Water purification question

**MichMetal** · 05-13-2012, 09:58 PM

Originally Posted by Rick

Boiling water is the preferred method of purification. It will kill all pathogens including viruses.
Filtering water with a commercial filter will block all pathogens except viruses.
I'm not sure why you think neither will catch everything. I would not boil my water if I used a filter and I would not filter my water if I boiled it. It's redundant and a waste of time and fuel.

Check out video I posted above you, he explains why neither catch everything and why using both is ideal and absolutely not redundant.

**Rick** · 05-14-2012, 07:17 AM

I did watch it and if that's what you're basing your decision on I'll simply tell you he is wrong on the chemical part. Unless your filter has activated carbon it will NOT remove any chemicals from the water. If it does then it will aDsorb only organic based compounds. It does not filter them it actually becomes chemically bonded with the organic based chemicals. That's what aDsorb means. Most of those fall into the Volatile Organic Compounds term. Things like chlorine, benzene, radon, etc.

They do NOT adsorb inorganic compounds such as arsenic, nitrates, mercury, etc. Those are heavy metals and you cannot remove them with any method that you would carry to the field.

While an argument can be made that all water contains some levels of both organic and inorganic compounds if you suspect your water is contaminated (road side ditch, industrial plants nearby, etc) then you need to find another water source.

I stand by my answer. Filtering and boiling are redundant.

**Rick** · 05-15-2012, 08:59 AM

I wanted to come back to this and offer a clarification. I wasn't considering a larger pore filter, which the Frontier Pro could be and this thread was based on. Someone PM'd me and quizzed me about the larger sized pore vis-a-vis (I really just wanted to use that word) my comment about boiling and filtering being redundant. Thank you for the reality check by the way! Aquamira does not mention the pore size in any of their adverts but they do say it will kill 99% so it's possible the filter is in the .03 micron range. I just don't know for certain. I guess it depends on how they do their math.

If you have a filter that is in the .3 (not .03), which many emergency filters are then it is not stopping all of the bad guys. In which case, you will need to boil your water or chemically treat it. I'm of the opinion that if you are going to boil as an adjunct to filtering then you might as well boil to begin with. If you are going to filter in the .3 range then you need to have a chemical follow up. There are some advantages to filtering at the .3 range. Turbidity, adsorption of some chemicals if the filter is equipped with activated carbon and debris can all be avoided with that size of filter.

Even at .03 you will not filter out viruses so chemically treating the water is still advisable.

If you are going to boil and have the option then filtering is not necessary. If your filter is larger than .03 microns then something besides the filter needs to be added, either chemicals or boiling. But if you are going to boil why not do it in the first place?

I hope that clears up any confusion I might have created.

**Daniel Nighteyes** · 05-15-2012, 12:59 PM

Originally Posted by kyratshooter

If you are going to boil anyway why pay good money for a filter?

My thought exactly.

**Daniel Nighteyes** · 05-15-2012, 01:29 PM

It is frequently desirable to pre-filter water before boiling or treating it, or running it through even the best filter (whatever that is). The idea is to remove the larger particles of dirt, silt and other trash. You can also try just letting things settle out for a while, but some things either won't settle or will get all stirred up again with the slightest motion.

For many years I carried a couple of large commercial coffee filters in a well-folded gallon-sized baggie, and attached to the outside of my canteen cup with a large rubber band. I also had one of those canteen-cup "stoves," and a small pair of water-pump pliers stashed in the canteen cover. (1) Put a coffee filter inside the "stove" - leaving plenty of droop, then attach it 'round the top with the rubber band. (2) Insert the assembly into the top of the baggie, holding top of bag around the assembly with your hand. (3) Pour the water through the filter, slowly enough that it doesn't overflow or tear the filter. Once the bag is nearly filled, you're all set to make it safe to drink.

This worked great, and a fair amount better than a bandanna, do-rag, etc. The filters were also fairly useful to help start fires - as long as they weren't wet, of course!

**Rick** · 05-15-2012, 02:02 PM

But the comparison was commercial filters vs. boiling.

**Daniel Nighteyes** · 05-15-2012, 07:32 PM

Originally Posted by Rick

But the comparison was commercial filters vs. boiling.

If that was to me, I was trying to add something to both "sides" of the question. Both benefit from a good pre-filtering to remove particulate matter and a lot of silt. My approach goes a good bit beyond straining the water thru a bandanna or do-rag. I did this whether I planned to boil the water, treat it with chemicals, or use a commercial filter.

By the way, the filter I used was the First Need. Great reviews, much lower cost (at the time). The chief complaint about the early First Need filters was that they were a bit TOO good, which meant they quickly clogged up when filtering "dirty" water. My pre-filtration technique came about because of this. Later they added a pre-filter to the First Need, but I kept on pre-filtering.

Now, if my earlier post contributed confusion rather than a suggestion, my apologies.

-- Nighteyes

**Rick** · 05-15-2012, 07:35 PM

No, no. My confusion is eternal. And trust me, a lot of folks have offered me suggestions. Most of which we can't discuss here.

**Daniel Nighteyes** · 05-15-2012, 08:01 PM

Originally Posted by Rick

And trust me, a lot of folks have offered me suggestions. Most of which we can't discuss here.

Are you sure we aren't related?

**finallyME** · 05-17-2012, 09:37 AM

If Aquamira's pore size was .03, then they would be shouting it out. However, looking online, it looks like the frontier pro has a 3.0 micron pore size. That is HUGE.

**Rick** · 05-17-2012, 11:24 AM

I would hope someone misplaced a decimal. You can drive a truck through 3.0 micron.

**Daniel Nighteyes** · 05-17-2012, 07:35 PM

I just checked the current price for a First Need filter. As the Russian once said, "Holy Sh*tskies!" They are -- um -- quite a bit more expensive than they were when I was using them. Wow, am I EVER glad to have a new (unused) one, and two replacement cartridges, in my equipment!

(I mean, I'd absolutely hate to be required to float a loan just so I could afford one...

)