RO filter keep or remove

Users who are viewing this thread

Jsmallberries

Member
Messages
265
Reaction score
18
Points
18
Location
Zephyrhills, Florida
A couple of years back, I installed an RO point of use under the kitchen sink after installing a whole house softener. Thinking I would remove the salt and chlorine and any other chemicals passed through the municipal water supply.
It’s time for a filter change and I have a minor repair issue and the 3 gallons of waste for every gallon made, has me questioning if I should keep it or not.
No children in the home. Any advice on this)
 

MaxBlack

Member
Messages
164
Reaction score
22
Points
18
Location
Northern Wisconsin
Well it's a matter of personal preference then. Do you use a lot of water? Drink a gallon a day each? Does the RO water taste better to you? Does wasting a couple gallons in the RO process give you heartburn?

If it were us, we would try a few days of drinking non-RO, including of course our beloved morning coffee, and see if we can tell the difference.

And BTW we do have "Hydration Nation" jugs though wife is better at (trying to) drink two 32oz jugs of water each day.
 

Bannerman

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,795
Reaction score
768
Points
113
Location
Ontario, Canada
the 3 gallons of waste for every gallon made, has me questioning if I should keep it or not.
I do not consider it "Waste", but is a part of the cost of obtaining highly purified water, similar to the expense for fuel and oil needed for travel.

When you consume unfiltered water, you then become the 'filter' since you will consume not only water but also whatever other unwanted elements and contaminants that are dissolved within the water.

While plain chlorine may be easily and rapidly removed by even a relatively small quantity of activated carbon, many municipal systems have adopted using Chloramine (chlorine and ammonia) for disinfection since it is more stable and so will be persistent within the entire water distribution system, but making it much more difficult to neutralize and remove.

While the use of Chloramine supposedly results in fewer disinfection byproducts compared to plain chlorine, disinfection byproducts are difficult to remove unless using a large quantity of carbon, or an RO or distillation system. RO is also highly effective in reducing/removing arsenic, fluoride, and a wide range of other contaminants including lead and sodium as a result of the softening process.

https://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/global/household-water-treatment/chlorination-byproducts.html

To reduce the quantity of water that is flowing to drain, you might consider replacing your current standard RO membrane with a Pentair GRO version since that membrane will require less water for rinsing contaminants to drain while resulting in only a slight water quality penalty. Since less rinse water is needed, this will permit your current drain flow restrictor to be replaced with the appropriate lower flow rate version.

Alternatively, you could add a Permeate Pump to your current configuration. A PP functions by eliminating storage tank back pressure from being placed on the membrane. This will then permit the membrane to function more efficiently, allowing higher quality water to be produced more rapidly, thereby reducing the time required for the RO system to operate to refill the storage tank each day. Since the system's ASV (auto shutdown valve) will stop incoming flow once the storage tank becomes filled, faster storage tank recovery will result in significantly less water 'waste' to produce the same quantity of RO water you currently consume.

To reduce the amount of 'waste' to drain, an RO system's standard ASV will typically stop water production once the storage tank pressure rises to ~60% of the incoming water pressure. For instance, if your incoming municipal water pressure is 60 psi, then RO production will continue until the storage tank pressure rises to 36psi. Because a permeate pump will eliminate virtually all backpressure from the storage tank, the ASV may be replaced with a 90% version which will allow additional storage of RO water within your current storage tank while also achieving higher maximum pressure (54 psi) at your RO faucet.


pp100_anlage640_1024x1024.gif
 
Last edited:

Jsmallberries

Member
Messages
265
Reaction score
18
Points
18
Location
Zephyrhills, Florida
Thank you. That’s very helpful.

BTW the recent TDS 288 before RO and 8 out of the tap. Is that good?

I had purchased a dual faucet that eliminates the need for a separate tap at the counter. (See photo). Supposed to be specifically designed for aggressive water that prevents leaching of contaminants. I had to give up an extendable hand held faucet. Happy with it, works well
 

Attachments

  • Faucet.jpg
    Faucet.jpg
    97.4 KB · Views: 86
Top
Hey, wait a minute.

This is awkward, but...

It looks like you're using an ad blocker. We get it, but (1) terrylove.com can't live without ads, and (2) ad blockers can cause issues with videos and comments. If you'd like to support the site, please allow ads.

If any particular ad is your REASON for blocking ads, please let us know. We might be able to do something about it. Thanks.
I've Disabled AdBlock    No Thanks