Hotstuff said:i would say go, for aquaguard RO water puifier. RO technology gives much better n cleaner water. also it tastes just like mineral water
racy1 said:Practically I would not suggest an RO purifier... Reason..... We are Indians & we cannot live on such pure water.... Our immunity is built 'coz we take microbes in less no. but with such pure water the immune tolerance for pathogens will decrease... We cannot take such pure water everywhere....
wolfff said:hmmm... sounds interesting. I would like to know what Medpal thinks about this...
medpal said:Now lets consider the UV machines:
These are as such good, but they do not destroy or remove the infective material, they just deactivate them and render the water temporarily clean for intake.
NOw if the container is contaminated or water storage is not proper or even if the consumers immunity is down, these infective organisms can be reactivated and can create the problem.
racy1 said:For an average Indian family UV option is the best....'coz not everyone gets clean Municipal Water... I've seen Permionics India make Filters with many doctors & Rly Hospitals. We had that filter earlier.... But they need Clear & Clean water....
Also UV does destroy the membrane of the microbe thus killing it & not just deactivating..... The e-boiling+ feature is nothing but a higher rated UV lamp used in the purifier which makes the water safe as water boiled for 20mins.... (As stated by service personal)....
AMC makes the Eureka Forbes purifier a better option... even though they charge a premium over other brands.... For options other than Eureka Forbes there is Philips & Bajaj... Though they are relatively new but provide the same technology....
Regular maintainance is a major drawback but AMC is worth the effort... A two year plan costs Rs.1590/- Incl. Taxes.... Covers most things....
medpal said:if you have the literature then i would like to go through the manual where it suggests that UV action is bactericidal.
because if i need to disinfect my Operation Theatre with a really powerfull lamp then also it would take at least 2 hours so i dont think a small uv lamp can disinfect water in a flash.
secondly an average lower middle class family who are most exposed to hazardous water cant afford regular AMC imo, believe i am diectly concerned with people who try hard to meet their two ends every month being in healthcare field.
so a really decent maintainance free option is available why shouldnt we opt for it? i am not against UV or RO my point is expense to benefit ratio.
lastly i had made the water cultured for any bacterial or viral infection for 48 hours with a friend who is specialist microbiologist, and the results were negetive with Pureflo of Permionics.
medpal said:if you have the literature then i would like to go through the manual where it suggests that UV action is bactericidal.
racy1 said:Dude.... Don't tell me UV is not bactericidal.... Check this out....UV Rays Specialty Definition
I can't believe that you said this... Intensity of any radiation is also dependent upon the area & wavelength along with duration of radiation.... In a 2x4" enclosed space UV rays would be more effective... Then say in a 12x12 OT.... Also service personal tells us not to open the valve fully & let water come to the purifier slowly... To have more effective purification....
I am not suggesting any middle class family to go & get a UV water purifier... Most people don't.... they either don't purify water at all or use filters... mostly cheapo candle stick type...
Again how many areas get clean municipal water... In my area its always slightly muddy... Most places in India supply water is not pure & clear... There is always impurities Biological, Chemical & Physical... UV rays does have viricidal, bactericidal effect... To take care of biological impurities...
Again not every one gets clean water....
ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES
Advantages
• UV disinfection is effective at inactivating most viruses, spores, and cysts.
• UV disinfection is a physical process rather than a chemical disinfectant, which eliminates the need to generate, handle, transport, or store toxic/hazardous or corrosive chemicals.
• There is no residual effect that can beharmful to humans or aquatic life.
• UV disinfection is user-friendly for operators.
• UV disinfection has a shorter contact time when compared with other disinfectants (approximately 20 to 30 seconds with low-pressure lamps).
• UV disinfection equipment requires less space than other methods.
Disadvantages
• Low dosage may not effectively inactivate some viruses, spores, and cysts.
• Organisms can sometimes repair and reverse the destructive effects of UV through a "repair mechanism," known as photo reactivation, or in the absence of light known as "dark repair."
• A preventive maintenance program is necessary to control fouling of tubes.
• Turbidity and total suspended solids (TSS) in the wastewater can render UV
disinfection ineffective. UV disinfection with low-pressure lamps is not as effective for secondary effluent with TSS levels above 30 mg/L.
• UV disinfection is not as cost-effective as chlorination, but costs are competitive when chlorination dechlorination is used and fire codes are met.
medpal said:now if you dont open the valve for first minute then the contents are good but what can you say bout the regular flow to fill the big containers. The disinfection can not be guaranteed.
So the Uv process just takes care of biological impurities, the physical impurities are taken care of by prefilter and silver impregnated activated carbon.
As you said not every one gets clean water supply in our setup, right so the hard water or muddy water or whatever you feel is bad will render the UV disinfection powerless.
now UV will disinfect the water but will not do anything about physical impurities.