Apparently, 80% of Japanese households now have bidet-style "washlet" toilets, where toilet paper is replaced by a really complex system of bidet-style washing and drying.
The idea is not new, and certainly non-electric bidets have been around for CENTURIES. But Japan seems to have gone from a hole in the ground to ultra-sophisticated AI-enabled electric toilets in a very quick and comprehensive manner.
In addition to permanently heated seats, perfumed air deodorizers to cover up smells, and even white noise or muzak to cover up unwanted sounds, the system operates like an automatic bidet, with a nozzle that extends to shoot warmed water at the appropriate area, and then an air dryer that dries you. There is a whole multi-button control panel through which you can customize this process ad infinitum.
It seems like they have thought of pretty much everything to give you the perfect toilet experience, even if it doesn't sound particularly appetizing to my British/North American sensibilities. It's notable that the idea has not really taken off that much outside of Japan, although a surprising 10% of American toilets are now this style, ditto Europe, and an estimated 5% in China.
Washlets - actually a brand name of the most popular Toto bidet toilets, but now commonly used as a generic name, much like, well, Kleenex - are not without their critics, though.
Some doctors warn that there is, ironically, actually an increased risk of bacterial infections from the use of warm water and the nozzle, although the manufacturers are at pains to refute this. Doctors (including Japanese doctors) also warn that there is a risk of over-washing and over-drying, which can remove the sedum that naturally lubricates the anus, and of increasing the naturally acidic pH of the anal region, leaving it open to dermatitis and bacterial infection. There are also many reports of chronic rectal bleeding and hemorrhoids. As one (Japanese) doctor put it, "It should be obvious that subjecting the anus and vagina to direct jets of warm water can create problems". If that is indeed the case, Japan as a nation has problems, even if under-reported.
What I wondered about, though, was whether washlets are actually as environmentally superior to toilet paper as they claim. The environmental problems associated with the production and bleaching of toilet paper are well documented, although recycled or bamboo-based toilet paper can help significantly. But all that water heating, air heating, seat heating. air perfuming, additional production carbon footprint, and water use? All of that can't be very environmental, can it? To say nothing of the added up-front cost and installation hassles.
The claims include that washlets use a much smaller volume of water and energy than what is needed to produce toilet paper, produce less waste for sewage systems and landfills, and (in the case of some more premium systems) incorporate water conserving and water recycling features. In fact, even the notoriously picky David Suzuki Foundation recommends them as a greener option than using toilet paper, as does Successfully Sustainable.
Still, I can't help but think that these analyses are not very scientific, and certainly not very specific or comprehensive. It's all very well saying that some bidet-style toilets only use 0.8 gallons of water for each clean, while one roll of toilet paper requires 37 gallons. But a roll of toilet paper contains anywhere from 150 to a 1,000 sheets, and even if you use 5 sheets every time you go (and I don't!), that's 30 to 200 uses out of every roll, which puts the water consumption of toilet paper used anywhere from 1.2 gallons to less than 0.2 gallons, i.e. much less than a bidet toilet.
And I for one use 100% recycled toilet paper (as should everyone!) How does a washlet compare with that environmentally?
Now, full disclosure, I'm not going to change to a washlet any time soon (and I'm a relatively early adopter, environmentally speaking). Call me old-fashioned and hidebound, but it just seems wrong on so many levels to me. But in terms of whether they're actually objectively "better", well, the jury is still out, I say. More work needed.
No comments:
Post a Comment