Washington Post Wants You To Use Cold Water To Save The Planet

The interesting part is that “reporter” Allyson Chiu fails to mention whether she’s fully switched from not using hot water, nor is it mentioned whether the WP has turned off hot water at their office

Why you should embrace using cold water, almost all the time

You may not be giving a second thought to setting your washing machine on the hot cycle, cranking your showers to a steamy temperature or scrubbing your dirty dishes under a stream of scalding water.

No, I really don’t. I actually do most of the laundry in cold water, and use the appropriate detergent. Though, if I am doing a big load of whites I might do it in hot. I don’t mind saving some energy, and making sure I have hot water for other things. But, not to “reduce emissions.”

If you did, you’d find that you probably don’t need to use so much hot water — and that you could be saving energy and cutting your utility bills. Water heating is responsible for more than 10 percent of both annual residential energy use and consumer utility costs, the biggest share after air conditioning and heating, according to the Energy Department. An American household uses an average of 64 gallons of hot water a day — close to the amount needed to fill an average bathtub — by doing laundry, showering, washing the dishes and running kitchen and bathroom faucets. (snip)

By washing four out of five loads of laundry in cold water, you could cut 864 pounds of CO2 emissions in a year, an amount equivalent to planting 0.37 acres of U.S. forest, according to the American Cleaning Institute.

Piss off. Mind your own business.

Showering accounts for roughly 17 percent of the water Americans use in their homes, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. Your steamy showers also consume energy: Nearly half of a home’s hot water is used for bathing. A cold shower uses less energy than a hot one.

Why do these people feel the need to nag? Is Allyson doing this?

You should also rethink washing your hands with hot or warm water for the same reason, she added.

Washing up with cooler water could also have additional benefits for your skin, according to dermatologists.

Yet, doctors recommend you wash with hot water. Anyhow, this is the kind of “news” you get these days, with “reporters” who never leave the office (or their apartments), never cultivate leads, never ask tough questions of politicians and bureaucrats.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

12 Responses to “Washington Post Wants You To Use Cold Water To Save The Planet”

  1. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    Yes. Every American has the right to spend as much unnecessarily as they desire. In addition, they have the right, nay the obligation, to complain and whine loudly about how much money you’re spending!

    The article recommends one use less hot water.

    Piss off! Shouts William Teach. Go fuck yourselves for suggesting I use less hot water!! But why so angry about a suggestion?

    LOL. https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_wacko.gif

    • drowningpuppies says:

      Why so interested in being a Karen?

    • James Lewis says:

      Chicken Little Karen Man

      But why so angry about a suggestion?

      Because we’re tired of hearing every ^*(*7 thing tied to “global warming.”

      I never hear of mitigation… like, planting trees…. building sea walls… you know… DO SOMETHING AND QUIT WHINING LIKE A 5 YEAR OLD.

  2. Professor Hale says:

    Is that the same Washington Post still printing “news” on paper with ink by using massive electric printing presses? Don’t those papers fill up landfills, get dropped in city streets and get blown into the waterways? If only someone could invent a more economical and ecological way to distribute words. But then the ecologically conscious Washington post would be demanding we all use it and they would stop wasting energy on newsprint and diesel trucks to distribute it.

  3. Jl says:

    The prophetic William F. Buckley Jr. said years ago “A liberal is someone determined to reach into your shower and adjust the water temperature for you”.

    • Dana says:

      The source for that quote.

    • Elwood P. Dowd says:

      While not as significant as Buckley’s shower fantasies…

      The modern conservative is engaged in one of man’s oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. -John Kenneth Galbraith

  4. Dana says:

    By washing four out of five loads of laundry in cold water, you could cut 864 pounds of CO2 emissions in a year, an amount equivalent to planting 0.37 acres of U.S. forest, according to the American Cleaning Institute.

    Our hot water is generated by burning propane! https://www.thepiratescove.us/wp-content/plugins/wp-monalisa/icons/wpml_yahoo.gif

    I love my hot showers. But we’ve also planted trees, so I guess we’re all good.

    • Elwood P. Dowd says:

      We had to remove our giant mulberry tree this past year…

      C3H8 + 5O2 –> 3CO2 + 4H2O

      Burning 1 kg of propane emits 3 kg of CO2

      CO2, May 14, 2024 = 427.85 ppm

      March 2024: +2.99°F relative to 1880-1920

  5. Professor Hale says:

    My house is primarily heated by clean electricity (from the coal power plant not far from here), but I shift over to burning wood whenever I feel like it. The world needs MORE CO2 release, not less. Save the Earth, burn something. I laugh every time I see some yokel from Alexandria driving a Tesla thinking he is saving the planet by burning all that coal to charge his car.

    • Dana says:

      The Professor amuses us:

      My house is primarily heated by clean electricity (from the coal power plant not far from here), but I shift over to burning wood whenever I feel like it.

      And if you bought a plug-in Chevy Dolt, it too would use clean electricit6y from the coal burning power plant, but it would make Mr H happy.

      The closest power generation facility to me is actually a small hydroelectric, but electrons are electrons; who can say from which generating facility the sparktricity powering my computer and internet systems comes? I did, however, use an induction kettle to heat the water for the noodles I’m eating for lunch, rather than using a tea kettle on the propane powered range, so there’s that.

      The left want us to believe that there’s some magic, zero-polluting, zero-emissions society we can have that will still leave us all living first world lives, and perhaps there is . . . many decades from now. They are, however, pushing things for which the technology itself is still in its childhood, the generating capacity does not exist, and the distribution grid for it is very much insufficient. Perhaps these things can all be developed and built in the future, but there is an unjustifiable rush to Do Something Now.

  6. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    With out little house, new windows/doors and insulation our energy bills are very low. And as retirees we drive very little.

    Mr Dana writes of an unjustifiable rush, but that’s his opinion. We have been kicking this can down the road for decades. The objective is to reduce CO2 emissions primarily by switching electricity generation to renewables and nucular and reducing ICE transportation.

    It’s likely all too little anyway, although both the US and Europe have actually reduced emissions while maintaining the best economies evuh.

    We note that President Biden has enacted Trump-type tariffs on imported Chinese EVs, chips and various and sundry other items. Of course, Mr Biden understands how tariffs work.

    President Biden on Tuesday quadrupled tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles to 100 percent and imposed new levies on computer chips, solar cells and lithium-ion batteries in a bid to prevent a flood of low-cost Chinese products from swamping his hopes of reviving domestic manufacturing.

    Tuesday’s actions effectively made Chinese clean energy products much more expensive for American customers. But without tariff protection, domestic manufacturers would be unable to compete, leaving the United States dependent upon China for the bulk of what’s needed to transition to a low-carbon economy, administration officials said.

    To some analysts, the president’s tariff policy conflicts with his environmental goals. “If the Chinese government wants to subsidize American consumption of EVs, the best response is to welcome that foreign aid,” said Scott Lincicome, a trade specialist with the ( ed. Libertarian) Cato Institute. “If climate change is an existential crisis, as the Biden administration says, that should be the No. 1 priority.”

Pirate's Cove