Hi! New forum member here, and I'm in the midst of this same decision -- that's how I found this thread. I have both a sewage pump and a sump, both currently on a battery backup, and have had problems with both that are driving us to try to find better/additional protections.
Our sewage pump used to encounter clogged pipes to the city lines, and then would spew out a cleanout in the front yard (lovely). We eventually got that line replaced with PVC ($4,000). Then we had the float on the sewage pump get stuck, and when we ran the washer, all the drained washer water backflowed into the laundry room and surrounding carpet. The fix there -- grab the overhead pipe and shake it, which must have dislodged the float, and got everything working again (3 weeks of dehumidifying later and the room is back to normal :-( ). And then the sump pipe got buried under a layer of ice once, and wouldn't stop running for a while. Luckily it didn't burn out. The fix was pouring hot water over the pipe (outside) until it was free and open again. Fun fun fun.
So anyway, our goals are to get alarms or backups for everything since we're completely paranoid now (even though, technically, neither pump has failed and neither has the battery backup). I would LOVE any feedback on any of these -- or you can limit feedback to the ones that are on topic.
For the sewage pump, I'm thinking of getting an electric probe type switch, and replacing the float type switch. Looks like that would be about $90, and I've seen some good feedback on how those work. That or I'll just drop in an electric probe type high-water alarm. I've seen one at ******* that uses a float, and that is $100. So cost-wise it all seems the same. But I'm wondering if the probe types are actually as reliable?
For the sump, we're considering the overhead water-powered, and the in-the-pit water-powered options (from here on out I'll say WPP for "water powered pump")
So most of the literature I've seen is by people pitching these systems for sale, so none of it seems too reliable. The flow rate is low -- 4-20gpm. In the pro-WPP literature, the numbers suggest 1-to-1 municipal gallons to ejected water gallons (that might just be for the overhead style). And they also said that the end-cost should not be that much different from the cost of electricity to run the standard pump. I've gotta check my water bill to see if that's true (see if that theory holds water -- teeheehee). The contamination of the freshwater supply appears to be a contentious issue. Companies against WPPs say that there's a big chance for it. The overhead WPP says that it has virtually NO chance for contamination, but that the in-the-pit WPP has a high risk of it. I didn't see the in-the-pit type say there was any significant risk. So whom do you believe?
It strikes me that for the overhead system, the risk would be low since there's only drainage water near the valve while the pump is running. For the in-the-pit type, it seems to me that drainage water would have to flow back down from the ejection pipe, and then back UP the 10 feet, against a valve AND a column of municipal water, to get to the house supply. That seems very unlikely too. So maybe they're all just trying to scare buyers away from the others.
So the zoeller (in the pit) would give me probably 4gpm ejection. The overhead version says it would be about 17gpm. (My current Hydromatic SD33A1 is rated at 48gpm) So, I'm assuming that the system that can drain more water faster will waste less municipal water? In any event, they're both very low numbers. But the argument is that they're not electricity-dependent, so who cares -- the make sure you have constant drainage if everything else failes.
Cost-wise it gets ugly. The overhead style runs $310-$580 or something like that. But you can get in-the-pit ones for $100 (they have one at ******* where I am).
Someone mentioned that the WPPs don't have an alarm. I'm kinda lucky there since my house is small, and I can hear the pumps when they're running, so if the backup kicked in, I'd know it. But if my house were bigger, that might be more problematic for me.
And don't forget I have a true battery backup already, so the WPP would be, for me, a secondary backup. For that reason, I'm probably going to go with the in-the-pit. I can't stand the thought of shelling out another $200 bucks for something that may never come into play. As for the expense of running it -- if it ever has to kick in, that means things got really bad, so I'm not going to mind the expense. On top of that, I'd GLADLY trade the expense for not having to dry out my carpet for 3 weeks yet again...and worry about mold...and deal with that musty smell...ugh...
Im also installing a water alarm on the floor near the area where most of the water goes (based on the past overflow episodes), and plugging the washer into that -- so when the alarm goes off, the power is cut to the appliance. Since the washer is the only thing I've got that actively dumps water into the sewage pit, that's the one guy I want to be monitored closely. My last overflow went like this: sewage pump float got stuck; pit got filled; washer tried to drain a load of water into pit, but encountered a full pit; pipes between washer and pit fille up; remaining water the washer was draining poured out onto the floor...and into the adjacent room... An alarm in the pit would have saved us there. And the alarm on the washer would have helped severly reduce the water damage that happened if the alarm DIDN'T alert us.
And my other todo is to figure out what types of maintenance-free batteries I can use in my backup -- I'm currently using marine ones that have to be topped-off with distilled water every 6 months...more fun...
By then end of all this my laundry room is probably gonna be like fort knox as far as water is concerned...
Any input or suggestions would be greatly appreciated!
Jeff
