I have noticed a difference to resource conservation attitudes and practices in the U.S. as opposed to that in Australia, specifically when it comes to toilets.

Ahh yes, toilets.*  In Australia, since the mid-1990s methinks, there has been increased adoption of the dual-flush toilet.  This toilet design splits the water tank into two parts:  the first holds about 1/3 of the tank capacity and the second holds the remaining 2/3.  When the user urinates, she or he presses the ‘partial flush’ lever and the toilet is flushed using the lesser of the two partial tanks and only about 3 litres of water.  When the user defecates, she or he presses the ‘full flush’ lever and both partial tanks empty and uses about 6-8 litres of water.  Any reasonable person would agree that urine would require less water (and water pressure) to rid than a stool.

However, it seems that dual-flush toilets have not really caught on in the U.S.  I have been to several states here and have not seen them in any home (old or new) or commercial buildings or hotels.  And I think I know why.

When Sydney hosted the Olympics in 2000, the city also hosted Katie Couric and Matt Lauer et al,  as the Today Show  was  broadcasting from  there.  In  one of the between story exchanges between the hosts, Katie mentioned the state of Australian toilets.  Kate was shocked and incredulous about the dual-flush toilets in her hotel room, saying that she did not feel comfortable with only using a half-flush for a “Number 1″.  Her co-hosts agreed readily.

This, I  think,  is a vivid and accurate representation of the attitude of a large number of Americans to water conservation.  They have a difficult time prioritising (water) conservation over personal hygiene.  That is, the average American will not sacrifice their need to be and feel clean over the need to conserve.  Firstly, let me say that the U.S. apparently has abundant potable water supplies unlike Australia, so there is less of an obvious need to conserve water.  Secondly, I venture to say that Americans are generally insanely fastifious about personal hygiene and have an all-conquering need to be and feel ‘clean’.  (Note the astronomical rise of personal anti-bacterial soap sales and the large consumption of perfumes and colognes)

To me, it makes Uncommon Sense that  one should use a dual-flush toilet, that such use would not lead to any deterioration of the cleanliness of the toilet (i.e. the partial flush gets rid of all of the urine and there is no need to use a full flush), and that Americans should be more flexible with respect to the compromises one has to make in order to conserve resources.**

*  What I have noticed is that in the U.S., the toilet is almost always located in the bathroom (i.e. sink, shower and/or bath tub) whereas in Australia in most houses the toilet is located in its own little stall-sized room and the bathroom is adjacent and contains the sink, shower and/or bath tub.  Newer Australian houses may adopt the U.S. configuration, but I think only if there are multiple bathrooms in the house.

**  Perhaps not to the point of more hardcore conservationists whose refrain may be, “If it’s yellow, let it mellow; if it’s brown, flush it down”.