Re: Reliance water containers
[ QUOTE ]
flownosaj said:
Something to look into would be the battery powered water purifiers. I think it uses ultrasonic vibrations, but I've also heard of UV and colloidal silver.
[/ QUOTE ]
Jason,
From what I've read (can't seem to remember the source right now, maybe a backpacking magazine?), the little handheld UV and ultrasonic devices work, only on a small amount of water at a time. Basically you have to swish them around in a cup of water. Doesn't seem optimal.
-john
I found some online reviews on backpacker.com:
rabideaux, Tuesday, October 01, 2002
[ QUOTE ]
Performance: I spent 4 days in the Boundry Waters with the Hydro Photon Steri Pen and had trouble with it leaking water in the device. Then 7 days on the Superior Hiking Trail with a different Steri Pen that would only work 20hrs estimated with a battery set, then required a change. When it works...It is very nice...when it doesn't, you use Iodine until your out, then drink the water and take you're chances. I'm requesting a refund. If you want a reliable filter..try the ceramic MSR.. no batteries, no electronics, no water born giardia to worry about. The Steri Pen has no place in the woods.
[/ QUOTE ]
Jastein527, Sunday, May 26, 2002
[ QUOTE ]
The Steri-Pen performed extremely well in these conditions and I was able to drink purified water very quickly. I would recommend this product to anyone looking for a lightweight work free way to purify their water. The only 2 drawbacks that I faced were the cost($200) and only being able to purify 16 ounces at a time(half a nalgene).
[/ QUOTE ]
And a bit about it on the equipped.org forum:
paramedicpete write on the equipped.org forum:
[ QUOTE ]
Hi, you may want to check out some previous posts on the Steri-pen made several months ago. I have the pen and have checked it in my lab. It works and works well, although I had to use 2 rounds (2X 60 secs) to achieve sterilization in some heavily contaminated test samples. It is effective against spores. I think for the cost, filtration is the better way to go. Let me know if you need more information. Pete
[/ QUOTE ]
Later, he writes:
[ QUOTE ]
Possible, but unlikely. Some of the reasons the cost is so high may be due to the limited market and validation testing, since it is EPA registered. Also keep in mind, cost of operation and potential pitfalls - battery usage, malfunction, does not work well in cloudy water and does not remove chemical contaminates, Also don't forget where there is no water, i.e. the lip of the container, sterilization does not occur. Don't get me wrong, I have one and use it, but only as a backup to filtration. I find it more useful in a travel situation where the water is visibly clear, but may have biological contamination or after filtration to ensure safety from viral contamination, when the filter does not have a viracidal component. I was lucky to have gotten mine from REI, when they distributed dividends and provided a 10% discount if you used your dividend. Pete
[/ QUOTE ]
AyersTG writes on equipped.org's forum:
[ QUOTE ]
No first hand experience with it, but I did research it several months ago and it appears that it does what it claims. There might be some question about oocysts, specifically cryptosporodium parvo (sp?), IIRC - those are tough rascals - but (IIRC) it does better than chemicals against them. Filtration or floculation + filtration is best non-boiling defense against oocystic critters from what I've researched...
The UV pen appears to do very well on everything else, and of course it (UV) is used for sterilization of municipal water in SOME places (it's expensive at the municipal level).
[/ QUOTE ]