Many facilities are considering waterless urinals because they are regarded as an effective way to conserve water—making them a Green, environmentally preferable choice. Additionally, because water must be pumped by electricity, it is believed more than $100 per year/per urinal can be saved in utility costs by installing a waterless urinal, depending on the actual use of the fixture and local utility costs.
And because of these benefits, installing waterless urinals can help building managers and owners achieve credits toward Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification.
Before 1990, the average urinal in the United States used as much as four gallons of water per flush. Today, because of legislation and increased conservation measures, conventional urinals use about one to one and a half gallons of water when flushed. However, this is still a significant amount of water—as much as 35,000 gallons per year per urinal.
Moreover, this water usage can be quite detrimental in the country’s most drought-prone areas, such as California and other western states. The average office building in the United States uses 14,695 gallons of water per day.* Waterless urinals have the potential to significantly reduce this water usage and relieve the water supplies in these locations.
Not only can no-water urinals be environmentally responsible and help reduce water usage, but the cost to install and maintain them is also catching the eye of many facility managers.
“The initial installation is easy and relatively inexpensive because you need only a drain line instead of a water and a drain line,” says David Rose, an architect in Farmington MI. “You also don’t have to contend with additional plumbing, flush valves, sensors, and the like, which can be costly maintenance headaches.”
Some school districts have also found less vandalism and restroom property damage because there are no valves, handles, or visible plumbing for students to tamper with.
How They Work
A no-water urinal works the same way as a conventional urinal, except without the water. A traditional flush urinal fills into a U-trap below the urinal filled with a small amount of water that prevents odors and sewer gases from escaping.
Waterless urinals also have a trap or cylinder, but it sits atop the drain area of the urinal. The cylinder is filled with a thin layer of liquid or sealant. Urine passes through the trap and sealant, forming a barrier that prevents odors from escaping. It also helps to eliminate evaporation of the urine, which can harm indoor air quality.
Cleaning and Maintenance
Waterless urinals are cleaned the same way as conventional urinals. Some models are designed to facilitate cleaning because they have a smooth interior “skin” or surface than what is found on a conventional urinal. They also have no water disbursement rims, which prevents the buildup of mineral deposits on the urinal.
The urinal’s trap insert requires attention, and on some models, the liquid sealant can be replenished, prolonging the trap’s life span and effectiveness. But depending on use, it must eventually be changed. This change happens only about two to four times a year in most instances.
Potential Drawbacks
Waterless urinals do have benefits. They use no water, cost less to install, reduce utility costs, and vandalism. Furthermore, many facility managers also believe no-water urinals are more sanitary because germs tend to multiply in damp conditions but die in dry conditions. Additionally, these urinals do not have to be “touched” by the user, decreasing the possibility of transferring germs and bacteria.
However, there are some drawbacks when switching to a no-water system. For instance, the cylinders used in waterless urinals can be pretty expensive on certain no-flush models and may need to be changed more frequently than initially thought. This may prove to be costly and eliminate any economic savings a facility hoped to attain.
Additionally, some facilities with few urinals, low water usage, or low sewer or water costs may not benefit by installing waterless urinals—especially if existing conventional urinals are still helpful.
Still, the economics are favorable from the beginning because no-water urinals are less expensive to install and maintain compared to conventional ones. “Overall, waterless urinals are an efficient and economical alternative to traditional urinals,” contends Rose.
Klaus Reichardt is Managing Partner of Waterless No-Flush Urinals, Vista, CA. His company has been manufacturing waterless urinals since 1989.
*Southwest Florida Water Management District
