a big cup. I tried it and it worked fine[0] - almost no drawback at all, just a different habit. I need far less water to shower than I imagined and if I can, turn the water on and off as I shower. Unfortunately, it requires a shower control that is one lever that retains its heat setting; resetting the temperature every time is too cumbersome.

[0] To be clear, I am not at all implying that those people shouldn't have plumbing (they should) or that I was trying to experience poverty in any way (a ridiculous notion, considering where I came from and where I was returning to). I just saw that it worked fine and tried it.

I'd recommend the sauna as an alternative... I'm really interested in the homestead movement and one thing thats promoted is the rocket stove, I've often wondered how such a design might work out if you used it for cooking while using the residual heat for a hot "sauna" wall in the next room...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com