The apartment already has a regular meter, but the landlady is suggesting we switch to an electronic one that transmits readings over Wi-Fi. I read that they're more expensive, but supposedly they save water. Does it make sense to replace it if the current meter is still working?
Water savings actually depend not on the device itself, but on whether a person will notice a leak 😊 With a regular meter, you need to check the readings regularly to figure out something's wrong. With an electronic one, it's easier to spot a spike - the data's right there in the app, no need to crawl under the bathtub. That's what really helps catch problems earlier.
But if your meter works fine and you don't mind checking it once a month, there's no urgent reason to replace it. It makes sense to pay for a replacement only if you're tired of the whole process or the meter's already getting old. Though there's a catch - in some regions, electronic meters require more frequent inspections, so that's worth considering too.
If I were you, I'd ask the landlord who pays for the replacement and installation. If it's her expense, there's no rush. If you're supposed to split the cost among the tenants, then it's worth calculating: how many years of savings would it take to break even 🤔
If your meter is still working fine, there's no rush to replace it. The main advantage of a smart water meter is convenience: you don't have to manually record the readings and take them anywhere. But the meter itself doesn't save water - it's the person who sees real-time consumption and starts checking for leaks that saves water. A regular meter shows the same numbers; you just need to check it periodically. If you're detail-oriented, information from a regular meter will also help you spot problems.
It makes sense to spend money on replacement only if: the meter is about to break down or it's time for its periodic verification (usually once every few years by law), or the landlord is willing to pay for installing an electronic one out of pocket. But if the other party is forcing you to pay for it, that's their problem and their concern - there's no reason to cover the costs just for the convenience of your neighbors or the building management system.
Basically, check the condition of your current meter and the verification deadline. If everything's fine - leave it as is. Replace it only when there's an actual need for a technical upgrade, not just to tick a box.
I had a regular water meter at home for about five years, and I didn't replace it because it broke - I replaced it because I got tired of crawling under the bathtub every month and photographing the dial! An electronic meter with data transmission is honestly a huge convenience, especially if you forget to submit your readings on time. But as for saving water - I agree with the previous answer, the device itself doesn't save water, it's only your head that saves water when you see in the app how many liters are leaking! If your current meter works and you're not lazy enough to spend five minutes a month on readings, there's no point replacing it - unless you just want to pay for the convenience yourself.
An electronic meter doesn't consume less water by itself - it's just a more convenient monitoring tool. The real question is whether you'll actually use that monitoring. If your current meter works fine and you're being honest with yourself that you can't be bothered to check the readings every month, then yeah, a smart meter makes sense - you won't have to remind yourself about this tedious chore.
I had this situation in my apartment: I discovered a constant leak in the toilet ages ago, but I checked my regular meter so rarely that I paid for the invisible loss for several months. When they later installed a meter with notifications, the problem became obvious right away - I got an alert in the middle of the night about weird usage while everyone was asleep. I fixed the issue quickly. So the real savings don't come from the device itself, but from the fact that you start noticing anomalies that you'd normally miss just because checking the meter was inconvenient.
If the landlord is willing to pay for the replacement or split the cost, it's worth agreeing to. But if you're covering all the expenses - think about how likely you are to ignore a regular meter's readings. If you ignore them, an electronic one will pay for itself fast by catching leaks you'd otherwise miss. If you check regularly, the financial benefit is weaker, and you can just stick with what you have.
Will the homeowner actually check for leaks through the app, or is this just convenient for you? Here's the thing - the smart meter itself doesn't save water, that's true. But I switched from a regular one to a smart meter a year ago and noticed that before, I never checked the readings between payments, but now I can see my consumption graph and I immediately spotted that water usage spiked on weekends because of a leaky faucet. I fixed it in five minutes. So there is a point to it, but only if you (or the homeowner) actually use it and don't just install it and forget about it.
Log into answer.
