I'm on the fence here. On one side, I can see it being a useful output. On the other hand, it has the potential to be misleading/misinterpreted because it's really the total water use associated only with mixed temperature water draws, as we do not model cold water draws/use (though there's a feature request for it).

We discussed this during our call this morning and are leaning towards not proceeding with this change. At the point at which we model all (i.e., cold water uses) as described in #1421, then it would make sense to add it.

I'll leave this open for another week or two in case anyone else has further comments.

We discussed this during our call this morning and are leaning towards not proceeding with this change. At the point at which we model all (i.e., cold water uses) as described in #1421, then it would make sense to add it.

I'll leave this open for another week or two in case anyone else has further comments.

So in the future, if we modeled all cold water uses, we'd combine cold water uses + cold water associated with mixed temperature water draws, into a single output?

Right, we would report total water use (hot + mixed + cold) like you did here. It'd be almost exactly like this PR except there would be some additional cold-only end uses. So hopefully we could just borrow this code at the point at which we do that.