Whole house water filtration.

Users who are viewing this thread

Ndx

New Member
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Ontario

Bannerman

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,795
Reaction score
768
Points
113
Location
Ontario, Canada
Another option and a recommendation: Depending on your water consumption requirements, a 1.5 or 2 cuft, Fleck or Clack based back washing catalytic carbon filter for Chloramine removal and a Reverse Osmosis system to remove fluoride and other contaminants from your drinking water.

A much larger volume than 1 cuft of Bone Char would be needed to be effective for for a whole house system. A larger volume than 1 cuft of catalytic carbon should also be used for most whole home applications.

Where are you located in Ontario where chloramine is being utilized?
 
Last edited:

Ndx

New Member
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Ontario
Hello,

I'm in Hamilton...

How does 2 Cu sounds, for each Bone Char + Catalytic Carbon ? ( back wash ...)

This is for two people,

Thx
 

Ndx

New Member
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Ontario
Or even better how this setup sounds

Two 12 x 52 Tanks
- Gravel Bed
- Catalytic Charcoal in one
- Brimac in other tank ( Bone Char )
- 2 x Valves manual or automatic
- 2 x Distribution tube + Screen
- 1 x 0.5 micron pre filter

Would a system composed of this be enough ... or should I go with larger tanks for more efficiency ?

Thx
 

Bannerman

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,795
Reaction score
768
Points
113
Location
Ontario, Canada
I have no practical experience with using bone char (Brimac) for fluoride removal but have lightly researched the topic in consideration for use in my home. I current utilize an RO system for drinking water.

It is my understanding that fluoride removal is somewhat difficult in that it takes a substantial quantity of media to provide enough surface area to effectively remove/reduce the contaminant at the flow rate needed in a whole home, point of entry application. I also understand the media is fairly expensive. As such, many bone char filters are designed and are suitable for a single faucet, point of use application, typically for drinking water only.

Similarly, chloramine reduction is more difficult than chlorine only so the water will need increased contact time with the media for the chloramine removal process to occur. As such, the effective service flow rate supported by a smaller catalytic carbon filter will likely be too small for a point of entry application, so a larger quantity of media is required to support a higher gpm flow rate.

While not intending to promote any of the products shown, here are some links which provide information which may be of interest.

http://www.purewaterproducts.com/chloramine-catcher

http://www.reactual.com/home-and-garden/kitchen-products-2/best-filters-remove-fluoride-water.html

http://www.purewaterproducts.com/articles/backwash-chart

http://www.gaialife.net/#!bone-char/c1acm

http://www.premierwatersystems.net/carbonkdfwholehousefilters.html
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Ndx

ditttohead

Water systems designer, R&D
Messages
6,088
Reaction score
455
Points
83
Location
Ontario California
You are correct. Our in-house testing has shown both Chloramine and Fluoride to be difficult to reduce even with the testing of every media that has been proven to be safe and effective. I laugh when I see whole house Big Blue type systems being touted for Fluoride and Chloramine.

What is your fluoride level and is it naturally occurring or is it added by the municipality?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ndx

Bannerman

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,795
Reaction score
768
Points
113
Location
Ontario, Canada
As Hamilton is directly adjacent to Lake Ontario, I expect Ndx's water source is L Ontario and the fluoride is added by the municipality.

My town's municipal water source is currently derived from 4 deep wells. Fluoride is not added but occurs naturally. This area is surrounded by numerous quarries mainly supplying crushed gravel so the water hardness is 24 gpg as received. The town's 2015 water report indicates the well fluoride levels range between 0.9 - 1.1 mg/L.

In addition, although not in exceedance to current standards, Arsenic @ 1.9 - 14.5 ug/L, Uranium @ 0.503 - 1.47 ug/L, in addition to Nitrates, Lead, Barium, Boron and various other elements. The only item to exceed standards at one well is Sodium @ 76.2 mg/L .
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ndx

Ndx

New Member
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Location
Ontario
Thank you very much Bannerman and dittohead.

Yes Fluoride is added by the city as Bannerman mentioned.
I believe that 0.8 mg/L3 . or 0.7 for me ..

City reports samples for Fl. 0.7-0.10, 0.15 - 0.16, 0.61 to 0.66

As chloramine

  • chlorine and ammonia added to the filtered water to bring the combined chlorine residual to approximately 2.2 - 2.5 milligrams per litre
 
Last edited:
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