Hot Tub Forum
Original => Hot Tub Forum => Topic started by: orlandoguy on July 21, 2005, 04:28:45 pm
-
My rep says that one of the best things about an ozonator is that it lowers the amount of chemicals you need to keet the tub clean.
I have been keeping my bromine level on the lowest shade on the test strip, just below the ok range and was wondering if I am alone in this science???
-
That's what I was told by my dealer also. So far so good! :)
-
My rep says that one of the best things about an ozonator is that it lowers the amount of chemicals you need to keet the tub clean.
I have been keeping my bromine level on the lowest shade on the test strip, just below the ok range and was wondering if I am alone in this science???
This is true. I have had more than 21 years of ozone experience. I am not a scientist or an engineer, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn on more than on occasion.
Ozone is an oxidizer, sanitizer which is exactly what chlorine and bromine are. Chlorine and bromine are "contact" killers while ozone is a "search and find" killer. IF ozone kills and oxidizes bacteria, viruses, nutrients, and minerals, than what is the purpose of chlorine or bromine? They are a contact killer that will kill anything that comes in contact with it in the water when it is introduced. So, it protects you from other "body bugs" that are introduced by others. Well, usually a family always has the same "body bugs" anyway, but an invited guest may have uninvited "body bugs" that should be killed on contact.
Unlike Ozone, chemicals accumulate in the form of undissolved solids and require frequent to occasional water changes every 3 to 4 months. Ozone will reduce the need for chemicals and will extend the duration of time between water changes for up to a year’s time.
As a matter of fact, and this is factually true, IF your water is clean and clear with minimal TDS (total dissolved solids, chemical residuals) when you change your water, your new water will likely be the same, clean and clear. SO, IF it ain't broke don't fix it. We have had customers with the SAME water in the spa for more than 3 years, and we have done bacteria sampling and extensive testing on the water that was clean, clear and still had an "invitation to drink" AFTER 3 years.
I know to some this may sound "unbelievable", But I stand to profit nothing or gain anything for you to believe or not. It is true.
Good water management is SMART and Ozone WORKS. As a matter of fact, if your water is clean and clear, unplug your ozonator and continue your routine and see how long before you have water problems. Should you have any questions, please PM me.
;D ;D ;D
-
This is true. I have had more than 21 years of ozone experience. I am not a scientist or an engineer, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn on more than on occasion.
Ozone is an oxidizer, sanitizer which is exactly what chlorine and bromine are. Chlorine and bromine are "contact" killers while ozone is a "search and find" killer. IF ozone kills and oxidizes bacteria, viruses, nutrients, and minerals, than what is the purpose of chlorine or bromine? They are a contact killer that will kill anything that comes in contact with it in the water when it is introduced. So, it protects you from other "body bugs" that are introduced by others. Well, usually a family always has the same "body bugs" anyway, but an invited guest may have uninvited "body bugs" that should be killed on contact.
Unlike Ozone, chemicals accumulate in the form of undissolved solids and require frequent to occasional water changes every 3 to 4 months. Ozone will reduce the need for chemicals and will extend the duration of time between water changes for up to a year’s time.
As a matter of fact, and this is factually true, IF your water is clean and clear with minimal TDS (total dissolved solids, chemical residuals) when you change your water, your new water will likely be the same, clean and clear. SO, IF it ain't broke don't fix it. We have had customers with the SAME water in the spa for more than 3 years, and we have done bacteria sampling and extensive testing on the water that was clean, clear and still had an "invitation to drink" AFTER 3 years.
I know to some this may sound "unbelievable", But I stand to profit nothing or gain anything for you to believe or not. It is true.
Good water management is SMART and Ozone WORKS. As a matter of fact, if your water is clean and clear, unplug your ozonator and continue your routine and see how long before you have water problems. Should you have any questions, please PM me.
;D ;D ;D
Though I tend to disagree with much of what is said above, I will simplify my response to this.
Please provide data that shows how much my savings would be when ozone is used in comparison to not. What % in savings can be expected with the use of ozone? Is ozone considered a sanitizer or an oxidzer?
I don't claim to be a scientist either nor have studied the effect directly in lab conditions of the benefits of ozone but a great many years in this industry and tens of thousands of water analysis I have performed is enough for me to offer my opinion of disagreeing with 90% of your post McD. Sorry... :-/
For the record, I have owned a spa for years without the use of ozone and my water quality has ALWAYS been exceptional. I believe your opinion of the dramatic effect that would take place on a spa without ozone, is grossly overstated in relation to TDS.
It is interesting that 2 experienced people with a vast understanding of watercare can differ so much eh? ;) We’re not the only 2…
Steve
-
Steve, I am in complete agreement with you and I do not disagree with your point of view, nor do I challenge the numerous water analysis and testing you have done on "chemically" treated water. I am more than confident you interpretation is accurate and I do not challenge your experience with "chemically"" treated water.
I have never represented ozone to be a money saver or that it is more financially efficient in the treatment of water. But, I do agree with the initial post that indicates the use of "less" chemicals while using ozone. You must have made the assumption this would represent savings while it very well may. ;)
Please appreciate the fact that the scales of justice are blind and can only consider the evidence presented.
Your evidence is relative to your experiences and my evidence is relative to mine, of which you are certainly at liberty to challenge the opposing point of view. But, your opposition does not make it wrong.
You do use less chemicals in an ozone treated spa,
You do need chemicals in an ozone treated spa,
You will have longer durations between water changes,
You will have less TDS in ozone treated water,
You will experience less water maintainence,
AND,
You can use anything you want to use in your own spa. It is only what works for you. And, the only thing that will work is what you try. I have been trying it for more than 21 years. Life is filled with examples of things that others always thought didn't work before they witnessed the difference. ;)
That will always take time and your time has been dedicated in another, more common, direction than mine. That make us different, but not wrong. While we disagree and and this is a point of conjecture, it is what keeps us thinking and making advances. ;D
-
Well said.
Here's the thing. I've been hearing for years how ozone will help. I have asked professionals on countless occasions to give me an example of just how much it does but I never get a clear, definitive answer.
Does ozone reduce chemical use by 30%....80%? ???
Will it extend the life of the water by 30%...80%
How will it lower my maintenance and by how much?
I agree that it will assist my sanitizer by making it more effective, but I too am unclear on the real savings. I've heard anything from 10% to 90% from dealers but what I haven't seen is data supporting any of this for spa use.
Here's a question that maybe you can answer for me.
If my cost of ozone is $300 and I need to replace the chip every couple of years in a standard ozonator at a cost of approx $100, that would mean that over a 10 year period my cost of ozone is about $800. Will it save me more than this in relation to it's total cost and by how much? ???
We also have to realize that we speak of ozone generically here but there are variations of quality systems available that can dramatically effect our generalizations on cost and effectiveness.
To summarize my opinion McD, I respect your opinion but I want to be clear on it also. I agree that ozone can help. How much and at what cost? That, I'm unclear on. Maybe you can provide more details for us to give us a better understanding of its true advantage.
Steve
-
Let me chime in and add to this interesting exchange. I own a spa that has both an ozonator and a silver ion exchange system and I follow the Vermonter's water treatment regime. I am a professional engineer, working in the chemical engineering relm, but I am not a water chemist by any means.
Anyway, ozone is O3 (the 3 should be a sub) and is highly unstable. O2 is ordinary oxygen and is of course quite stable. So O3 does not last long, a matter of no more than a few seconds. O3 is harmful to the environment and the amont of O3 that can be generated must be quite small. Manufacturers of ozonators try to keep the amount of gas generated below governmental regulation limits so as to protect the environment.
Ozone is the most powerful oxidizer or sanitizer known to man. It is several orders of magnitude more powerful than dichlor or bromine as an oxidizer. But only a wee bit of it is being generated in your ozonator, and that wee bit has a short life span of just a few seconds. So an ozonator kills some bugs and this minimizes the need for dichlor or bromine. If a bigger, more powerful ozonator could be built perhaps it would generate sufficient O3 to obviate the need for dichlor or bromine. For obvious reasons, such a device cannot be.
Now some ozonators are more effective than others. This has to do with not only how much O3 they generate, but how well that O3 mixes with the water. Tiny bubbles are better than big bubbles and so on. So, two people can have different experience with ozonators because they are dealing with different ozonator products.
In conclusion, an ozonator is a nice thing to have. A good one should kill enough bugs so as to reduce the need for dichlor or bromine a noticeable amount. It is possible to treat water to kill bugs without an ozonator as well as with one. Either approach will still require the use of chemicals such as dichlor or bromine simply because the ozonator that is environmentally acceptable is not able to do the whole job by itself.
I hope that helps.
Regards,
Bill
-
I'm using Dichlor in my tub. I also have an ozinator connected to my 24X7 circulation pump. It's been in use for about 3 weeks. This system is new to me.
It is my understanding that the ozinator will assist in keeping the water cleaner, and thus reduce the amount of chemicals needed to maintain the water. I cannot comment if the system is more economical. However, I was drawn to it under the pretense that I could keep my water just as clean (if not cleaner) with less, harsh chemicals in the water.
Question: Should I be keeping my dichlor balanced per the test strip, or reduce it slightly because I have the ozinator? For some reason, I was lead to belive to keep it at the proper levels via the test strip, and in the long run, I'd need less chemicals to do that. But after reading this thread, should I also be keeping a lower chlorine level in the water?
As far as TDS, I'm concerned. My tub is about a month old and has seen a large varity of users. I'm getting the alka selzter foaming (disapaites after the jets are turned off) and a bit a cloudy-ness that clearrs up after a few minutes.
Wondering if I should change the water out?
-
Chemical companies suggest keeping your chlorine at 1-3 ppm and bromine at 3-5 ppm regardless of whether an ozonator is being used or not. Tis is part of the reason why I don't fully understand the "cost savings" aspect of ozone.
Bill, as a chemical engineer, are you able to answer any of my questions in this thread in regards to the actual cost savings associated with ozone use? Also, can you explain in a bit more detail how ozone acts as a sanitizer in a spa? Thanks much.
Drewstar, do you know what the current TDS level is in your spa?
Steve
-
Drewstar, do you know what the current TDS level is in your spa?
Steve
No. I do not know the current TDS level in my spa. The water is clear and has no ordor. The only concern is as I mentioned the fizzy bubbles and cloudniness that occurs when the pumps are running.
I'm faithful with checking the water and adding the appropriate chems, without going overboard. However, I am concerned that I am seeing this only after 4 weeks into a fresh fill up. But I recognize, since the tub is new, it's seen an unusally high amount of different users wanting to "check it out".
Perhaps Chas's Law of a water change for all new tubs after a month applies?
I guess I should pop down to the dealer and have em check TDS.
Steve, my ozinator wasn't billed as a primary cost savings but as addittinal defense to keep the water clearer. I am under the impression that I may see some savings in chems as I should be using less to maintain the appropriate levels, but will it offset the cost of the Ozinator? I dunno.......not enough data/experience to answer that.
-
Chemical companies suggest keeping your chlorine at 1-3 ppm and bromine at 3-5 ppm regardless of whether an ozonator is being used or not. Tis is part of the reason why I don't fully understand the "cost savings" aspect of ozone.
Not an engineer. Didn't even stay at the Holiday Inn.
Steve, the theory is that you can maintain the same PPM of sanitizer with less sanitizer input as the ozone is oxidizing your sanitizer, thereby making it availible to work.
I beleive a dichlor user with ozone would see less variance between free and total chlorine.
For the record, ozone is a chemical, and a very harsh one at that.
-
For the record, ozone is a chemical, and a very harsh one at that.
However, isn't ozone almost imediently broken down in water? So the trick is to mix the water and ozone in a compartment seperate from the tub area, allow it to ozidize in the water and then once harmless and has done it's job, allowed to enter the tub?
Or am I all wet?
-
Chemical companies suggest keeping your chlorine at 1-3 ppm and bromine at 3-5 ppm regardless of whether an ozonator is being used or not. Tis is part of the reason why I don't fully understand the "cost savings" aspect of ozone.
Steve
I live in Quebec city (Canada). I' am a newbie but from what I have learned so far, changing water here from december to march is, if not impossible, risky and disagreable.
Changing the water after the Chrismas and/or new year party is rather hard because then the average daily maximum* here is -8 Celcius (17,6 fahrenheit)
So a device that can keep the water OK until april have a value and I would be ready to pay for it. It is not just a matter of cost saving.
* in afternoon
-
My understanding of ozone is this -
It is not a sanitizer in the traditional sense. It does not maintain a residual. But, as most bacteria are anerobic (die when contacted by oxygen) it does sanitize some. The most benefit comes from the fact that it constantly(w/ circ pump) oxidizes the halogen sanitizers, it makes them more effective. It is, in effect, a low level, continuous shock. I've been told that once it oxidizes either bacteria or your sanitizer that the resulting off gas is approx. 95% oxygen.
I got these facts straight from Tom Cruise himself!!!! ;D
-
However, isn't ozone almost imediently broken down in water? So the trick is to mix the water and ozone in a compartment seperate from the tub area, allow it to ozidize in the water and then once harmless and has done it's job, allowed to enter the tub?
Or am I all wet?
Drewstar;
Please dont take what I said as argumentative. I simply take exception to people (dealers mostly) that lead consumers to beleive that an ozonator or salt system results in a "chemical free" environment.
Ozone is a chemical, but you are right it does dissolve in the water quickly. It does not add to TDS directly like a granular oxidizer does.
Using an ozonator, especially on a 24 hour circ pump, will raise pH which will result in more chemicals to fix the pH. It is true also that some granular oxidizers will also change pH (MPS 2.3, Lithchlor 10.8). Dichlor and its bromine cousin are pH neutral (7).
-
Dichlor has a ph of 6.0. I believe bromine to be about 4.0.
-
Dichlor has a ph of 6.0. I believe bromine to be about 4.0.
Really? Where are you getting your dichlor and granular bromine?
SpaGuard Dichlor=7
Beachcomber (aka Sanimar) Dichlor=6.7
SpaGuard Bromine Concentrate=7
Beachcomber BromoBlast =6.7
Bromine Tablets are pH 4......I hope you aren't oxidizing using bromie tablets.... ;D
-
BioGuard Chem Plus 2000 training manual states on page 89 // Dichloro-S-Triazinetrione = ph of 6.0
-
Drewstar;
Please dont take what I said as argumentative. I simply take exception to people (dealers mostly) that lead consumers to beleive that an ozonator or salt system results in a "chemical free" environment.
Ozone is a chemical, but you are right it does dissolve in the water quickly. It does not add to TDS directly like a granular oxidizer does.
Using an ozonator, especially on a 24 hour circ pump, will raise pH which will result in more chemicals to fix the pH. It is true also that some granular oxidizers will also change pH (MPS 2.3, Lithchlor 10.8). Dichlor and its bromine cousin are pH neutral (7).
Nope, I didn't take it as argumentative, and even if it was, I don't mind. I prefer a healthy exchange of thoughts and experiences here. So far my PH has been fine (only 1 month though_
However I was seeing a bit of foaming in the tub, and it was a bit cloudy with the jets running. it would clear up in a few minutes after the pumps stopped, but I wasn't happy with it.
It was suggested I get my TDS checked. I planned on doing that before dumping the water, but Saturday night I found my 18 year old nephew and his freinds in my tub eating chips and dip. ARRRRRRGH! Foam was high. The next morning i said "F-it!" and drained the tub.
I was suprised how long it took to drain the tub. (2 drain valves on the base and 2 hoses, after 3 hours I was only 1/2 way down (350 gal tub). I I brought out my electric pump and had the thing empty in an hour.
I glossed the tub. (forgot to do that on initial fill up).
Refilled and will see what happens. Also noticed a slight yellow brownish film along the water line after fill up. It wiped off very easy, but wondered about that. I did put in a bottle of metal gone, as recomended before fill up.
?
-
I would like to cover just a few points that have been made in this thread.
Bromine is not pH neutral, it is quite acidic.
The cost savings from ozonators has never been quantified, documented, or published in any credible journal as far as I know. So there is no way to know if it has an economic payback. My gut tells me that it would cost at least as much to buy, use, and maintain an ozonator as it would to just use chemical treatment schemes. An ozonator is nice to have anyway. It is another tool in our arsenal of tools to control bacteria.
Ozone or O3 is not very easily dissolved in water. And it bubbles out and is lost quickly to the atmosphere. O3 is not stable so it does not stay as O3 for long. It is looking to get rid of that extra oxygen atom and to revert to the inherently stable O2 that we breathe. What makes it such a powerful oxidizer is exactly that it is eager to give up it's extra oxygen atom. It could be said to be an extremely aggressive chemical. There is no more reactive oxidizer known.
Regards,
Bill
-
Bromine is not pH neutral, it is quite acidic.
What bromine are you referring to? Pure bromine, which none of us can get our hands on. Bromine pucks (4) or bromine concentrate (which is 15% sodium bromide and 85% dichlor, pH 6.7-7)
-
BioGuard Chem Plus 2000 training manual states on page 89 // Dichloro-S-Triazinetrione = ph of 6.0
They must offer different products north and south of the 49th..
-
Just when you thought is was safe to go back into the water…..sorry I'm late, but I would like to clarify a few issues of conflict in this thread to correct any mis-understanding.
Well said…..I've been hearing for years how ozone will help…..
Does ozone reduce chemical use by 30%....80%
Will it extend the life of the water by 30%...80%
How will it lower my maintenance and by how much?
I agree that it will assist my sanitizer by making it more effective, but I too am unclear on the real savings. I've heard anything from 10% to 90% from dealers…..
Here's a question that maybe you can answer for me.
If my cost of ozone is $300 and I need to replace the chip every couple of years in a standard ozonator at a cost of approx $100, that would mean that over a 10 year period my cost of ozone is about $800. Will it save me more than this in relation to it's total cost and by how much?
…..there are variations of quality systems available that can dramatically effect our generalizations on cost and effectiveness.
To summarize my opinion McD, I respect your opinion but I want to be clear on it also. I agree that ozone can help. How much and at what cost? That, I'm unclear on. Maybe you can provide more details for us to give us a better understanding of its true advantage.
Steve
Steve, I have not collected nor have I certified any scientific data that will support my “grass roots” claims of practical use and application of ozone. I do not profit in any way to state my concepts or opinions which are based on my actual experience with over 5,000 customers and 21 years of using ozone as the primary sanitizer in spa water.
Your questions are legitimate and here is my response; I would represent annual chemical consumption on an ozone treated spa to be not more than approx. $100 @ year. Over 10 years, your chemical consumption would be approx. $1,000 plus the cost of Ozone that you suggest would be approx. $800 for a combined total of $1,800, or an average $180 per year. Because TDS are much lower, ozone will extend the time between necessary water changes upwards to a year, or even more. Thus, in 10 years you would drain, refill and re-heat the water 10 times. Consider the cost of your time and energy.
On the other hand, you could choose to NOT use ozone and your chemical consumption cost over a year’s time would approximate $300, or $3000 over 10 years which would include additional start up sequestering agents etc. Plus, because of the TDS build up and chemical stew that develops, you will change your water every 3 months, or 4 times a year and 40 times over the 10 years. Consider the cost of your time and energy.
IF instead, your choice was to use BQ as a sanitizer, your annual cost would border $400 to $500 a year and if you were to use an ozonator on a BQ treated spa the cost would escalate upwards to $500 to $600 a year. That would be $5,000 to $6,000 over 10 years.
And, thank you for acknowledging that there are variations in the quality levels of ozonators from expensive to inexpensive for our shoppers to keep in mind. They certainly do perform differently because of the type, style, quantity, method of mixing and length of the “contact” chambers used to reduce “off gassing” that we hear so much about.
What you and others have “heard” is sales talk which can be misleading and inaccurate. If you do respect my opinion, then with an open mind you will consider it for a short period of time before rebuking it. Individually, we stand to gain nothing, however collectively, we can all benefit, if we open our minds and apply our combined knowledge for the interest of all. Are you up for it? ;D
Why no one has scientifically come forward to prove beyond any reasonable doubt to convert all of the naysayers and disbelievers, is the same reason there are 7 primary froms of religion. We are all different and who profits to make you all believers? ???
-
Let me chime in and add to this interesting exchange. I own a spa that has both an ozonator and a silver ion exchange system and I follow the Vermonter's water treatment regime. I am a professional engineer, working in the chemical engineering relm, but I am not a water chemist by any means.
Anyway, ozone is O3 (the 3 should be a sub) and is highly unstable. O2 is ordinary oxygen and is of course quite stable. So O3 does not last long, a matter of no more than a few seconds. O3 is harmful to the environment and the amont of O3 that can be generated must be quite small. Manufacturers of ozonators try to keep the amount of gas generated below governmental regulation limits so as to protect the environment.
Ozone is the most powerful oxidizer or sanitizer known to man. It is several orders of magnitude more powerful than dichlor or bromine as an oxidizer. But only a wee bit of it is being generated in your ozonator, and that wee bit has a short life span of just a few seconds. So an ozonator kills some bugs and this minimizes the need for dichlor or bromine. If a bigger, more powerful ozonator could be built perhaps it would generate sufficient O3 to obviate the need for dichlor or bromine. For obvious reasons, such a device cannot be.
Now some ozonators are more effective than others. This has to do with not only how much O3 they generate, but how well that O3 mixes with the water. Tiny bubbles are better than big bubbles and so on. So, two people can have different experience with ozonators because they are dealing with different ozonator products.
In conclusion, an ozonator is a nice thing to have. A good one should kill enough bugs so as to reduce the need for dichlor or bromine a noticeable amount. It is possible to treat water to kill bugs without an ozonator as well as with one. Either approach will still require the use of chemicals such as dichlor or bromine simply because the ozonator that is environmentally acceptable is not able to do the whole job by itself.
I hope that helps.
Regards,
Bill
Bill, maybe you can help us better understand. What would you anticipate your annual chemical cost to be and how often do your change your water? When you do change your water, is it because it is cloudy or dirty and smells of chemicals, or is it clean and clear like the new water you put in? ???
Ozone is indeed a potent and powerful oxidizer and sanitizer, but is it a chemical or a gas? Isn’t ozone a gas derived from oxygen as you state or is it a chemical compound? ???
If ozone is a more powerful oxidizer, sanitizer than di-chlor or bromine, then why is it that we must use chlorine or bromine if we were able to introduce the proper amount of ozone? ???
I am not so sure that we are introducing the "wee bit" you indicate, as ozone generators for spas will produce from 50mg to 500mg into the system, thus proving ozone generators do in fact differ from one another. However, what does concern us are large gaseous bubbles coming to the surface as ozone gas rather than oxygen, thus the reason for the injectors, mixing valves and contact chambers to allow the ozone the ability to complete it’s “search and find”, or it’s “seek and kill” mission resulting in oxygen before bubbling to the surface within the spa.
If a good ozonator would in fact reduce the need for “more” chemicals, would that not represent less chemical consumption, less TDS resulting in clean water. And theoretically, couldn't it possibly eliminate the need for chemical sanitizers and oxidizers? I said "theoretically" and "possibly", not "actually". We do in fact need a "contact killer".
And then of course, you could choose to use chemicals exclusively without an ozonator. But then, what’s the point of having an ozonator in the first place?
-
Ozone is indeed a potent and powerful oxidizer and sanitizer, but is it a chemical or a gas? Isn’t ozone a gas derived from oxygen as you state or is it a chemical compound? ???
What is a chemical? Here's some possible definition:
1- Everything that you can express with a chemical formula is chemical:
So, water is a chemical H2O. There's a lot of chemical reaction in you're body so YOU are chemical.
With this definition, ozone is a chemical.
2- Stuff that is reactive or have weird properties:
Bleach is a chemical because it remove the color on your shirt. Glue is chemical because it stinks and sticks.
With this definition, ozone is a chemical.
3- Stuff that are man-made, that you don't find in nature.
At the pool and spa store, that's the stuff you buy in little plastic container and you add to water.
With this definition, ozone is not chemical. Think about the ozone layer.
4- The stuff I sell is natural. The stuff you buy from the guy on the other side of the street is a chemical:
Look at this page:
http://c3.org/chlorine_knowledge_center/bbc7.html
Choose your own definition of what is a chemical. If you like ozone, I suggest you to use a definition that classified ozone as "natural". ;D
-
I don't have the extensive knowledge that Bill has but ...
Ozone is a gas to my knowledge. It's chemical composition is 3 oxygen atoms.
It doesn't "seek and destroy", it needs to bump into the bugs to be effective. Remember in a microscopic world a centimeter can be as large as a football field to us. There is a slight electric charge to the electrons that can make an unstable electron jump to another "body" if close enough and if it doesn't need a catalyst.
It needs to be at a certain concentration to allow enough ozone atoms to bump into the bugs to destroy them. The figures that come from manufacturers are they dissolved or at the ozone producing site (not dissolved)?
here are a couple of sites about ozone for drinking water:
http://www.ozoneapplications.com/watertreatment/ozone%20and%20water.htm
http://www.ozoneapplications.com/info/ozone_bacteria_mold_viruses.htm
http://www.ozoneapplications.com/info/ozone_properties.htm
It's all I can find on ozone during my research phase of buying a tub. I have to say after seeing what's needed to ozonate drinking water - spa ozonators aren't up to the task IMO. As you read the above (if you do) remember their injecting 100% O2 and air is at 21% O2 - a 79% reduction in O2
Can they work - I believe they can. Do I have ozone on my tub - yes but only run it 8 hours a day. Without the off gas chamber (I don't have one) any unused ozone has to go somewhere - into the tub and that could damage the cover and headrests.
I run it for the "just in case" syndrome - IF it does anything, I have it process 5280 gallons a day in my 400 gallon tub. No it's not available 24/7 but it usually runs after my soak and then again mid day.
I still rely on chlorine to do it's part and at 2-3 ppm, it's effective. And by the time I get back into my tub, I'm usually soaking in close to 0 chlorine - unfortunately I really don't have knowledge of bromine - I've read it's very stable in hot water.
-
I'm using Dichlor in my tub. I also have an ozinator connected to my 24X7 circulation pump. It's been in use for about 3 weeks. This system is new to me.
It is my understanding that the ozinator will assist in keeping the water cleaner, and thus reduce the amount of chemicals needed to maintain the water. I cannot comment if the system is more economical. However, I was drawn to it under the pretense that I could keep my water just as clean (if not cleaner) with less, harsh chemicals in the water.
Question: Should I be keeping my dichlor balanced per the test strip, or reduce it slightly because I have the ozinator? For some reason, I was lead to belive to keep it at the proper levels via the test strip, and in the long run, I'd need less chemicals to do that. But after reading this thread, should I also be keeping a lower chlorine level in the water?
As far as TDS, I'm concerned. My tub is about a month old and has seen a large varity of users. I'm getting the alka selzter foaming (disapaites after the jets are turned off) and a bit a cloudy-ness that clearrs up after a few minutes.
Wondering if I should change the water out?
Drew, changing you water because of the heavy use contributing to of accumulated matter including chemicals and TDS would not be a bad idea. A new tub will see more “dirt” and traffic in the first 30 days as the new tub is introduced. As a daily use patterns develop fewer guests outside the immediate family are using the spa. In many cases, you will find 90% of the time 2 people or less are using the Hot Tub.
I would recommend keeping dichlor present in the water as use stabilizes. Obviously, what you are trying to accomplish is Clean, Clear Water with an invitation to drink. Water should not be cloudy, it should not smell and you should be able to read the date on a dime in the bottom of the tub. There are several things that will cloud water that need to be understood. They all have different solutions. They are lack of proper sanitation regardless of chemicals or ozone and include, body nutrients, oils, lotions, minerals and inadequate filtration. When you have your pumps on and you turn them off, you water should be crystal clear. If the water appears “fuzzy”, but the “fuzz” dissipates in a matter of seconds, this is the evidence of accumulated chemicals in the form of TDS. The longer it takes to appear crystal clear, the higher the level of TDS. This will not occur because of the gaseous form ozone, but will occur in chemically treated water.
Foaming on top of the water is all together different. The root cause of foam is phosphates other wise known as soap, or residual soap rinsed out of what ever somebody wore into the water. There are several ways to handle this problem, such as anti-foam which is silicone based and will leave a “bathtub” ring. It would be suggested to mix anti-foam with 50% water in a “spray” bottle and spray it on the foam. The results are the same and immediate, the use of chemical is reduced and the resulting affect of using chemicals will be minimized. But then, the chemical companies say just add, dump, pour repeatedly to use MORE chemicals, I wonder why? ???
The best solution is to wear nothing into the tub that has soap residual, ie your birthday suit. ;D
-
I think what is not being mentioned is that many people today use mineral "stick" like N-2 or the frog along with ozone and bromine or di chlior, it is my understanding that this is what allows one to use less bromine or di chlior along with ozone that is again in use in many of todays spas .....I do not think a mineral stick or ozone is sold as a way to save money but as a way to have lower ppm of bromine or di clior ...and that is where the advantage is....
-
Chemical companies suggest keeping your chlorine at 1-3 ppm and bromine at 3-5 ppm regardless of whether an ozonator is being used or not. Tis is part of the reason why I don't fully understand the "cost savings" aspect of ozone.
Steve
If ozone is an alternative sanitizer, oxidizer proven to be effective, why would the chemical companies recommend the reduction of the use of their product? Of course I understand their position which is the need to identify a “contact” killer that endorses the consumption of their product, and in certain instances it is needed.
Now don’t go off on me, but let's open our minds and think out loud with me for the benefit of others. Your statement above holds the chemical companies out as if they have written the bible and ALL of their information is credible, whereas you do not embrace the information of the Ozone industry as it might promote their product concept while you dismiss their information as unproven “scientifically”. Why do they continue to exist? ???
Well then respond to this question, why are there so many people using ozone, and so many dealers selling or giving away ozonators that cost them money, and why are so many manufactures purchasing ozonators for resale to the public and the inclusion of ozone on their manufactured product? Why spend the money? “This is part of the reason why I don’t fully understand” where all of this disbelief is coming from when it appears no one really understands anything about ozone, but we sell it and people buy it because we are all fools and this is the biggest scam being perpetrated on the consuming public. I DON’T THINK SO. ::)
You say you “respect” my opinion. Could it be, if I have indeed embraced ozone as a primary sanitizer, and I have put into service more than 5,000 ozonators, thus having more than 5,000 customers/consumers experiencing clean clear water that has an invitation to drink with virtually a very low amount of chemical applications, wouldn’t you naturally understand and expect that I would have a different level of understanding than you or others would? Does this make me a “screwball" or an "ozone fanatic" that should not be believed.
We wouldn’t be driving automobiles today if Henry Ford listened to his critics as they voiced their disbelief and considered him a fool and told him it couldn't be done. That was in the early part of the 1900’s. That was before the Japanees lost the war and focused their efforts on becoming industrialized, now THEY are the #2 global automaker in 50 years. Look at what Henry Ford has caused to happen.
Are you aware that ozone was first understood and put into use in the 1890’s and was then most commonly used for water purification.
“Chemical companies suggest keeping your chlorine at 1-3 ppm and bromine at 3-5 ppm regardless of whether an ozonator is being used or not” :o AND WHY WOULDN’T THEY. :o
-
What is a chemical? Here's some possible definition:
1- Everything that you can express with a chemical formula is chemical:
So, water is a chemical H2O. There's a lot of chemical reaction in you're body so YOU are chemical.
With this definition, ozone is a chemical.
2- Stuff that is reactive or have weird properties:
Bleach is a chemical because it remove the color on your shirt. Glue is chemical because it stinks and sticks.
With this definition, ozone is a chemical.
3- Stuff that are man-made, that you don't find in nature.
At the pool and spa store, that's the stuff you buy in little plastic container and you add to water.
With this definition, ozone is not chemical. Think about the ozone layer.
4- The stuff I sell is natural. The stuff you buy from the guy on the other side of the street is a chemical:
Look at this page:
http://c3.org/chlorine_knowledge_center/bbc7.html
Choose your own definition of what is a chemical. If you like ozone, I suggest you to use a definition that classified ozone as "natural". ;D
Thank you for your input and welcome to the pursuit of the truth.
Chemical = a substance used or made by chemistry, a substance used in or produced by the processes of chemistry. =Ozone does not qualify as a chemical as it can not be produced through the process of chemistry, nor can it be manufactured or packaged.
Gas = a substance such as air, “chemistry” a substance such as air that is neither a solid not a liquid at ordinary temperatures and that has the ability to expand indefinitely. =Ozone is a gas and is a derivitive of oxygen in the "air".
Natural = produced by nature, present in or produced by nature, rather than being artificially created by people = chemicals and ozone of which neither are natural as both are created in a process that is not necessarily a chemical process.
It would be my opinion that ozone is a gaseous form and not a chemical. It would be my interpretation that a chemical is a compound or a substance that can be analyzed under a microscope. It is a “solid” form of matter that can be identified, manufactured, packaged.
I would welcome any learned explanation that can correct any misunderstanding and a correct interpretation regarding this issue.
-
I don't have the extensive knowledge that Bill has but .....Ozone is a gas to my knowledge. It's chemical composition is 3 oxygen atoms.
It doesn't "seek and destroy", it needs to bump into the bugs to be effective……..It needs to be at a certain concentration to allow enough ozone atoms to bump into the bugs to destroy them. ……..Can they work - I believe they can……I run it for the "just in case" syndrome - IF it does anything……I still rely on chlorine to do it's part and at 2-3 ppm, it's effective. And by the time I get back into my tub, I'm usually soaking in close to 0 chlorine
EXACTLY But, is an atom a chemical, thus if I have 3 like atoms, do I have 3 separate measurements of a chemical? I agree and accept your observations and I should change my term to “contact and destroy”. The “IF” factor and the “just in case” factor is certainly understandable and appropriate.
-
Oxygen is an chemical element in the periodic table so ... I would think that an free oxygen atom is part of a chemical.
To that I would say YES it is a chemical.
-
I simply take exception to people (dealers mostly) that lead consumers to beleive that an ozonator or salt system results in a "chemical free" environment.
Ozone is a chemical, but you are right it does dissolve in the water quickly. It does not add to TDS directly like a granular oxidizer does…Using an ozonator, especially on a 24 hour circ pump, will raise pH which will result in more chemicals to fix the pH. It is true also that some granular oxidizers will also change pH (MPS 2.3, Lithchlor 10.8). Dichlor and its bromine cousin are pH neutral (7).
I would like to cover just a few points that have been made in this thread.
Bromine is not pH neutral, it is quite acidic.
The cost savings from ozonators has never been quantified, documented, or published in any credible journal as far as I know……. An ozonator is nice to have anyway. It is another tool in our arsenal of tools to control bacteria.
Ozone or O3 is not very easily dissolved in water. And it bubbles out and is lost quickly to the atmosphere. O3 is not stable so it does not stay as O3 for long. It is looking to get rid of that extra oxygen atom and to revert to the inherently stable O2 that we breathe. What makes it such a powerful oxidizer is exactly that it is eager to give up it's extra oxygen atom. It could be said to be an extremely aggressive chemical. There is no more reactive oxidizer known.
Regards,
Bill
For the record, ozone is pH neutral and will not raise the pH of water.
I do NOT believe ozone will support a “chemically FREE” environment, BUT, it will SUBSTANTIALLY reduce the need for chemical sanitizers, oxidizers, as well as other chemicals used to conteract other water conditions.
Whether ozone is a chemical or not remains to be a point of conjecture, BUT it does NOT dissolve in water, because it is a derivative of oxygen, which is a gaseous form of air. It MUST be “smashed” into the tiniest, smallest, water soluble little air bubbles to remain in suspension within the water to come in contact with mineral, nutrients, bacteria and viruses to do exactly what you say, attract a “like atom” from those forms of other matter, thus oxidizing them and sanitizing the water.
Because the gaseous form of ozone or oxygen, it will not remain "disolved" in the water which is what chemicals do, thus TDS. It will eventually “bubble” to the surface and become airborne, thus all the controversy regarding “off gassing”.
As Bill states, “An ozonator is nice to have anyway. It is another tool in our arsenal of tools to control bacteria”, is that because it works? ???
“O3 is not stable so it does not stay as O3 for long. It is looking to get rid of that extra oxygen atom and to revert to the inherently stable O2 that we breathe.” Get rid of or, is it looking to attract a “like atom” so as to render the other molecule oxidized or sanitized? While I believe it gives up or surrenders an atom to form oxygen, it is actually “attracting” a like atom from another molecule to become 2 stable molecules of oxygen eventually going airborne.
However, if there are no other molecules of mineral, nutrient, bacteria or viruses contained within the water the water is in its purist form, and it remains to be a gaseous form of an air bubble, it will go airborne and remain an active molecule of ozone until such time it “contacts and destroys” another molecule extracting a like atom.
THUS, the fear of "off gassing" and inhaling ozone which could be considered a carcinogen like chlorine. Let me think about that, do we ever absorb or consume chlorine? Isn't is also a carcinogen? ???
-
reading this I do have to say in my own limited knowlege of things. Ozone does work well. I bought a Marquis Epic. All of them have a Ozonator built in to the price. From what I understand If you go to the Marquis web site it shows how it works the Ozonator is only on during the filter cycles. it has a mixing chamber to let the O3 move back to o2 to prevent off gassing. Just having Ozone is not enough minerals and bromide still must be used. My Marquis dealer told me to make sure I increase the filter times and decrease the level of bromine to .05 ppm I still have to wait to see if this stands true. Waiting for hand to heal and get my pad set up etc...
-
If ozone is a more powerful oxidizer, sanitizer than di-chlor or bromine, then why is it that we must use chlorine or bromine if we were able to introduce the proper amount of ozone? ???
The limitation of ozone is not the quantity but is location. When the bubbles come out of the mixing chamber, there is no ozone anymore. When you use Chlorine, some of it kill bugs and oxydize stuff. If you add more Chlorine than what is needed to oxydize everything, than you have some residual chlorine that stay in the water and wait for the next job.
But no matter what kind of ozonator you have, there is no residual ozone in your tub.
Imagine two person in your tub. Some bug could travel from one body to the other before it get caught in the water intake of your ozonator.
Another problem is that some bugs could stick on the side of your tub and multiply there without being exposed to ozone.
That's why you need chlorine or bromine as a residual sanitizer.
-
Whether ozone is a chemical or not remains to be a point of conjecture,
Yes, that was my point.
BUT it does NOT dissolve in water, because it is a derivative of oxygen, which is a gaseous form of air.
Gazes can be dissolve in water. There a lot of CO2 in a Coke bottle.
http://home.howstuffworks.com/question446.htm
http://science.howstuffworks.com/question101.htm
However, if there are no other molecules of mineral, nutrient, bacteria or viruses contained within the water the water is in its purist form, and it remains to be a gaseous form of an air bubble, it will go airborne and remain an active molecule of ozone until such time it “contacts and destroys” another molecule extracting a like atom.
I don't think so. It can just become oxygen again:
3 O2 <=> 2 O3
In the corona discharge, three molecule of oxygen (O2)become two molecule of ozone (O3). Two molecule of ozone (O3) can become back three molecule of oxygen.
This explanation is a short cut. More details here:
http://www.atmos.umd.edu/~owen/METO123/OZHOLE/lecture.html
I don't have statistics or a proof, but I think that most of the ozone that have not been "used" become oxygen before exiting the mixing chamber. That's make the device safer in the eyes of the people who think that breathing ozone is bad.
There's a debate about the effect of ozone on health. Personally I just don't know. But I tend too believe that the tubs with ozone are safe because there's not so much of it that escape the mixing chamber.
-
BUT it does NOT dissolve in water, because it is a derivative of oxygen, which is a gaseous form of air.
Actually air is mostly Nitrogen, (about 78%), with only about 21% Oxygen (and 1 % other junk). So we can't say that "oxygen is a gaseous form of air." it's only a component of it.. (I wouldn't scuba with 100%compressed O2!) :)
-
My Marquis dealer told me to make sure I increase the filter times and decrease the level of bromine to .05 ppm I still have to wait to see if this stands true. Waiting for hand to heal and get my pad set up etc...
Tootall,
Sorry to hear about your hand. I hope it heals quickly.
I've noted your post with interest as my Marquis dealer didn't have much to say about the ozonator and wants me to keep my frog bromine cartridge set to 4 - at least for now because it is a new install (8 days ago). So for the last week, my tendency is to add the dry bromine if the test strip shows its low but now I'm wondering whether or not I need to keep it up to that level.
If I can keep the bromine level lower - so much the better.
Anyone is welcome to chime in here: when I take the cover off there is a chemical smell but its not strong. It would be wonderful to have no smell at all. Is that realistic? I keep seeing the phrase, "Clean, clear water with an invitation to drink" and that it should not smell. Does that mean no chemical smell at all? As in NYET, NADA, NIHA, NEIN, etc.?
Thanks,
Phil
-
Anyone is welcome to chime in here: when I take the cover off there is a chemical smell but its not strong. It would be wonderful to have no smell at all. Is that realistic?
If you want to soak with less of a "chemical smell", I highly suggest you do away with bromine altogether as by nature it'll always seem that way with that method. If you switch to a Nature 2 type system (chlorine based) you will probably be much happier. I've seen people switch many times and wish they'd done so sooner after seeing the difference. Chlorine does not stay in hot water long so you add after you get out and it does its job and dissipates whereas bromine maintains a constant level making it seem like your bathing in a chemical soup (IMO).
-
I mentioned in an earlier post about the minerals along with ozone as in todays spa world many folks are going this way ....again my question to those who with more experience is not the cost savings, as that has already been debated and think it is reasonable to say that while perhaps using less bromine or DI chlior that alone will not offset the cost of an ozonator, the real benefit is the lower ppm ....and that means less odor, easier on skin and, suits, covers, etc .... I think as it has been mentioned that the advantage to ozone and again I throw in minerals, (frog, N-2, etc) is making water care easier and using less of the harsher sanitizer no matter its form .....
-
If you want to soak with less of a "chemical smell", I highly suggest you do away with bromine altogether as by nature it'll always seem that way with that method.
???
Any bromine zealots want to argue this? Does a spa using bromine always have a chemical smell?
Why would anyone want to use bromine if there is always an odor? Is it cheaper or a better sanitizer than dichlor?
Phil
-
Phil,
with bromine you have a residual most of the time it is used with a feeder of some type so you do not have to spoon feed your spa after use ...for many it can be almost like a set and forget it thing...which by the way is of course not the best action ....
-
Phil,
with bromine you have a residual most of the time it is used with a feeder of some type so you do not have to spoon feed your spa after use ...for many it can be almost like a set and forget it thing...which by the way is of course not the best action ....
True, Bromine allows you to skip the add per use while chlorine allows you to sit without a clothes pin on your nose (maybe I'm exaggerating a bit). You can try both but I find about 83% of the people that have done both prefer the chlorine method.
-
As for what my dealer has told me is to increase the filter time thats when the Ozone is used. Have to mineral stick wide open 8 and the bromine open to 2 or 1. his store is busy and non of his tubs have a chemical smell so what it's worth I think the spa frog and ozone works just have to wait and see for myself. maybe I will change my opinon who knows?
-
???
Any bromine zealots want to argue this? Does a spa using bromine always have a chemical smell?
Why would anyone want to use bromine if there is always an odor? Is it cheaper or a better sanitizer than dichlor?
Phil
Bromine has a pH balance of 6.2 - 6.5 (someone can correct the number if it is wrong) but, it is below 7.2 - 7.6 where we want to keep the water.
Anything you SMELL off of the water is a gaseous form and an indication that your pH is out of balance. Bromine will continiously pull pH down because of it low pH and contributes to the cause of smell, gas off the water.
-
For the record, ozone is pH neutral and will not raise the pH of water.
For the record, my experience is that constant ozone generation (and resulting O2 injection) in showroom tubs tends result in pH higher than the spas in the same showroom, using the same chemicals with 2*3 hour ozonation.
Customers that do not turn off there air controls (in non circ pump tubs) tend to have higher pH than those that do not. This is because injection of air results in pH creep.
I know that is far from scientific data, just my experience.
I know your experience in the industry far exceeds mine, but upon what do you base your statement above if I may ask?
-
For the record, my experience is that constant ozone generation (and resulting O2 injection) in showroom tubs tends result in pH higher than the spas in the same showroom, using the same chemicals with 2*3 hour ozonation.
Customers that do not turn off there air controls (in non circ pump tubs) tend to have higher pH than those that do not. This is because injection of air results in pH creep.
I know that is far from scientific data, just my experience.
I know your experience in the industry far exceeds mine, but upon what do you base your statement above if I may ask?
Ozone is in fact pH neutural, that being the case it will not change the neutural pH of 7.2 to 7.6 that we are trying to maintain.
The amount of “chemical” reduction is in direct proportion to the following items: Amount of ozone gas available (more ozone; more oxidation)
The efficiency of dissolving the ozone into the body of water (only dissolved ozone will be effective; undissolved ozone will off-gas)
The amount of organic load in the water (more organic load; more ozone is needed)
The amount of time the ozone has to contact the organic load (more time; more oxidation)
I do not believe 2 to 3 hours of ozonation is adequate to have a meaningful fenefit.
-
Ozone is in fact pH neutural,
Again, upon what do you base this statement?