greenguru.org

Ms. Carter,

While I applaud your commitment, efforts and accomplishments to date, the information regarding rainwater collection in your latest article is, in my opinion, misleading and too simplistic. On the surface, collecting rain sounds simple. My personal and professional experience proves otherwise.

I have designed and built several small to very large utility grade rainwater collection systems for clients as well as my own, so all of this is based on real-world experience and a track record of 12+ years.

My family and I have lived here in the Wimberley area since June 1994. We made the commitment to live 100% on rainwater and never intended to install a well. Having had a well at our previous house, it looked like a potentially dry $10,000 hole in the ground. We were a family of 3 when we moved here, now we are 4. We started out with a 25,000-gallon cistern and 2800 sf of collection area. We live conservatively - 25 - 30 GPD / person (indoor use) and have had all of the water saving strategies in place you mentioned since the beginning. I've even experimented with gray water recycling as part of an integrated approach. This system was adequate for indoor needs ONLY for the first few years.

Irrigation water supply has always been an issue and has been hauled in on a regular basis, especially during the summer. Fortunately, I have a truck, equipment and access to water necessary to do this easily myself. Lets face it, when you live on acreage in the country; you want to have a sizable garden.

Since I've been involved in rainwater collection, the truth about system size is more often than not oversimplified at best and blatantly ignored at worst. And this does not address the quality of the installations. I've seen some real junk systems.

Our system became inadequate shortly after we became 4 in 2000 and I have had to haul water in regularly ever since. Currently, due to the latest drought, I am hauling 1500 gallons a week just to maintain our cistern at a minimum level, until it starts raining again.

This will all change in the near future. We have installed another 30,000-gallon cistern and are building more collection area in the form of a shop / studio building, plus we will be expanding our house over the next few years. This should solve the water supply problems to a great extent. I still expect to haul water in, just not as much. If you want to have any kind of useable garden in this area, it takes a lot of water.

The reality is that in order to live independently on rainwater in this area, you need enormous storage, collection area and proper system design to maintain a safe, sustainable water supply. You also need to have the commitment and technical capability to act as your own water utility company to maintain the system. This includes either having the capability to haul water in or being able to hire someone to do it for you. And, there are many issues regarding system design and configuration for long-term safety and reliability that need to be addressed.

Another alternative is to have a well AND a smaller rainwater system. Or, design the system to be expanded over time.

None of this is cheap either, which underscores the fact that water in this part of the world is neither inexpensive nor easy, no matter which direction you go. Honestly, I spend more time talking people out of doing this because they simply cannot afford to design and build a proper system that will function to serve their needs in the long term.

Feel free to contact me if you'd like to discuss this further. I'd be happy to share my experience in the interest of accuracy.

Matt Bachardy, Assoc. AIA

Mr. Bachardy,

Though I appreciate your comments, in the interest of accuracy I would like to say that my article in no way assumed that a "conserving family" would be irrigating a garden in Texas in the summer with only their roof for collection. That is simply not sustainable unless they have an enormous house. I am sorry your system is not working for you, but in my articles I speak only from my real-world experience and research. We have had an easy time of it as a family of three living in a house with water saving appliances. Maybe we called the right guy to do our system, I don't know.

Even though we only had half of the average rainfall, we only needed to have 6000 gallons delivered this past year, which only cost us $450. I know that ordering water for us will not be necessary again if we get the average rainfall per year. I cannot see why a family of 4, if they are conserving, could not be adequately supplied by your system.

I would look at decreasing your garden water usage by using greywater and building a sizeable rain barn or adding on, as you said. Also try shade cloth over your garden if it is in direct sun, it keeps the temperature of the soil and plants down and thus holds moisture in. Many people in this area are doing this to save water.

I truly feel that as an architect in Texas with your influence, it is irresponsible to discourage people from going with rainwater collection. Even if it is only to suppliment their current usage, it would be a step in the right direction. Without conserving and collecting water, Texas may become a place that cannot sustain its population. Many architects have happily taken on the task of teaching and facilitating evironmental stewardship, they feel that it is their responsibility as designers and planners to do so. The rivers, creeks, springs and even wells in Wimberley are drying up because of increased well drilling and water consumption. I beleive that planning new developments that fail to address these issues is a disservice.

As for your comments on the expense of rainwater collection I can only report that in our experience it has saved us money. First of all, a well would have cost us about $8000. Then a pump and water softener would have been another $1000, not to mention the constant maintenance. Then in order to drink the water we would have needed an RO system (which wastes about 2 gallons of every 3)and would have cost us about $600. The electricity needed to pump the water up hundreds of feet is an expense, and you don't even know how long it will be before it goes dry.

Our rainwater system cost us about $10,000, but has cost us only $30/yr. in filters to maintain. And with the property tax credit we will save $400.00 a year for as long as we have the system. That alone will pay for the system in 25 years. I do appreciate your comments and like to have as many success, as well as failure, stories on the site, they are something everyone can learn from.

In my opinion, there is no reason not to collect rainwater, it is good for the environment, good for your pocketbook and good for your soul.

Heather Carter, greenguru.org

I have a piece of land outside of Wimberley that I going to build small cottage on (1,200 sq. ft) for a vacation home. I'd like to use a rainwater system. I would assume a 2,500 gallon cistern would be adequate since we will only be there 30-40 days a year. Is there any harm if the water sits there for weeks or maybe months with usage?

Our family of 3 uses about 3000 gallons a month, so as long as you don't have a bunch of people coming to stay and it's not for a whole month 2500 gallons should be enough. To be safe I would recommend 5000, in case you have company. You can start with 1 2500 gallon tank and always add more later if needed. As for your water sitting in the tank, I wouldn't worry if you have a 3 part filter system that has a UV light in it. We have one of these filters and it is great. It will get rid of any bacteria or algae. However I would recommend that if you will be gone for long periods of time to turn off the UV light so that it doesn't burn out. The expert on these pumps is James Riley from Rainsavers in Wimberley, he can help you and explain it all very well. Also Tank Town in Dripping has the know-how to set you up too. Also set the tanks out of direct sun and this will keep the water cool and keep the plastic from leaching out into the water. I hope this helps you. Let me know if there is anything else I can do.
Heather Carter, greenguru.org

First, we want to both congratulate and thank you for your efforts on your column and website. We live near Wimberley in a reasonably green home and we use rainwater for all of our water needs.

Since Matt Bachardy designed our passive solar home and encouraged us to go with a rainwater system in 2001, we are surprised to learn of his current negative attitude toward rainwater collection, especially since he suggests no viable alternative. With all due respect to Matt, we have never been sorry that we chose to go with rainwater for all of our water needs, and believe that it is imperative that more people choose to go this way.

During 2 ½ years in this house, we purchased water only at the very beginning, to get us going until we got some rain. Because of the period of extremely low rainfall that started last summer, by mid-March we thought we might have to purchase water, so were very pleased when we got a 1.65” rain on March 20th. Since then, even our below-average rainfall has brought our reserves up to where we now have enough to last through November without having to resort to heroic conservation measures. Most of our water conservation is accomplished through water-efficient appliances and fixtures, and just not being wasteful. We do not use water for irrigation.

Basically, designing an adequate collection and storage system is a matter of arithmetic and budget. While you could design a system that would provide for irrigation and much worse droughts than we’ve ever had in Texas, at some point it makes more economic sense to plan to buy water if and when such an unlikely event occurs. If a drought is so severe that rainwater does run low, it is likely that wells will be drying up too, as has been happening this year. A rainwater system provides a place to store purchased water.

A good rainwater harvesting system is not cheap, but neither is a well, particularly in the long-term in central Texas as wells dry up and must be re-drilled deeper. Over time the tax exemption for the system will offset its cost, while the taxation on the value of a well will continuously add to its cost. We’re also lucky to have knowledgeable, reasonably priced rainwater system vendors in our area in James Riley with Rainsavers in Wimberley and Richard Heinichen with Tank Town in Dripping Springs.

When you go with rainwater collection you do have to make a commitment to monitoring and maintaining the system, but that is not an overwhelming chore. The quality of the water is well worth the investment of time.

Personally, we believe that rainwater offers the only viable alternative for a long-term, reliable water source in central Texas. We also feel that the money spent on our rainwater collection system is an investment in our environment that we are glad to make.

Hello Ms. Green Guru,

I forgot to check back to see your response to my last letter, got buried with work and before I knew it, several months passed!

First, let me say that I did not intend to cast a negative light on rainwater collection. I realize that sometimes a dose of reality can be perceived as negativity when you aren’t telling people what they want to hear. I am far from a negative opponent of rainwater collection. Quite the opposite, I’m as big of a proponent as you will find.

Make no mistake, I am not “negatively discouraging” people from implementing rainwater collection at their homes and businesses as implied in your response to my last letter. Rain collection in some form is always one of the first considerations in the programming of my projects. Whether it gets implemented or not depends on budget and the client’s values. It is always brought up for consideration early in the design process.

I am only interested in it being done correctly and REALISTICALLY for the long term. I apply this approach to ALL aspects of my projects. If I’m not going to be allowed to do things right, I question the reasoning behind doing it at all.

I am personally committed to it as my home’s sole source of water, or I would have taken the “easy way out” and drilled a well. I actually enjoy designing and building systems for others and personally – that is when I’m allowed to do it properly. In fact, I currently have 5 projects in development that the owners are firmly committed to incorporate independent rain collection systems in the project.

My enlightened clients are smart enough to be willing to compromise other parts of their project and pragmatically look at the long-term issues in order to accommodate the additional up-front costs of the rainwater system. The ones that will not budge on other parts of their budget or don’t have the right value-based priorities are the ones that get talked out of it. Those that value that new Hummer or are only interested in a “thin green veneer” for fashionable, trendy appearances aren’t good candidates. A good example of “Thin Green Veneer” would be a 5,000+ sq. ft. heated area home with every latest “green” feature, including rain collection thrown at it. Then there are those that simply do not have the up-front budget to build it right. I try to design for the future addition of a RWS on these projects if possible. I don’t waste time pushing or encouraging ideas or concepts that I know simply will not work within the budget.

If one wishes to live 100% on rainwater, there are certain realities that, more often than not, are not discussed. I think it is highly irresponsible to not educate people with real world information. I’ve lived with my system for over 12 years and have designed and built many others in the same time frame. It’s easy to get lost in simplistic “numbers” and the warm fuzzy “green” aspect and not pay attention to real scenarios. The nature of what I do - designing for the real world, worst-case scenario (within reason in relation to the project’s realities of budget and other constraints) is an integral part of my work. I am professionally obligated to use this approach for the structural and safety aspects of my projects so it a natural extension that I apply this strategy to the water system as well. If I were to inadequately design any aspect of my projects, not only will I have unhappy clients, I will have breached my professional responsibility to them.

With careful management, 2-3 people can live with a small system in the short-term, especially if there is little or no irrigation demand. My family did so for 6 years, until we became a family of four and wanted a small garden. We then had two other family members live with us for a year. The current drought condition did not help either. One cannot reasonably expect conditions to stay as perfect as they are early in a project’s life to last forever. There are always events that can happen over time that affect the performance of any system that seemed the “right size” by simple math calculations.

This is why I use 60 years of past rainfall data in a program that calculates collection area, storage capacity, number of persons and average use rates to determine system size with a generous reserve (30% based upon the worst case drought on record). Using real historical data, not guesswork, the storage, collection and use rate numbers can be manipulated to arrive at a realistic indicator of future performance I an effort to establish a realistic system size. A generous reserve designed into the system ensures a more long-term sustainable system, allows for guests and limited irrigation. Of course, hauling in water when needed is another viable, albeit unsustainable, operating parameter, as is planning for future expansion.

The property tax reduction scheme as currently implemented is a joke. I spoke with the Hays County tax appraisal office concerning this since I am expanding my system. They told me that the market value of the system is taken from the “Improvements” line item and a new “Exemption” line item is created. While the Hays County and Special Road District entities will honor the exemption, WISD and the others will not. WISD’s tax rate is the highest of all of them (of course).
The bottom line is that at best, it is a wash, at worst in actually INCREASES your property taxes. And, you have to make an application (along with the associated fee of approx. $100.00), meet all of the requirements of the county’s health department AND re-apply for the “exemption” on a yearly basis. All for a net zero gain or increase in your taxes. Until WISD gets on board with the exemption incentive, it’s not worth dealing with the process. While it is a step in the right direction that the County wants to promote rain collection, it is a complete waste of time and taxpayer money to support the bureaucracy needed. Making the statement that “the tax savings will pay for the system in 25 years” (assuming your system in constructed in a way that it will last 25 years in the first place) at this point, is pure misinformation.

How can it cost $30.00 a year to maintain a system, as you state, when the replacement lamp for a UV unit costs over $100.00 alone? Not to mention the particulate filters that need to be changed more than once a year. Again, I stress that with careful design and detailing, a well-done system will be easy and relatively inexpensive to maintain. However, it is unrealistic to say that it only costs $30.00 a year to maintain a system. Maybe if you don’t have a UV unit, which is not recommended if you want to stay healthy.

I experimented with grey water recycling for several years. At one point, I was reusing some of the water for toilet flushing in addition to limited ornamental irrigation and it worked well for a while. I abandoned most of the system required to treat the water to that quality level as too maintenence intensive. When I built it, there wasn’t any good information available on the best way to manage grey water, so I did a lot of experimentation using ideas that seemed to make sense. I made a few of mistakes along the way, mechanical complexity being one of them.

Grey water irrigation works only if you use the water right away and not store it, as it turns septic very quickly. You need a completely separate collection, filtration and distribution system in order to disperse it evenly in a reliable manner. In other words, a second water collection system and all of the associated equipment. Grey water should not be used in a vegetable garden. Fruit and nut trees are an exception. If you haven’t checked this out already here is a good place to go for good, realistic information on grey water recycling:

http://www.oasisdesign.net/greywater/index.htm

I have come to the conclusion that one is better off building more rainwater storage and only reusing grey water as simply and inexpensively as possible. Even a simple GW system takes careful planning and will require regular maintenance.

In conclusion:

1. In my opinion, a simplistic overview is a disservice to the entire issue and raises people’s expectations to an unrealistic level. What works for 2 people with one small child (and who are probably hyper-conservative) and little to no irrigation demand will not work for a conservation-minded family of 4 with a moderate irrigation need – which is a much more common scenario. Most of us who move to the country want at least a kitchen garden and maybe some animals. After all, this helps with one of the goals of sustainable living: growing as much as your own food as you can. To leave irrigation demands out of the equation is not telling the whole story.

2. Water in this area is expensive no matter which strategy you implement. To imply the rainwater collection is “cheaper” than the other options is all relative. In most cases it is not. It all depends on how independent you want / can afford to be, or how “water poor” you can tolerate being. To make blanket statements that it is “cheaper” is simply not correct.

3. Rain collection done right is a viable alternative or supplement to traditional sources and should be encouraged. However, people need to realize that a system designed to serve a more typical conserving family is significantly more involved than one serving 2 ½ people. It seems to me there is not enough dialog addressing this issue.

4. Careful design and construction ensures long-term reliability, serviceability, safety and sustainability, which cannot be over stressed. Serving indoor potable needs is more involved than just connecting a tank to your gutters, installing a pump and calling it done.

5. The owner of such a system should be capable of maintaining and repairing it themselves. It is not a plug-and-play, turn it on and forget about it thing. Usually, when something goes wrong, it is 5:00 on a Saturday and you’ve got 14 people coming over for dinner.

6. Another challenge when building a new home is finding a lender that will finance the project where rainwater collection is the only water source. There are lenders that will accept this and the prospective owner may need to have a contract with a bulk water hauling company to satisfy the mortgage lender. At the very least a well in combination with rainwater system may be required in order to obtain financing.

7. As with everything else involved in building, you get what you pay for. Paying a premium up front for a rain collection system with enough capacity to serve the long-term demand without relying on trucked-in water is far more “green” and sustainable than one that is not. Just think of the fuel required to haul water in at eight pounds per gallon. I should know – I’ve been hauling water regularly for the past 1½ years. Unless you have water hauled in from Austin, it is coming out of the ground locally. Add the inefficiency of large truck transport, and you might as well have a water well along with a rain collection system.

This is similar to carefully planning the placement your home on your site, creating an organized design that works with the site, installing better insulation, windows, doors and a more efficient HVAC system, among a wide range of other intelligent choices when building. You pay extra up front for higher quality components to realize long-term reliability and savings in addition to the conservation aspect.

Unfortunately, more often than not, most people are only interested in how cheap they can it (Insert whatever “it” is here) done above all else. Comparing a properly designed, utility grade rain collection and supply system to a well is like comparing apples to oranges. In my opinion, this is the only way to build something as important as you your own private water company. “Your Own Private Water Company” and all of its implications, is a concept most people don’t understand without education.

Oversimplification only tends to misinform the public farther. The catchphrase “Cheaper Than a Well” without qualifying it is just wrong. Since most people pay more attention to the money aspect of just about everything above all else, the more they hear “Cheaper!” the less they will pay attention to the idea and the value of proper planning and higher initial quality, which actually IS cheaper in the long run.

Careful, methodical design and construction of anything right in the first place always costs more than the minimum way. The minimum way inevitably falls apart and has to be rehabbed or torn apart and (hopefully) done right the second time around. How sustainable is that?

Matt Bachardy, Assoc AIA