ECOsmarte water purification systems feedback

SWGs, salt water chlorine generators, chlorinators,
ozone generators, UV systems, . . .
chem geek
Pool Industry Leader
Pool Industry Leader
Posts: 2382
Joined: Thu 21 Jun, 2007 21:27
Location: San Rafael, California

ECOsmarte water purification systems feedback

Postby chem geek » Wed 23 Feb, 2011 03:31

(continued from previous post)

Note that solid copper (and typical copper alloy) has an effective concentration over 10 million times higher than the concentration of copper ions in pools. Even so, the claims allowed by the EPA say that this kills 99.9% of bacteria within two hours which is something that chlorine does in less than 1 minute for fecal bacteria. Actual clinical trials with copper alloys (60%+ copper) typically showed roughly 90% reductions in bacterial load (the surfaces must be cleaned regularly to achieve the 99.9% kill rates). However, if you read this link in my earlier post, you would find the following scientific papers showing how copper ions at the VERY LOW concentrations used in pools have ZERO effect on fecal bacteria:

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0043-1354(94)00213-Q
"no inactivation of E. coli was observed after exposure to 0.4 or 0.8 mg/l cupric chloride after 60 min".

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC95116/pdf/jb002145.pdf
gives a MIC (minimal inhibitory concentration) for Escherichia coli of copper ions of 1.3 mM to 3.5 mM depending on strain, but even 1.3 mM is (1.3 millimole/liter) * (63.546 g/mole) = 82.6 mg/L (ppm) copper which is far higher than pool/spa concentrations.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2798663/
showed the MIC (minimal inhibitory concentration) for Staphylococcus aureus of 200 µM (12.7 ppm) copper so 0.4 ppm copper would have no effect on this bacteria.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1563648/
showed the MIC (minimal inhibitory concentration) for copper-sensitive strains of Enterococcus faecium of 4 mM (254 ppm copper) so 0.4 ppm copper would have no effect on this bacteria and I presume that this is also true for Enterococcus faecalis.

http://aem.asm.org/cgi/content/full/69/4/2313
for Pseudomonas aeruginosa gives a MIC (minimal inhibitory concentration) for copper ions of 2 mM (127 ppm) copper though even lower 0.06 mM (3.8 ppm) copper showed only a significant lag of around 20 hours before growth occurred to normal levels by 30 hours. The MBC (minimum biocidal concentration) for an apparent complete kill in 5 hours in one growth medium (MSVP) was 0.01 mM (0.64 ppm) copper while in another (MOPSO) it was 0.125 mM (7.9 ppm) copper, but this is during the lag time where growth may subsequently resume after 20 hours from copper-resistant phenotypes.

(continued in next post...too many URLs)


chem geek
Pool Industry Leader
Pool Industry Leader
Posts: 2382
Joined: Thu 21 Jun, 2007 21:27
Location: San Rafael, California

ECOsmarte water purification systems feedback

Postby chem geek » Wed 23 Feb, 2011 03:33

(continued from previous post)

Note that the EPA limit for copper in pools is set to the drinking water limit of 1.3 mg/L (ppm). In practice, copper levels in copper ion or ionization systems for pools and spas are usually kept at 0.4 ppm to prevent staining of pool surfaces (or if at 0.8 ppm then the pH is kept low at 7.0). Again, this is around 10 million times lower than the concentration of a copper solid or EPA-approved alloy.

As shown in this link , the three bacteria for which copper ions have no effect (Escherichia coli, Enterococcus faecalis, Staphylococcus aureus) are found in the lower G.I. tract (S. aureus is also found in the nose and on skin) and are potential pathogens. Pseudomonas aeruginosa is the bacteria that causes hot tub itch/rash. It is also unlikely that any bacteria that can survive for an extended period of time in blood, such as the pathogenic Leptospira that causes Leptospirosis (aka Weil's disease), will be able to be killed by copper ions in pools since blood serum contains 0.7 to 1.5 ppm copper ions (see this link or this link for normal copper levels of 70 - 150 µg/dL = 0.7 - 1.5 mg/L). Normally in the gut, beneficial bacteria such as Bifidobacterium bifidum and Lactobacillus sp. keep a check on the pathogenic bacteria, but if allowed to grow and flourish in pool water, the pathogenic bacteria can overwhelm the body when ingested or entering through broken skin and cause disease (usually diarrhea or infection).

(continued in next post...too many URLs)
chem geek
Pool Industry Leader
Pool Industry Leader
Posts: 2382
Joined: Thu 21 Jun, 2007 21:27
Location: San Rafael, California

ECOsmarte water purification systems feedback

Postby chem geek » Wed 23 Feb, 2011 13:06

(continued from previous post)

There are NO copper ion or ionization systems approved by the EPA for use without an EPA-approved disinfectant such as chlorine because no copper (or copper/silver, for that matter) ion or ionization systems pass EPA DIS/TSS-12 . Also note that all NSF Standard 50 certified metal ion (copper/silver) ionization systems require a minimum of 0.4 ppm chlorine or 0.8 ppm bromine. You can also read more about copper/silver ion systems and why they are not used in public/commercial pools on their own on the Australian APVMA website and on the Health Canada website.

I really wish that these manufacturers and distributors of copper ion and ionization products (e.g. ECOsmarte®, PristineBlue®, (EcoOne) Rain Forest Blue, PoolRx, CL Free) would stop deceiving the public by making claims of killing bacteria, viruses, etc. when at pool concentrations they have absolutely ZERO inhibitory effect, let alone killing effect, on fecal bacteria and are not very effective against viruses or protozoa either. The EPA registration for copper ion products is as an algaecide only, not as a disinfectant. Note that Ecosmarte Planet Friendly has EPA establishment number 083498-MN-001 , but they apparently do not have any products EPA registered in the PAN Pesticide Database (ionization systems, just like SWG systems, are not sold as chemicals to be added and are not normally registered).
linda Martin

Ecosmarte feedback

Postby linda Martin » Thu 08 Nov, 2012 17:48

wrenhome wrote:This is our second season of having a pool with Ecosmarte as the system. Last year, everything was great and the pool was crystal clear. This year, we have had our pool open two months, and there has yet to be more than one day in a row where the pool has been clear. We have worked with our pool company and called the Ecosmarte company with no luck. It is very frustrating. If I had to do it all over again, I probably wouldn't have bought the Ecosmarte system



I had a Ecosmarte pool system too. We pulled it out and got rid of it. $5,000. down the drain plus we had to get the pool refinished from the stains from the system. Pinch a Penny helped all they could. They finley put a new system in and worked a year on the stains. No luck with Ecosmarte . You got had too. If you have well water you do not want this system too. Water Healthy was who they sent out for our home ecosmarte system. Waste of time. Cost us $1,050. to rebed the system. Run from Ecosmarte and Water Healthy co.
Rude also.

Return to “Salt Water Chlorine Generators, Ozone, UV”

Who is online at the Pool Help Forum

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests