Shower guilt? WaterPik EcoFlow can help!

Melissa, taking a turn at the GLR wheel today...

For those of you out there virtuous enough to blast your way through a three-to-five minute shower, or able to successfully convert yourself to Navy showers, feel free to go check your Facebook page or e-mail now. You have my admiration. But if you, like me, suffer severe shower guilt due to overconsumption, read on!

I'm a Pisces, so water is my element. Maybe that's why I've been fretting for years about how I can cut back on my wasteful showers, which have been too long and also wasted way too much on the front end, warming up the water before getting in. (I know I could put a bucket in the shower to catch that water, and I will probably do it this summer for garden-watering, but I haven't been ready to face off with my husband about this one yet!)

But thanks to an afternoon's lazy aisle-scanning at Home Depot last week, I have found what I think is a pretty satisfying solution: The WaterPik EcoFlow.

This is not the bare-bones aerator you might be picturing, but a five-setting handheld sprayer that makes showering with less water a pleasure. In fact, I don't even feel like we're cutting down -- the spray is so well-diffused that it feels like we're getting as much as -- if not more than -- our old water-hogging showerhead. The five settings (controlled with a dial on the head) include a kind of standard shower spray, a harder spray, a pulsating spray, a concentrated mist and a diffuse mist.

But my favorite favorite feature (and the one that sold me on this showerhead) allows you to slide a kind of switch to one side and cut the waterflow down to just enough to keep you warm while you lather or shave. I also use this feature while I'm warming up the shower (Yay! Big chunk of guilt, melted away.).

I don't know all the details on flow rate comparisons, but I did see on the WaterPik site that EcoFlow uses 1.5 gallons per minute. Also according to WaterPik, "by law, all shower heads sold in the United States must use no more than 2.5 gallons of water per minute," so dropping another full gpm seems like a pretty solid reduction. And I'd bet my old shower head predated whatever law they're talking about, so we could probably save even more. Win, win, win!

I am sure there must be cheaper products that reduce your water usage (like the above-mentioned basic aerators), but I don't feel like I was taken to the cleaners. I paid about $45, but saw something similar in a pricey catalog a year or so ago for closer to $70.

I had a few moments where I hesitated about buying a new showerhead, figuring my husband might rupture something if I made a change "for the sake of making a change," as he sometimes sees it. But I got past that, installed it myself (super easy -- took about 5 minutes and the only tool involved, they provide), tested it on my own arm first and held onto the receipt, just in case.

I did decide to tell him about it rather than sneaking it in on him (which has not been a good choice, historically), and fortunately, he was merely impressed that I installed it myself (men!). And when he used it, he said his shower was fine and even felt a little harder than with our old showerhead (a surprising admission, since he chose that one several years back).

So for all you shower hogs out there not ready to sacrifice warm water and reasonable pressure (you know who you are), but tired of feeling like an environmental dirtbag, the WaterPik EcoFlow may just be the answer! And I'm awarding it four green leaves for now...personally, I'd give it five, but who knows? There could be an even better one out there somewhere!

Save Me A Seed Dude!

What might happen to all of the plants in the world if the global temperature continues to rise? The Millennium Seed Bank Project (MSBP) is hoping to avoid finding out by starting a collective for seeds of all species.

Are you now asking two questions -- what is the MSBP and how can I help? Well read on for answers to both questions!

Based on the definition explained to us on the MSBP Wikipedia page:

“The Millennium Seed Bank Project is an international conservation project coordinated by the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew. Launched in the year 2000 and housed in the Wellcome Trust Millennium Building situated in the grounds of Wakehurst Place West Sussex, its purpose is to provide an "insurance policy" against the extinction of plants in the wild by storing seeds for future use. The storage facilities consist of large underground frozen vaults preserving the world's largest collection of seeds.”

With the rising global temperature many species are experiencing the beginning effects of possible extinction and this is where the MSBP comes in by goaling to store up to 10% of all wild plant species seeds by the end of 2010. But they are in trouble because the financial status of the entire world is in such turmoil and they are no longer gaining the steady donations they once were. Many environmentalists are wondering if it is because not enough people have heard of the MSBP and one group in particular is really doing their part to spread the word.

SuperForest, which some of you already read (a link to which is over on the right side bar), is a lovely organization and they have conceived of a fantastic way to help. By sharing information about their Save-A-Seed coalition among fellow bloggers, they are hoping to not only raise awareness but donations to support a single seed.

Here’s the seedy low down. Get it? Seedy. Yeah, luckily I crack myself up.

The cost to ensure one seed will survive is approximately $3,000 USD. SuperForest has a PayPal donation button right on their page where donations can be made for the cause. They have already collected over $1,000 but help is still needed for the additional $2,000. SuperForest is asking for that help in any way possible either through donations or simply spreading the word amongst the blogosphere so others who may not have heard of the cause can do their part to keep the information readily available.

Please consider linking back to this blog post on your own blogs to keep the information flowing, checking out SuperForest and linking back to them as well and/or donating even a few charitable dollars to the cause through the donation link. Together we will ensure the survival of the MSBP and protect up to 25% of the world’s plant population by the year 2020.

The Answers Are In

Here in Massachusetts we had three publicized questions which were binding (meaning it will go into law) and a forth in only eleven districts which was non-binding (meaning people would be generally expressing to their legislation what they want to see happen). All of the questions were serious points to consider and the non-binding question was one available in my district; I was happy to fill in the black blob for all four this time around.

Question 1 was to reduce personal income tax (currently at 5%) to 2.65% as of the first of next year and then eliminate it completely by the first of 2010. A yes vote for this question would cut state revenues by more than forty percent of the total state budget surely reducing aid, education funding, safety and potentially other programs -- as reported by those against. Those for indicated that there is waste of over 40% in Massachusetts already, that each of the 3.4 million residents would gain $3,700 annually (upon complete elimination) and no services would be cut.

Since it was not accurately expressed exactly what would be cut if the income tax was eliminated, and I did not want to take the chance that someone like my Aunt who works for the Parks Department would lose her job due to the reduction of alleged waste, I happily voted NO.

69% of the state agreed.

Question 2 (I am showing only the basis for those over eighteen in my summary) was a proposal to replace criminal penalty for those possessing an ounce or less of marijuana, keeping it off a criminal record (will not show up on background check) and make it a civil crime resulting in a $100 fine and relinquishment of the substance. Those in favor estimate that $30 million and 7,500 arrests could be saved and spared annually, freeing up police to pursue more serious crime. Those against insist it would encourage use of marijuana and send a lackadaisical message about selling to drug dealers.

For those who are unaware of my stance on this issue, I fervently voted YES.

65% of the state concurred.

Question 3 would ban dog racing, meeting and wagering on those races across the state and anyone in violation would be subject to payment of no less than a $20,000 civil fine. Those in favor indicate the inhumane treatment of the animals both while racing (living in confinement, injuries and positive testing for drugs such as cocaine) and after their career has come to an end (potential cardiac arrest, paralysis and broken legs). Those opposed note the over 1,000 jobs that would be lost as a result of shutting down an institution that has been in place for over seventy years as well as revenue for the two towns where this type of racing still exists.

Although I do agree that revenue and job loss for anyone is a blow, I had to vote from the heart on this one. I do not support racing of any animals and happily voted YES.

56% of Massachusetts was ready for change tonight as well.

Question 4 would instruct legislation to vote in favor of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by the year 2020 and begin working to eliminate tax incentive for projects which drain on energy resources while simultaneously expanding efforts to increase green job creation, conservation and sustainable agriculture efforts.

Although all of the precincts have not yet reported on this question as of the time of my writing I am happy to report that all precincts in my district have and we are all in unison saying YES! For the other districts not yet in but some votes tallied it is looking as if this measure will get a yes vote almost all the way across the board.

Go Green! Go hope! Go positive vibes!