Registered: 04/19/02
Posts: 493
Loc: Hervey Bay, QLD Australia
I've just spent the last three hours reading previous threads on water treatment methods. (VERY informative)
So now I'm curious - what treatment system(s) are you using now?
I'm most interested in a quick poll. So, I ask everyone to please try to refrain from the long winded response as most everything that needs to be said has been.
Me: I've been using a pur hiker (Katahdine) most recently. Before that was the sweetwater. Before that was a (now defunct) chemical treatment. And now I'm thinking of switching over to Aqua Mira.
_________________________
i really don't think that applies to me.
MSR Miniworks EX; thinking seriously of giving the MSR Hyperflow a try. I've also used the Katadyn Mini Filter (8 oz., ceramic element) with reasonable satisfaction.
90% of the time I do not treat. The other times I only treat non-cooking water with chlorine tabs. I previously used iodine tabs with a nutralizer for my emergency treatment.
Registered: 02/03/06
Posts: 6799
Loc: Gateway to Columbia Gorge
I've used a pump filter (MSR Sweetwater), iodine (with horrific results), Katadyn MicroPur (chlorine dioxide tablets), the Steripen Adventurer and the ULA Amigo Pro gravity filter.
The pump filter consistently threw my lower back into spasms while I was bent over the water source. The Steripen (see my recent post) has been returned to REI. Its on-off switch is so stiff that most of the time I couldn't turn it on, and I was concerned that there was no way to sterilize the water remaining on the threads or the outside of the wide-mouth jar required. The Steripen may seem like the lightest solution, but by the time you carry extra batteries and the required wide-mouth Nalgene bottle (4 oz.), it is heavier than my preferred solution. With the extra batteries and the Nalgene, it's heavier (and takes longer per gallon) than my preferred treatment method. My experience with chemicals has not been happy; the allergy to iodine resulting from my use of iodine purification 20 years ago has left me unable to tolerate seafood or anything cooked with iodized salt (meaning I can't accept most invitations, since most people use iodized salt).
My preferred water treatment is the ULA Amigo Pro gravity filter, 7.5 oz., $45 US, a gravity filter using the Katadyn Hiker Pro filter cartridge. In a situation common to most of the "cottage" gear manufacturers who work out of their basements or garages, the owner of ULA, Brian Frankle, is going on a hike starting Aug. 1, so unless you want to wait several months, you need to order by this Thursday, Aug. 24. While it's inconvenient, I can't object to these folks doing the same things I like to do--and the gear they produce will be the better for it!
YMMV--Your Mileage, obviously, May Vary!
_________________________
May your trails be crooked, winding, lonesome, dangerous, leading to the most amazing view--E. Abbey
Micropur tablets and AM liquids use identical active ingredients: chlorine dioxide. If you read the ingredients, you will note that Micropur has 3 times the concentration of chlorine dioxide. So:
1. Micropur is EPA registered and is allowed to advertise effectiveness against all three classes of baddies: viruses, bacteria, and protozoa (crypto, giardia, etc.). Treatment times are 15 minutes for the first two -- and 30 minutes to 4HOURS for the third -- depending on water temp (the colder, the longer).
2. A.M. being a weaker solution cannot obtain EPA registration and is NOT allowed to mention either viruses or protozoa! If you read the AM packaging, you will note that ONLY bacteria is mentioned -- along with the shorter treatment time.
3. When I talked to an A.M. rep -- she said I could replicate Micropur's efficacy against protozoa by simply quadrupling the dosage. Mathematically, it should be tripling, but she said quadrupling. Be it 3 or 4 times, that makes AM both slower to use (counting drops, 5-min mixing period, etc.) -- and more expensive!
4. Finally, just last year, A.M. came out with its own tablets! Interestingly, if you ignore the A.M. labeling and just compare the packaging and ingredient percentages -- they are identical to Micropur! And both are made in Spain. I am willing to bet it's the same factory making the tablets for both brands!
I like the chlorine dioxide, full spectrum destruction approach.
PS. I really like the convenience of the individually wrapped tablets one brand packages in. That way I don't have to measure powder or drops, don't spill out more than I need, and can rip off a strip for a short trip or to hide in my first aid/emergency kit that goes in my day pack.
Registered: 04/19/02
Posts: 493
Loc: Hervey Bay, QLD Australia
I didn't mean anything by asking for short responses - And thank you all for the quick survey results - which follow: (I used only your first choice most of the time - depending on how you presented your preferences)
7 Nothing (including the coffee filter!) 6 CLO2 tabs 4 AM 4 Pur Hiker Filter (or other pump filter) 2 Amigo Pro 2 Bleach 1 UV 1 MIOX
I didn't mention it in the original post because I was asking about treatment, but I too fall into the "use Nothing" catagory most of the time. I know it makes some of you squeemish, but I love "live", fresh mountain water when the source is good.
Nothing, and chemical treatment are the hands down winners. It would seem that, for light weight backpackers (at least the best and brightest, who frequent this site) the filter is a thing of the past (most of the time - I note that some of you, including me, still carry a filter for certain areas).
I am intrigued by the amigo pro and as a note of clarification - ULA has left the building as of July 24 (not August) he did mention that you may still be able to get one thru a dealer.
So my thinking now is that I will try the CLO2 tabs as my backup to using nothing.
As a final note - I love you guys! I have learned more about the ins and outs of light weight backpacking from you all than from all other sources combined.
THANK YOU
rionada
Edited by rionada (07/25/0811:35 AM)
_________________________
i really don't think that applies to me.
Registered: 01/06/02
Posts: 129
Loc: Seattle, Washington
I'm a little late on this post, but I'm just curious about one other chemical treatment that was not mentioned. Does anyone here use the Klearwater chemical treatment? I started using this product last summer and so far I haven't gotten sick from drinking water treated with it. It's pretty easy to use. Any pros or cons about it that I'm unaware of?
Just to ensure that there is no confusion, the MIOX is a chemical treatment of mixed oxidants and is not a UV type treatment. Unlike other chemical treatments, each batch is fresh and can also be checked with testing strips if desired to ensure that the dosing amount is proper for the type of water being treated.
I'm a little late on this post, but I'm just curious about one other chemical treatment that was not mentioned. Does anyone here use the Klearwater chemical treatment? I started using this product last summer and so far I haven't gotten sick from drinking water treated with it. It's pretty easy to use. Any pros or cons about it that I'm unaware of?
I don't think that KlearWater is EPA registered. I would be leery because of that. And their website makes a couple of strange statements.
Quote:
KlearWater's Chlorine Dioxide formula acts within a few minutes to eliminate most common bacteria (such as E-Coli), and viruses. For "tough" pathogens, such as Giardia and Cryptosporidium a longer treatment time (15-30min.) is recommended. . . . Many of these viruses and bacteria, such as E-Coli, Cryptosporidium, and Giardia, can be found in streams and lakes in the US.
First, Crypto and Giardia are not bacteria; they are protozoa, so their last sentence does not make sense. And for them to state that within a few minutes most common bacteria and viruses are eliminated with Crypto and Giardia only taking 15-30 minutes is in my view somewhat reckless. The EPA registered chemical treatments would not be so bold as to make those statements.
Also, they don't appear to make specific claims about their product, but just CLO2 in general. Personally, I would steer away from this given the other alternatives that are available.
“It would seem that, for light weight backpackers (at least the best and brightest, who frequent this site) the filter is a thing of the past”
I don’t know why not; it is faster and lighter than chemicals <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" />.
OK, here’s one situation (and it’s very adaptable): The chemical user will usually keep 16oz of water on hand to drink while the next quart of water is disinfecting. This may be 3 lbs of water on average a chemical person will carry. A filter guy will just tank up (drink healthily) at the cold water/mud holes on the spot, and keep 16oz handy and thus be only carrying a 1lb filter +1 lb water on average.
When it’s hot and humid out, it’s nice to plop down at the water hole, filter, and drink ON THE SPOT. And if it’s coming from a cold source, I want that coolness now. That’s paradise. I don’t want the 30 minute wait that warms it up.
Registered: 05/10/04
Posts: 493
Loc: Lynchburg, VA
I agree Barry. I use a filter, and for the exact reasons you mentioned. It is a heck of a lot easier to filter water on the go, and drink it on the spot. It also allows for carrying a lot less water (assuming springs are available up the trail).
Couldn't have said it better myself (and I've tried.)
Filters may be a thing of the past among ultralighters, but not among lightweight hikers - or, I suspect, among the "traditional" hikers that we so often forget to consider, but who probably make up the majority of hikers. (On the other hand, "lightweight" may be the new "traditional" as mainstream gear continues to get lighter.)
I agree with you BarryP. The main reason I went to a filter is because of the fact that many of the available watering places I frequent tend to become almost dry later on in the summer. Water like that has to be pumped. Before my pump days, I would strain the water through my bandana to get the silt out of it, but somehow it still turned out brown. The Pristine likely did a good job of taking care of the nasties, but it didn’t make the water look any more appealing. Now I have a reliable and light filtration system I would not go back, and I often think about the advantages of a pump and the reasons you mentioned.
Our long-time Sponsor, BackcountryGear.com - The leading source for ultralite/lightweight outdoor gear:
Affiliate Disclaimer: This forum is an affiliate of BackcountryGear.com, Amazon.com, R.E.I. and others. The product links herein are linked to their sites. If you follow these links to make a purchase, we may get a small commission. This is our only source of support for these forums. Thanks.!