the beauty of it is that you don’t have to worry about getting the germs from the sink that rubbed off when you turned the water on as you turn it off… it is truly a feat of engineering!
I find the engineering questionable. I need more information: Where, precisely, does one stand to wash the hands—to the side, or straddling the bowl? If to the side, doesn’t the commode-sink imply large bathrooms? (It would be impossible, for example, in our WC.) Second, what’s the order of the flush? Do you pull the handle, wash, then wait for the water to refill the bowl and then watch it all swirl down? Third, why is this better than just keeping a bar of soap on a shelf and leaving the lid of the commode open to allow one to wash in the reservoir? Fourth, what does one do with all the important things usually kept on the reservoir lid—I mean, we have candles there, and we need to place them, but where?
I applaud the desire to conserve, but at the moment, I question the design.
The sales pitch at toilettanksink.com is particularly thrilling, especially as it identifies the target consumer: apparently, the sink is good for people a) who live in deserts or b) prisons, c) who are environmentalists or d) cheapskates, and e) people who need to be convinced to wash their hands.
My question is if you are an environmentalist serving time in prison, or a cheapskate who doesn't wash her hands, or any other combination of two or more of the above, is your need for the TTS increased, or does it remain the same?
oh come on! you don’t stand in your sink to wash your hands. there’s at least, unless your sink isn’t inset into a vanity, a good 3-6 inches between the lip of the sink and the edge of the vanity. you are standing at least 2 feet away from the sink.
stradling the commode to wash your hands while conserving energy and water is little price to pay.
the freeeeeekin’ amazon is drying up because you don’t want something a little less, by an inch or two, commodious.
i can’t make up my mind about this. from an environmental and sanitation-conscious (i share j’s concern about the pre-wash spigot germs) standpoint i think the concept is brilliant. however, it’s plastic. how long would it last? how easy is it to clean? how clean IS the water in the toilet tank? and, what is the potential for mischief when younguns who already love to flush way too much get added incentive by producing running water? for example, would rose try to flush herself a glass of water?
In point of fact, the Amazon is not drying up by my flushes—the Iowa, and more specifically, the aquifer that runs beneath the Iowa, is. For you, it's the Chattahoochee. Think locally, dingbat! :)
The water’s cleanliness would depend upon whether or not the sink pumps water from the reservoir after it has settled in the res. It might connect to the spout which fills the res, in which case the water’s as clean as the water in the sink. This seems more likely: it would save money (no pump to make the water flow) and would auto-shutoff when the reservoir filled thanks to the res’s shutoff.
But splashing seems to me an important concern. I suspect prisoners would splash, too.
My grandmother would be apalled by the lack of hot water for handwashing.
Interesting tidbit: out here in the west, where there’s precious little water, I pay a flat fee for all the water I want every month. It’s not exactly a strategy designed to promote conservation. (Of course, where I live, the water isn’t potable—it’s basically salt water—but that doesn’t affect the quantity used in laundry, toilet flushing, etc.).
Fortunately, temperature doesn’t matter, not insofar as cleanliness is concerned (a fact to which I link because I thought it did), but warm water is certainly a bonus. I agree with L’s GM.
i like for the water to get hotish, but now that i know it doesn’t matter, well, then, whatever.
the worst thing is that i actually have to fear washing my hands in our bathroom sink: if you catch the first water to come out of the faucet, it literally shocks you. i’m not kidding. (i should say it shocks me because of course this never happens to greg.)
the beauty of it is that you don’t have to worry about getting the germs from the sink that rubbed off when you turned the water on as you turn it off… it is truly a feat of engineering!
by hermit x—Apr 6, 10:50 AM
I find the engineering questionable. I need more information: Where, precisely, does one stand to wash the hands—to the side, or straddling the bowl? If to the side, doesn’t the commode-sink imply large bathrooms? (It would be impossible, for example, in our WC.) Second, what’s the order of the flush? Do you pull the handle, wash, then wait for the water to refill the bowl and then watch it all swirl down? Third, why is this better than just keeping a bar of soap on a shelf and leaving the lid of the commode open to allow one to wash in the reservoir? Fourth, what does one do with all the important things usually kept on the reservoir lid—I mean, we have candles there, and we need to place them, but where?
I applaud the desire to conserve, but at the moment, I question the design.
by greg—Apr 6, 07:29 PM
i agree that the design requires a bit of room to the side of the toilet, but the idea is creative.
i found a cheaper version ($60) at http://www.toilettanksink.com/
by chris—Apr 6, 08:15 PM
On the plus side, that hand towel hanging beside the seat has commandeered a prime location to collect scads of fecal bacteria and pee splash. :)
by greg—Apr 6, 08:26 PM
The sales pitch at toilettanksink.com is particularly thrilling, especially as it identifies the target consumer: apparently, the sink is good for people a) who live in deserts or b) prisons, c) who are environmentalists or d) cheapskates, and e) people who need to be convinced to wash their hands.
My question is if you are an environmentalist serving time in prison, or a cheapskate who doesn't wash her hands, or any other combination of two or more of the above, is your need for the TTS increased, or does it remain the same?
by greg—Apr 6, 08:38 PM
oh come on! you don’t stand in your sink to wash your hands. there’s at least, unless your sink isn’t inset into a vanity, a good 3-6 inches between the lip of the sink and the edge of the vanity. you are standing at least 2 feet away from the sink.
stradling the commode to wash your hands while conserving energy and water is little price to pay.
the freeeeeekin’ amazon is drying up because you don’t want something a little less, by an inch or two, commodious.
by hermit x—Apr 6, 09:17 PM
i can’t make up my mind about this. from an environmental and sanitation-conscious (i share j’s concern about the pre-wash spigot germs) standpoint i think the concept is brilliant. however, it’s plastic. how long would it last? how easy is it to clean? how clean IS the water in the toilet tank? and, what is the potential for mischief when younguns who already love to flush way too much get added incentive by producing running water? for example, would rose try to flush herself a glass of water?
by mary—Apr 6, 09:22 PM
and what about splashing? i can see little girls flush and splashing away.
by hermit x—Apr 6, 09:27 PM
In point of fact, the Amazon is not drying up by my flushes—the Iowa, and more specifically, the aquifer that runs beneath the Iowa, is. For you, it's the Chattahoochee. Think locally, dingbat! :)
The water’s cleanliness would depend upon whether or not the sink pumps water from the reservoir after it has settled in the res. It might connect to the spout which fills the res, in which case the water’s as clean as the water in the sink. This seems more likely: it would save money (no pump to make the water flow) and would auto-shutoff when the reservoir filled thanks to the res’s shutoff.
But splashing seems to me an important concern. I suspect prisoners would splash, too.
by greg—Apr 7, 05:34 AM
A great many prisons already have their sinks on top of the toilets. I’m not sure how much, if at all, they splash.
by JH—Apr 7, 06:43 AM
My grandmother would be apalled by the lack of hot water for handwashing.
Interesting tidbit: out here in the west, where there’s precious little water, I pay a flat fee for all the water I want every month. It’s not exactly a strategy designed to promote conservation. (Of course, where I live, the water isn’t potable—it’s basically salt water—but that doesn’t affect the quantity used in laundry, toilet flushing, etc.).
by Laura—Apr 7, 07:32 AM
Fortunately, temperature doesn’t matter, not insofar as cleanliness is concerned (a fact to which I link because I thought it did), but warm water is certainly a bonus. I agree with L’s GM.
by greg—Apr 7, 07:03 PM
who waits for the water to get hot before washing their hands?
by mary—Apr 8, 03:09 PM
I soap and lather while it’s cold, but I don’t rinse until it’s hot.
by greg—Apr 8, 03:25 PM
i like for the water to get hotish, but now that i know it doesn’t matter, well, then, whatever.
the worst thing is that i actually have to fear washing my hands in our bathroom sink: if you catch the first water to come out of the faucet, it literally shocks you. i’m not kidding. (i should say it shocks me because of course this never happens to greg.)
by kathy—Apr 9, 09:54 PM
Hahaahahahaha! I am impervious to static electricity! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
by greg—Apr 10, 05:33 AM