water purification system ion

8/8/2019 Water Purification System ion

1/15

There are precisely TWO DIFFERENT WAYS in which to compare water purification systems witheach other:

y On the basis of their comparative performance and costy On the basis of their attributes to health and well-being

The following two sections summarize these two different comparisons. Our reason forpresenting this information is not one of confrontation or to be argumentative. These are technicaland cost factors which tend to be overlooked or intentionally discarded in the rush by most waterproducts manufacturers and distributors to "make the sale". It is important that you as aconsumer have accurate information in hand before you purchase any type of home watertreatment or purification system.

On the other hand, we do not pretend to be your doctor or nurse but feel obligated to present thelatest and most pertinent information on the health aspects of various types of waters, asavailable from the open literature and as produced by the various water treatment systems.

Although additional types of water treatment systems are available (such as ultraviolet, ozone, deionization, etc) we will limit our discussion to the three most popular types of water treatmentsystems: steam distillation, reverse osmosis and filtration.

All water treatment systems have a finite lifetime and during that lifetime their performance mayvary, depending on system type. Most manufacturers like to discuss the capabilities of theirsystems at the time of purchase and ignore possible system performance degradation as afunction of time.

At the beginning of life (fresh off the shelf) distillation, reverse osmosis and carbon filtrationsystems remove, respectively, decreasing levels of contaminants on their first day or hours ofuse. The actual percentage depends on the TYPE of contaminant being removed by the device.The types of contaminants being removed by each type of device (% and type of contaminant) arediscussed later on this page). However, in general one can construct the type of chart shownbelow which illustrates not only the initial performance comparison of the three systems, but the

long term water quality(or % contaminant removal) expected with each type of system.

Since both carbon filtration and reverse osmosis systems use components (filter elements andmembranes) which become depleted, worn out or simply exhausted over a period of time, thetypes of curves shown below represent a top-level comparison of the three types of watertreatment systems.


2/15

One can see very quickly that if a certain amount of time passed before components of the filter orreverse osmosis systems were changed, the consumer would be drinking what amounts to tapwater.

By comparison, distillation produces virtually totally pure water, not only at the onset of operationbut day after day, month after month and even year after year. This is because natural processes

are at work in the distillation system---team and gravity. Steam is always produced by the boilingprocess of distillation (see introductory chart on distillation) while gravity is always on the job,separating dissolved solids from the steam.

Expendable membranes and filters which comprise the heart of reverse osmosis and filtrationsystems cannot compete with the purity of water at the onset of system operation or over time,when compared with water distillation.

>>

Conclusions: With the Sole Exception ofSteam Distillation, all other home usewater treatment systems provided a

progressively degraded quality of water.

Distillation is completely alone in itsability to remove dangerous bacteria andother \micro-organisms. Other systemsmay act a s a fertile breeding ground forbacteria - providing a potentiallydangerous environment for individualssensitive to bacterial contaminants - forexample any immune system disorder plus individuals on chemotherapy, antibiotics, childrenwith cystic fibrosis, diabetics, etc.

THE TYPE OF CONTAMINANT IS ALL-IMPORTANT

There are four (4) general categories of contaminants in water supplies:

y Biological entitiesy Heavy Metals(not related to any rock band)y Organic Chemicalsy Inorganic chemicals

If one could select which of these categories of water contaminants were the most important orhad the most devastating effect on human health, it would be the first category, biological. SeePathogens, Bacteria page for more information.

More individuals are becoming ill(many seriously), worldwide, by exposure to biologicalcontaminants in drinking water than any other type of water contaminant. In fact, with anincredible increase in all types of immune deficient health conditions, biological hazards aretaking on an even greater importance to consumers as well as water treatment experts.

With this in mind, if one compares the effectiveness of the three systems, we find that only SteamDistillation and Ceramic filtration removes all bacteria, pathogenic or otherwise, from theincoming water. Carbon filters are known breeding grounds for bacteria. Carbon filtersimpregnated with silver only slow the growth rate of bacteria (that is why they are referred to as


3/15

"bacteriostatic" rather than "bactericidal" systems. Reverse osmosis systems also do not removemicrobiological contaminants. In fact, like carbon filters, they are known to act as breedinggrounds for bacteria.

One of the pivotal studies which conclusively proved that reverse osmosis systems acted asintensive breeding grounds for bacteria appeared in Applied and EnvironmentalMicrobiology, April 1991. p945-948.

In this milestone study, entitled "Gastrointestinal Health Effects Associated with theConsumption of Drinking Water Produced by Point-of-Use Domestic Reverse-OsmosisFiltration Units"and conducted in Canada, individuals who drank water treated with a $1000reverse osmosis system were experiencing gastrointestinal problems equivalent to thoseexperienced in the Third World.

Information such as this has been suppressed from the US press. In fact, when the story originallybroke and while we were writing several articles for the national water press, we approached oneof the major water monthly publications and proposed discussing this issue as part of a largertreatment of microbiological water problems.

The editor told me that even though the Canadian study was factual and apparently without fault,it would be impossible for him to include such materials in his publication because the US reverseosmosis manufacturers who advertised profusely in his magazine would tear him apart. Thisdisturbing incident led us to produce another article entitled Censored Science which appears onthis Web Site.

Our point in discussing this particular example is quite simple: what is sometimes promoted bythe water industry and its dealers does not necessary track with the facts. Do not be misled bycrafty advertising brochures which give the impression that a particular device or system iscapable of doing more than it scientifically is capable of doing. Many manufacturers and theirdealers would dearly love to have their systems "grow up" to do things that more capablesystems routinely do.

System

Performance

Comparison

Carbon

Filter

Carbon

filter

w/silver

Ceramic

Filter

Ceramic

Filter

w/carbon

Reverse

Osmosis

Steam

Distillation

w/carbon

Microbiological NO PARTIAL YES YES NO YES

Organics YES YES NO YES YES YES

Heavy Metals NO NO NO NO PARTIALYES

Radioactivity NO NO NO NO PARTIALYES

Inorganics NO NO NO NO PARTIALYES


4/15

Some filtration companies add various types of silver to their filter compositions, claiming that thesilver creates a "bacteriostatic" condition to reduce bacterial contamination. That may be true fornon-pathogenic (benign) bacteria types, but we have yet to see any type of filter manufacturerrecommend the use of their filter under water conditions when bacteria which causes illness arefound.

The same story is true regarding home-use type reverse osmosis systems: no manufacturersclaim (or can legally claim) that their system is a "purifier", capable of dealing with biologicalcontaminants.

In three recent national emergencies (the Northridge California Earthquake, the Loma PrietaCalifornia Earthquake and the Cryptosporidium outbreak in Milwaukee, Wisconsin), officialswarned the public not to drink water processed by methods than boiling or distillation. We saw noevidence whatsoever of dealers or manufacturers promoting reverse osmosis or filtrationtechnologies for these situations.

So, here were cases when it was important to remove dangerous contaminants from drinkingwater. And, both filtration and reverse osmosis failed to be effective in removing those dangerouscontaminants. Why, one would ask, is there any reason, other than aesthetic water taste or odor,

to buy a water treatment system such as reverse osmosis or filtration if it is the intent of theconsumer to be protected against dangerous water contaminants such as bacteria?

A homeowner buys a homeowner's insurance policy to protect him or her 24 hours a day, 365days per year against the house burning down. The policy protects the homeowner on the dayswhen there is no danger to the homeowners property as well as on the day when the house mayburn down.

So, if a homeowner buys a water treatment system, he or she is buying it with the intent that it willprotect them on the "good days" when there may NOT be dangerous contaminants in the water aswell as the day or hour when there could be dangerous contaminants (bacteria) in the water.

In the case of carbon filtration and reverse osmosis, these systems will work only on the "good

water" days and fail on the "bad water" days. Is that a smart investment?

THE EXCEPTION - CERAMIC FILTRATION SYSTEMS

An exception to the situation above is ceramic filtration technology where ceramic materials arecompressed into a densely packed arrangement, effectively blocking the movement or migrationof particles smaller than 0.2 to 0.3 microns. This is the size of the smallest known microbiologicalcontaminants. Therefore, ceramic filtration systems are useful in removing bacteria from unsafewater supplies.

When combined with carbon, these systems become even more effective in dealing with watercontamination problems which may contain BOTH bacteria and dangerous organic chemicals---

problems one may find in Y2K or other domestic emergencies. See the section on EmergencyWater Systems.


5/15

>>

>

This is what a normal, natural collection or clusterof pure water molecules looks like---a six-sided,hexagonal form. What you see at the right is theenergy pattern emitted by six symmetricallyarranged water molecules. This arrangement ofwater molecules is created by the loose hydrogenbonds between atoms of hydrogen and oxygen inadjacent water molecules.

Biochemists and particle physicists tell us thatthis hexagonal form is the form which occurs naturally in pure rain, fresh snow AND occasionally

in DISTILLED WATER. For information on how to transform the entirety of distilled water in thisHEXAGONAL WATER, go HERE.

They also say it is the best type of water "structure" for

y maximum hydration of the body's cells;y maximum transfer of nutrients into the cells; andy is best suited for electrical communications between cells.

All of this remained unknown until recently when extremely sensitive electronics devices wereable to identify low-level energy patterns which are radiated from various materials, includingwater.

Finally, these same biochemists tell us that a HEALTHY BODY has water molecules which arePREDOMINANTLY SIX SIDED in structure as shown above. A WATER DISTILLER will producewater with this hexagonal characteristic---identical to naturally occurring water from pure rain orfresh snow(remember all snowflakes have six sides/points).

PENTAGONAL(UN-NATURAL) WATER STRUCTURES

>>

Here we see another type of water molecule arrangement---onewhich has five(5) molecules joined by the weak hydrogen bond. Italso is a "clean" type of water but has an un-natural or deformed

cluster structure.

Biochemists who have studied these water structures in bothnature and in humans tell us that this type of "unnatural" waterstructure is found in humans and animals where the IMMUNESYSTEM IS MALFUNCTIONING. In particular, this type of pentagonal(5-sided) water structure isfound in AIDS, HIV and other immune deficient individuals and all protein systems that aredisease producing.


6/15

This is indeed astonishing. Whereas the six-sided water "cluster" found in rain, show and distilledwater is found in YOUNG or HEALTHY individuals and other healthy protein forms, unhealthyindividuals, older individuals and protein systems which are prone to disease have this deformed,un-natural water structure.

WE MAKE SPECIAL NOTE OF THIS FACT BECAUSE THESE SAMEBIOCHEMISTS HAVE DETERMINED THAT REVERSE OSMOSIS SYSTEMSPRODUCE THIS EXACT SAME TYPE OF PENTAGONAL WATER STRUCTURE.This information is documented in Dr. Mu Shik Jhon's book HERE.

There is no reason to believe that those individuals who possess this un-natural type of waterstructure in the bodies, and whose immune system is dysfunctional got that condition by drinkingreverse osmosis water. What one can conclude at this point is that there seems to be a distinct,"un-natural" structure to the all-important aspect of cellular water in both illness prone humans,disease producing proteins and reverse osmosis water.

While the process of "osmosis" is a known NATURAL phenomena, the process of "reverseosmosis" is EXACTLY OPPOSITE to that original, natural (osmosis) process. In other words,REVERSE osmosis is an un-natural process---and appears to be producing a relatively clean butun-natural type of water.

It is possible that in the rush to produce water treatment systems(for drinking) which producewater which is relatively free of inorganic, heavy metals and organic contaminants, the equipmentengineers have overlooked perhaps the most important aspect of water itself---its intrinsic, naturalstructure and its healthful aspects for the body.

It is also important to remember that reverse osmosis systems were initially developed to produce

"clean" water for industrial purposes 50 years ago. No thought was given at that time to thefactors discussed above, obviously because of the lack of adequate instrumentation to measurethe extremely important energy aspects of the "water structures" shown above.

MINERALIZED TAP WATER---WATER COMPLETELY WITHOUT STRUCTURE

Here we have water at probably its worst energy state---possessing no structure, no organizationwhatsoever and, according to biochemists, essentially useless in the three areas we notedabove(cellular hydration, nutrient transfer and inter-cellular communications).

Dissolved minerals(inorganic materials) such as calcium, sodium, chemical compoundscompletely "de-structure" the water molecules, breaking the loose hydrogen/oxygen bondsillustrated at the beginning of this page.

Water which is produced by simple carbon, sediment or even ceramic filtration procedures doesnot remove the inorganic materials which produce theun-structured water product shown below.

>>


7/15

The result is a "mish-mash" of water structures, similar to what biochemists tell us occurs insituations where proton densities are low(er).

Naturally, this brings up the next and perhaps most controversial question related to watertreatment, filtration and purification systems, MINERALS IN THE WATER---do we need them?.

Sources for the above include Dr. L. Lorenzen and Dr. J. Mushuk

IS IT REALLY WORTH THE EXTRA EFFORT TO PURIFY YOUR DRINKING WATER?

It is important to remember that every type of home water purifier as well as every type of"purified" drinking water has its individual advantages or meets a specific customer or industrialneed.

In the final analysis, selecting a specific type of home water purifier or type of "purified" bottledwater simply reduces to how pure you want your drinking water. Once you decide how pure thewater needs to be, you have selected the system you need:

Minimally purified (filtered) water: use a carbon filter (do not use silver-impregnated filtersystems)

Partially purified water: use a reverse osmosis system (and have the unit checked for properperformance every couple of months)

Completely purified water: steam distillation with carbon pre filtration.

WHAT'S BEST FOR YOU?

How do you know what type of water purifier is best suited for you, in your residential area?

First, consider the fact that the quality of tap water in your area may be vastly different from that

of a friend a few miles away who receives his or her tap water from a completely different set ofwater sources.

Additionally, seasonal changes to water sources may dramatically change the quality of yourwater on a monthly or even weekly basis. The reaction of municipal water treatment facilities tochanging source water conditions can produce even more dramatic changes in the taste, odorand visual condition of your water (chlorine, ammonia, lime, acids, etc.)

Also, each of us has different bodily capabilities to ward off colds, infections or even chemicalcontaminants from air and water. Therefore, a chemical, salt or metal contaminant from waterwhich might not affect another person might be successful in attacking your body, or vice versa.And this could vary from contaminant to contaminant, and possibly from chemical to chemical.

Considering these variables and unknowns about possible chemical contaminants, andcombinations thereof, inadequate water treatment, outdated water plumbing systems and otherhazards, water purification at the POINT-OF-USE, in the home using a STEAM DISTILLATIONSYSTEM WITH A CARBON PREFILTER will ensure the highest quality of drinking water possible .

Choose the system which is CONSISTENT WITH THE OTHER PORTIONS OF YOUR FAMILY'SLIFESTYLE. If you are concerned about good nutrition, good rest and exercise, steam distilledwater is CONSISTENT WITH THAT LIFESTYLE!


8/15

Rapidly increasing pollution of water sources used by our municipal water systems has forced agreat number of your friends and neighbors to find more reliable sources of pure, clean drinkingwater.

In this search for better drinking water, the consumer is faced with two alternatives: bottled wateror home water purifiers. Bottled water comes under many labels---"spring", "mineral", "drinking",

"purified", "filtered", "distilled", and others.

On the other hand, a home water purifier will produce various qualities of drinking water in theconsumers home---the quality depending directly on the technique used---filtration, reverseosmosis (a type of filtration) or steam distillation.

Many people are misled or confused by these various systems---in many cases assuming that thequality of water obtained from any one of these three types of systems would be basically thesame---very pure, very clean, etc.

Unfortunately, this is not the case. Only distillation is capable of removing virtually all of the fivemajor categories of water pollution: bacterial contaminants, inorganic (salts), heavy metals,organic (carbon-based) chemicals, and radioactive contaminants.

A wide variety of articles which have appeared in local and national newsprint related to theproblem(s) associated with the analysis and purchasing of home water treatment devices is givenbelow. The list will expand on a regular basis so plan to revisit the site to review and enjoy thesubsequent articles.

"Censored Science "-What the media and science is keeping from you regarding your drinkingwater.

"HOME WATER PURIFIERS---SORTING FACT FROM FICTION --WHEN NEEDS TURN TO GREED":

A candid look at how many water dealers and manufacturers have forgotten that providing purewater to the public is a service function. The view of many of these companies is one of how bestto rip off the customer instead.

"Drinking Water - Sorting Facts from Confusion:" a collection of questions you should reviewwhich will assist you in determining what type of issue are important when considering a homewater purification system or simply purchasing water for drinking purposes.

Reality vs. Hype in the Water Industry: a candid look at the reality which sets in once waterdealers feet are placed to the fire by circumstances which expose various types of watertreatment devices to serious challenges.

Home Water Purification Systems: the Good, Bad and the Ugly: another insight into the inner

workings of the water purification industry.

Drinking Water - Natural versus Synthetic:a unique view of water and its relationship to goodhealth.

For a lighter side look at system comparisons, Go to "Politically Correct Water Purifiers"


9/15

Water purification industry guns for higher standardsPraveen Bose / Chennai/ Bangalore July 28, 2009, 0:56 IST

The water purification and treatment industry in India, under siege from cheap imports of watertreatment products from China, is working to set standards for the water treatment industry inthe country as a safeguard against 'spurious' products. This, is being done through acertification process. Hence, for the first time the industry has put its head together to come upwith a solution.

In a country like India, where water scarcity is growing by the day, there are too many issuesrelating to water. This has meant that there are dime a dozen firms that are trying to make thebest of the situation. Now there is a clamour for proper standards.

With a membership of about 31 firms, the industry is estimated to be worth Rs 1,300 crore to Rs1,400 crore for the domestic sector and Rs 8,000-10,000 crore in the industrial sector. Theindustry is trying to build a consensus on the standards for water treatment products under anumbrella body WQA India.

WQA or Water Quality Assurance is a not-for-profit international trade association representingresidential, commercial, industrial and small community water treatment industry. WQA workswith organisations representing different aspects of water industry worldwide. It has over 2,400members from 80 countries around the world.

Water has many more challenges here in India than in the West or in countries like Singapore.The standards are directly proportional to the cost of water purification. Till now, the waterpurification industry in India concentrated on bacterial contamination. But, what about theviruses and other parasites that water may harbour?

Hence, there has been a long-felt need for standards to ensure all purifiers meet all standards.Now there is growing awareness for the need to fine-tune biological contaminants.

But, affordability is a factor. We need to build consensus on the minimum standards forpurification," noted an industry player. The members are presently looking to form an Indian armof WQA in India, which will be an independent not for profit organisation which will establishstandards and generally fund technologies for water purification. This is expected to cut the costof developing technologies.

The industry has to work towards a quality which is best for India, he added. The industry hasbeen working towards this for about a year.

According to K Chandrasekhar, manager, India Operations, WQA, We need to evaluate the

Indian conditions and come up with standards.


10/15

KEY PLAYERS IN THE INDUSTRY

Eureka Forbes

Kent

Ion exchange

Usha Breta

Philips

Luminous

Whirlpool

Hindustan Lever

Market Size : Approximately Rs.1400 Cr.

Market Share :

Ultra violet water purification system:

Eureka Forbes 68%

Reverse Osmosis purification system:

Eureka Forbes 60%

Kent RO system 40%

EUREKA FORBES


11/15

Pioneer in home water purifiers

Over 70 million litres of Aquaguard

Worlds largest manufacturerof UV

based purification system.

Pioneer in home water puri70 million litres of

Aquaguard

World s largest manufacturer of UV

based purification system

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Tests showed that some devices are better in terms of efficiency.2. However, conclusion cannot be made based only ontestingone sample. Detailed

longterm tests haveto be conducted inorderto comparevarious devices.3. Some devices are costly. So, the lower and medium incomegroups can

hardly afford to use this device.

4. Some devices have proved to be very popular among users. Themaintenance awareness, ease, performance, etc for this device has been very

satisfactory.

5. The initial cost and the maintenance cost for these two devicesare also quietaffordable.


12/15

6. The only drawback with these devices is that they have proved tobeinefficient in removal of microorganism from the influent source water.

7. Other than these devices all the other devices have proved to be almost equalin all the criteria, so any of these devices can be preferred after the above

three8. Out of these the ones with the RO Technology or Reverse Osmosis

Technology integrating device should be preferred as this technology of water

treatment has proved to be very efficient.9. The user should opt for the regular maintenance plans that areavailable with

the companies manufacturing devices or should themselves go for regular

maintenance of the devices themselves.10.It was also observed from the survey that the user generallyboughtthe device

just because a good friend oftheirs suggested the device. It should be a regularpracticewith the userthat a detailed knowledgeof maintenancerequired by the

device,technology used, powerconsumed, maximum service life,etc should betaken.11.The user should not just take the initial price into account whilebuyingequipment. The maintenance cost and service life should also be considered whichcould save him money overa long period oftime

CONCLUSION

1. The survey analysis shows that Aquagaurd Classic and AquagaurdRo are themost preferred water treatment devices. These devices have produced a good

performance in almost all criteria of maintenance, satisfaction level, use,etc.2. The maximum number of users use 25-50 liters of water with SMCwater as

source and they come in the incomegroup ofRs. 5,00,000/- to10,00,000/- and use adevicewhose price is morethanRs. 5000/-

3. The maintenance awareness of the user for other devices except AquagaurdClassic and Aquagaurd RO is comparatively low so theirperformance is also affectedand thus work should be done to increase the awareness for maintenance of thesedevices.

4. It can also be seen that a huge amount of users came to knowabout the devicefrom television as media. So the companies targeting to increase their sales can

concentrateon advertising theirdevice through television more compared to theothermedia

5. It can also be seen that the maximum users of treatment devicesaccommodatein the income group of Rs.1,00,000/- to Rs.5,00,000/- and Rs.5,00,000/ toRs.10,00,000/- So the manufacturers should concentrate on manufacturing orformulating such devices which are more cheaper and affordable so that the lower


13/15

incomegroup (


14/15

14.The total hardness of influent source water sample is way below the desiredlimits and the treatment devices make further reduction in hardness too. Thus thehardness oftreated watersample is withinthe desired range.

15.The chloride content of all the samples including influent sourcewater sampleare way below the desired range of chloride content and thus the performance

of all treatment devices is satisfactory.16.The residual chlorine in the influent water sample is zero and thesame is the

case with the effluent water sample. Thus the treatment for free available residualchlorine is notneeded and satisfactory.

17.From the graph it can be seen that the influent source watersample showedpresenceof microorganism.

18.Some devices have proved to be unsatisfactory in treating thewater biologically toremove microorganism.

19.However, it should be noted that only one sample was analyzedand moresamples should be analyzed before arriving at any conclusion


15/15

water purification system ion

Documents