As the climate is varying every year due to various reasons like deforestation, global warming, urbanization, etc., the level of ground water and in rivers is decreasing which in turn is affecting the supply of water in households. How can a family save water in day-to-day house work? How can an individual contribute to increase ground water level?

  • 1
    There are many resources online answering your first question. The second will depend on how much land if any you are responsible for.
    – Chris H
    Apr 16, 2016 at 11:41

3 Answers 3


The main thing we found is that in everything, use less. Over time you will be able to work down to quite low usage without major hassles. It sounds kinda obvious, but it works.

In Melbourne (Australia) during a major drought they introduced "target 155", or 155 litres of water per person per day. It's possible to do better, and from that article:

  1. Go dual flush. Or DIY dual flush
  2. More nifty gadgets - flow restrictors or tap aerators
  3. Got an evaporative cooler?
  4. Save water in the laundry
  5. Make your garden less thirsty
  6. Tanks (and cheaper alternatives)
  7. Only using your water once? Save water and use it on your garden.
  8. Fix those leaking taps
  9. Showers, showers, showers
  10. And that means shorter showers too

We found that to get below 155 litres per day for a household of six we also needed to catch shower water for flushing toilets, and completely stop flushing the toilet when it only had pee in it. But if you really work at it, 20-odd litres per day, per person is quite possible even if everyone showers every day.

Target 155 was so successful the had to start telling households to flush all their toilets at the same time once a week just to stop sewage sediment blocking their drains. (that's every toilet in one house, not "every household in Melbourne flush at 3pm Sunday"). The water companies also struggled because they budgeted on a much higher volume of water sales, so their pricing models were wrong (water companies have mostly fixed costs, but have volume charges to discourage waste).

  • Thanks for the reply. Surely helps. Adding to it, Water Purifier with RO drain 70% of water for purification. This water can also be utilized if stored.
    – Arun Gupta
    May 3, 2016 at 5:22
  • If you leave in the country, or have a large space in your backyard or inside, you can also save much water by using dry toilets. sustainability.stackexchange.com/questions/2757/…
    – J. Chomel
    May 14, 2016 at 15:44

Don't bathe (not a joke)

Mother Dirt (www.motherdirt.com) is a company selling an atomizer dispersing bacteria that metabolizes perspiration. (Amonia oxidizing bacteria). Replaces the natural skin microbiome. No need (or greatly reduced need) to bathe or shower especially not use soap, which kills the bacteria. Written up in the NY Times, etc.

It works. I use it. I haven't used soap or shampoo for about a year, and I only take a 30 second shower (no soap or shampoo) at the gym if I've been in the sauna.

  • 3
    Interesting answer, but what exactly is an atomizer?
    – THelper
    Apr 27, 2016 at 6:21

I think that the mostly water-hungry is irrigation but, in the kitchen, it is advised that you use a dish washing machine. I think this is wrong. I doubt that machine is smart enough to detect kind/level of pollution, which is necessary to choose the minimal washing method. Correct me if I am wrong, but, as a result, it must choose the worst washing regime for everything it washes, which not only increases the water consumption but also contaminates the sewage with chemicals. This is a crime, I think. We should reduce the contamination of the sewage to make it usable for the field irrigation.

If you was mindful, you would notice that very rare food is fatty and needs the detergent, especially if you don't indulge into the nasty fried diet. Also, soak the dishes in the stale water. When you wash down the soaked dishes under the stream of fresh water, you produce water for soaking the next lot of dishes. The water will soften all the dirt and more than 90% of the dishes then can be washed just by washing them down under the stream, without neither detergent nor effort, just as a fun. Detergent is needed for fatty dishes, which will not only contaminate the sewage but also demand more water and time since poison should not stay on your dishes and you need much more thorough washing down. Therefore, eliminating detergent saves your time and saves the water twice: when you wash the dishes and reuse the sewage.

You can also reduce water consumption to almost 0 when washing some dishes. The idea is that consumed the product to 100%, you have nothing to flush into the drain. My grandfather taught me this (their life was very difficult in the middle of 20 century in Russia, especially in the Leningrad that he defended from the Nazi animals, every drop of food was a gold). Instead of flushing the remnants, tuck to the walls of the container, you dissolve them in the (hat) water and drink! It made more sense in the past, when food products were supplied in the glass bottles and you could wash the scoured cream with the hot soup that you eat, for instance. In the modern time, jams are still supplied in glass bottles and you can wash them with the tea that you drink, for instance.

Moreover, you can also waste 0 water and no detergent when washing a fat pan! Have you seen the advertisment, where they just flick the remnants away from an enamel pan? The secret is that you still have to use some oil to fry anything on the ultra-modern pan because otherwise the contact of the food with the pan is poor and oil delivers the heat to the internals of the food. This method works when you fry something coated in the flour, like pankakes or fish. Some four is left over and you throw it into biogarbage. But, if you are crazy enough, you can sprinkle the remnants of the flour over the fan in the pan, mix them with a scooplua to help the fat better soaking into the flour. In the end, you just wipe fat-flour mixture with a towel into the biocontainer. Voila! Zero water, zero detergent, almost instantly, no contaminated sewage and reused garbage flour for washing! Isn't it brilliant?

You can also reduce the amount of water used when boiling. Many people pour out the hot water after cooking potatoes and pasta, for instance, which is a sign that more water was used than necessary. No water should be left after pasta or croup cooking, for instance. But that is more to the heat conservation. After boiling eggs you can boil pasta, for instance. This way, you reuse the water and thermal energy.

In the end, you could collect the sewage and wash down the toilet, as my grandparents did. I still have not reached this level of eco-mind yet.

  • Do you have any references for your claim that waste water from doing the dishes is a (sustainability) problem? AFAIK waste water treatment plants can handle this just fine.
    – THelper
    May 11, 2016 at 10:34
  • I tell nothing about making the dishes. I tell about the washing them. I propose the ways that reduce the amount of water wasted and to reduce the amount of chemicals in them. Chemicals are bad in two ways: you waste resources to produce/transport them and they contaminate the sewage. Probably the chemicals are not as poisonous as heavy metals, for instance, but I am sure that the fact that you won't drink them means that they are certainly dangerous for the life. Chemicals are said to wash the fat and kill the microbes. May 11, 2016 at 17:32
  • This is what advertisement says. Advanced chemical companies care only about antiseptic effect they can demonstrate on TV and in real life. They do not care about the nature and there is every reason to think that things which kill the microbes also kill you and the life in the wild. Even if you do not have undeniable scientific evidence, you should still minimize the chemicals and water consumption. You should behave the ways that I have described. May 11, 2016 at 17:34
  • @THelper Moreover, you suggest that water pruification uses counterchemicals against kitchen/toilet washing chemicals. This probably improves something but, obviously, it is also wasteful. It costs something to produce your counterchemicals. Every action is wasteful. Therefore, we can use pure logic to conclude that the only right position is to reduce the number of both washing chemistry and its neutralizing reagents. Right? May 11, 2016 at 18:16

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.