I was in REI the other day and was trying to decide between the Steripen Adventurer Opti and the Sawyer 2L Filter System. I went with the Steripen because it was more compact and lighter. However I have since been having second thoughts. The more I research it seems like the Steripen is not as dependable. I'm about ready to go exchange the Steripen for Sawyer since I have not even taken it out of the box yet. Should I do it? Which of these two systems would you guys choose for backpacking in the US.

I just used the steripen during a hike on Mt Rainier. Picked up a liter of water at pebble creek and within 5 minutes it was sterilized and stowed in my pack. The steripen is wonderful, quick and easy. It is also an electrical device that uses batteries, and a less-common battery at that (CR123). I would NEVER depend on any battery powered device for water treatment if it was my only method. The steripen should be backed up with an alternative treatment method. If you selected a filter as your back up system and you didn't need/want the convenience of the steripen, save the 100g and leave the steripen at home (or back at your REI store).

Can you describe how you'll be using your choice?

What kinds of water will you be treating and what are you treating for (cysts, eggs, bacteria, viruses, chemicals, etc.)?
How many people are you supplying and how much water per day?
What temperatures do you expect (including water temps)?
How long are your trips?

Both are good tools, so your challenge is finding the best fit for the task.

Cheers,

I recently purchased a steripen, but due to the birth of my second son, have not been able to get out and use it. I was a little frightened by the reviews, but it looks like the quality of the product is improving. In my mind the steripen might not be as reliable as a filter, but an excellent choice if you take that into account. The steripen with back-up is still lighter, smaller, and easier than a filter. For a back-up you can bring treatment tablets or boil water... or if you live on the edge drink untreated water. At least that was my thinking when I bought it.

I'll be treating water in the Rocky Mountains, Wind Rivers is next. Will be treating water for two people. Trip length will vary quite a bit. Normally 3-5 days. As I learn more about gear options and techniques for packing light I plan to move into fastpacking. Maybe a Steripen would be best for this with a iodine tablets as a backup.

I have used a steripen with success. But you need to take a backup. The iodine plan is good, or you can boil the water.

Unless you're hiking in grazing lands or around mine runoff your task is pretty easy--source water should be quite good.

In comparing weights include your Steripen treatment vessel and storage vessel(s). It's also possible to leave the Sawyer clean water bag at home and dispense as needed.

I'll guess your weights will be quite close, freeing you to choose the method you prefer.

As backup, I strongly recommend ClO2 tablets over iodine. They're much more effective and don't taste or smell nearly as bad (IMHO). Of course, spare batteries for the Steripen (not heavy).

Cheers,

Rick

Good point by Rick D. The Steripen is only good for killing "bugs", and is of no use for chemical contamination. Also, length of treatment time goes up with suspended solids like what can occur in glacial meltwater.

On a personal note, my stomach does not like the iodine treatment whereas the ClO2 tablets are not so bad.

Our treatment vessel was my water bottle, so no extra weight there.

We had both (among others) for our trip last week in the Winds. They serve different purposes and depend on the way that you hike. We had a large group, so the Sawyer did a lot of work and did it well, but it was best for use while in camp. The SteriPen works well for filtering a liter at a time, so its better use is on the trail for small groups.

When you want want water for breakfast and dinner at camp, the filter works better, but if you plan to pull water while on the trail, the SteriPen turns out better for 1 or 2 people. Generally, I carry the 2 liters or so I need for the day on the trail and only treat water while in camp. I know two backpackers that were basically on the same trip I was in Glacier two years ago and they used the SteriPen. It seemed that it took a long time for them to treat enough water. (Of course what I really like is using the MIOX and making a gallon or so each night for use in the morning and then on the trail).

Filters don't do anything about chemicals, either, really. Nor minerals. Both too small to be filtered out.

Actually they can lori. A very common one is activated carbon which I have used in the past to clean up chlorinated solvent spills in low volume pumping environments. I also have a much smaller unit under the kitchen sink. Filters can hold onto charged particles as well (ions), but the ions tend to compete for the sites with the lower valance ions losing out. Example, Na+ vs Ca++.

I think I see where you are coming from on this, a simple filter rather than a filtration system which is where I was coming from.

This is true, but most filters marketed for backpacking, as far as I know, don't inherently include this as part of the system. It isn't difficult to add an in-line activated carbon filter.

I use a Steripen Journey and like it - but it can be a bit finicky. It doesn't like cold-cold batteries nor does it like water low in mineral content sometimes found at higher elevations (the terminals won't recognize that they are submerged, so the unit won't turn on the lamp - I believe the Opti addresses this); the water issue is an easy fix with a pinch of salt, drink mix, etc. If you're an an area with tapeworms, prefiltering is advised, as UV does not neutralize those eggs (but they are large and easily prefiltered).

I carry spare batteries, AM tabs as backup, and sometimes prefilter with a cotton handkerchief designated just for that purpose.

As suggested, if filtering for 3 people or more, a pump (heavier) or gravity system (ie Sawyer) may be a good choice.

A backup, for everyone, is prudent with any setup. Steripens can fail, and filters can become clogged (but sometimes easily backflushed in the field), can be damaged if dropped or frozen, etc, all depending on the particular system.

+1 on Cl02 tabs over iodine. Everyone should have their own.

Yup, filters with carbon content (Katadyn Hiker is perhaps the most common) will adsorb organics and certain other stuff [note the highly technical description!], which can improve taste and odor and, under limited circumstances, reduce toxic contamination.

But, anybody relying on carbon to make chemically contaminated water healthy is on a fool's mission because such small filters won't do the job. I too have worked on groundwater cleanup projects and the scale of the treatment systems is truly industrial, relying on carbon vessel chains, often parallel, with each vessel containing tons of carbon. Input and output concentrations are monitored closely and when discharge concentrations show carbon saturation, the carbon has to be swapped out.

Enough of my tangent; I must miss working on this stuff or something.

Cheers,

You beat me to pulling my foot out of my mouth Rick_D! Sometimes I forget where I am posting. In general, the systems designed for cleaning up contamination have to be specifically designed for the contaminant stream (the list of specific chemicals). So, as far as I know, there is currently no available backpacking filtration system that reliably treats for anything other than biological issues such as viruses and bacteria. Best to stay away from mine drainages for sources of water. Sorry for the thread (and brain) drift.

And Rick...I know what you mean about missing that stuff...

I am a bit leary of claims of purification for ALL types of backpack treatment systems. Most people can consume small amounts of giardia, contaminants, etc, with no apparant effect. Purification may work simply because the water really does not need purification! Nature's purification system is simply achieved as water cascades down a mountain stream bathed in sunlight at 12,000 feet elevation.

I do not like fiters, because they are heavy and filters can actually introduce contaminants, if you are not diligent about cleaning it and replacing filters. I use chlorine tabs. You do have to get a routine worked out, because of the long treatment time. My husband uses iodine because it only takes half an hour. As for the chemicals, unless you have iodine sensitivity, for shorter trips, it is a small exposure in your overall water consumption. If you were doing a long trip (say PCT) then I would be concerned.

All treatments reduce the risk, but there is no 100% guarentee. Unless you are immune system compromised, you really do not need 100% kill of nasties in the water.

In the Sierra, water bodies that do not meet drinking water standards are listed on the internet. One place to avoid taking water is known old mining areas. We actually have quite a few of these in the Sierra.

What fun are the intertubes without tangents?

Fun story: a GW cleanup site with a contamination suite that includes radium had been operating for years before somebody got the bright idea of scanning the treatment system for radioactivity. They found the carbon tanks were radioactive above allowable workplace limits and had to build walls around them and limit the time workers could be in the area.

On a micro scale, whole house carbon filter systems in areas where drinking water has radionuclide contamination (fairly common in the Rockies) sometimes have to handle the used filter cartridges as hazardous waste.

When hiking I mostly watch for cow pies, horse apples, and dead stuff.

Cheers,