Dear all
My daughter has just moved into a flat at Brighton. She is scientific
(of sorts)
She wishes to remove oestrogen, chlorine and a variety of other
alleged or actual contaminents from her drinking water and, it
appears, her shower water
She has cited a UK Water filter
http://www.uk-water-filters.co.uk/wa...?affcode=eir12

Which seems to me merely to filter (reverse osmosis plus filters)
drinking and cooking water at a slow rate and store it under sink for
later reuse

I am unconvinced that ordinary tap water is so bad as to need to do
this but could be with the right data

My questions a
Does anyone know the pressure in Brighton?
How could one get the contaminants or other contents of water over the
internet - surely it is in the public domain?
has anyone experience of doing this for bath (ie whole house water)
which seems most improbable
likewise has anyone done this for cooking and drinking (very likely)
and if so
what do the recommend?
It seems to me to be money for old rope with the cost of filters etc
and that for drinking and cooking there must me a gravity filtration
or ion exchange system that would be cheaper
I may be wrong and in which case if a reverse osmosis system is the
answer - any recommendations?
Chris

On 21 Sep, 15:48, "Why?" wrote:
Dear all
My daughter has just moved into a flat at Brighton. *She is scientific
(of sorts)
She wishes to remove oestrogen, chlorine and a variety of other
alleged or actual contaminents from her drinking water *and, it
appears, her shower water
She has cited a UK Water filterhttp://www.uk-water-filters.co.uk/water_filters_reverse_osmosis.html?...

Which seems to me merely to filter (reverse osmosis plus filters)
drinking and cooking water at a slow rate and store it under sink for
later reuse

I am unconvinced that ordinary tap water is so bad as to need to do
this but could be with the right data

My questions a
Does anyone know the pressure in Brighton?
How could one get the contaminants or other contents of water over the
internet - surely it is in the public domain?
has anyone experience of doing this for bath (ie whole house water)
which seems most improbable
likewise has anyone done this for cooking and drinking (very likely)
and if so
what do the recommend?
It seems to me to be money for old rope with the cost of filters etc
and that for drinking and cooking there must me a gravity filtration
or ion exchange system that would be cheaper
I may be wrong and in which case if a reverse osmosis system is the
answer - any recommendations?
Chris

Hi,

If Brighton is Southern Water Have a look at:

http://www.southernwater.co.uk/homeA...er/default.asp

http://www.southernwater.co.uk/pdf/h...Report2008.pdf

or search google with

"Water Quality Report" site:www.southernwater.co.uk

Cheers Steve.

On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 07:48:13 -0700 (PDT), "Why?"
wrote:


My daughter has just moved into a flat at Brighton. She is scientific
(of sorts)

She wishes to remove oestrogen, chlorine and a variety of other
alleged or actual contaminents from her drinking water and, it
appears, her shower water

The operative words in your description seem to be "of sorts" rather
than scientific.

She has cited a UK Water filter
http://www.uk-water-filters.co.uk/wa...?affcode=eir12

Which seems to me merely to filter (reverse osmosis plus filters)
drinking and cooking water at a slow rate and store it under sink for
later reuse

Indeed.

I am unconvinced that ordinary tap water is so bad as to need to do
this

Ordinary tap water needs no such treatment.

How could one get the contaminants or other contents of water over the
internet - surely it is in the public domain?

Water company carry out very frequent analysis of water at pumping
stations and at the point of delivery (over half a million tests per
region per year). They will supply you with copies of their latest
analysis if you request it.

http://www.dwi.gov.uk/ covers the subject comprehensively.

http://www.dwi.gov.uk/pubs/annrep08/...n%20Region.pdf
is the 2008 report covering Brighton.

http://www.dwi.gov.uk/consumer/concerns/enddist.shtm covers the
periodic Oestrogen scares which appear in newspapers where the science
correspondent also covers sport and "lifestyle" issues.

http://www.dwi.gov.uk/research/reportlist.shtm is a selection of
reports on various subjects concerning water analysis.

http://www.dwi.gov.uk/consumer/concerns/index.shtm
is a simpler version.

has anyone experience of doing this for bath (ie whole house water)
which seems most improbable

Does the house have a water tank in the roof? if so you could always
fit a larger RO filter such as

http://www.jshumidifiers.com/pureflo...-h-44-details/

and use the water tank in the roof as a buffer. You may have to give
up the kitchen to fit the filter in to the house but as a scientific
person (of sorts) she will understand that.

likewise has anyone done this for cooking and drinking (very likely)
and if so what do the recommend?

Tap water. De-chlorinating is done by simply leaving the water to
stand in a jug for an hour or so. If you find the water to be hard
use a Brita filter jug.

It seems to me to be money for old rope with the cost of filters etc

It is. The effectiveness of these cheap domestic units is also very
variable. Usually, the higher the flow rate the less effective the
filter (for a given size). Quite a few simply don't work even to
their own declared standards (which are sometimes not very good to
begin with if you examine the figures). As there is nothing of worth
for them to filter in tap water no one ever notices and the cost of
periodic analysis is such that no one bothers doing it so their
failures remain undetected.

and that for drinking and cooking there must me a gravity filtration
or ion exchange system that would be cheaper

Brita jug.

I may be wrong

You are not.

On Sep 21, 3:48*pm, "Why?" wrote:
Dear all
My daughter has just moved into a flat at Brighton. *She is scientific
(of sorts)
She wishes to remove oestrogen, chlorine and a variety of other
alleged or actual contaminents from her drinking water *and, it
appears, her shower water
She has cited a UK Water filterhttp://www.uk-water-filters.co.uk/water_filters_reverse_osmosis.html?...

Which seems to me merely to filter (reverse osmosis plus filters)
drinking and cooking water at a slow rate and store it under sink for
later reuse

I am unconvinced that ordinary tap water is so bad as to need to do
this but could be with the right data

My questions a
Does anyone know the pressure in Brighton?
How could one get the contaminants or other contents of water over the
internet - surely it is in the public domain?
has anyone experience of doing this for bath (ie whole house water)
which seems most improbable
likewise has anyone done this for cooking and drinking (very likely)
and if so
what do the recommend?
It seems to me to be money for old rope with the cost of filters etc
and that for drinking and cooking there must me a gravity filtration
or ion exchange system that would be cheaper
I may be wrong and in which case if a reverse osmosis system is the
answer - any recommendations?
Chris


Recommendation: a realistic look at the death rates from all the major
causes. Hopefully she'll soon forget about the death rate from tap
water, which is extremely small.


NT

On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 17:16:01 +0100, Peter Parry
wrote:

good stuff allsnipped

likewise has anyone done this for cooking and drinking (very likely)
and if so what do the recommend?

Tap water. De-chlorinating is done by simply leaving the water to
stand in a jug for an hour or so.

Best aquire the self discipline to put a big jug of fresh tapwater
covered with a net or piece of kitchen towel in the fridge before
retiring for the night.

If you find the water to be hard
use a Brita filter jug.

It seems to me to be money for old rope with the cost of filters etc


Filters are much cheaper in SEARS in the USA. I was going to buy a
load and bring them back last time I went but the sales assistant
asked me which I had, "Odour" or "Sediment", in my water. TBH I had
neither. Then my uncle told me their market was for people (like him)
who have both well water (for drinking) and a septic tank in the
garden. 8-(

It is. The effectiveness of these cheap domestic units is also very
variable. Usually, the higher the flow rate the less effective the
filter (for a given size). Quite a few simply don't work even to
their own declared standards (which are sometimes not very good to
begin with if you examine the figures). As there is nothing of worth
for them to filter in tap water no one ever notices and the cost of
periodic analysis is such that no one bothers doing it so their
failures remain undetected.

and that for drinking and cooking there must me a gravity filtration
or ion exchange system that would be cheaper

Brita jug.


Much to be said for her getting someone with a Makro or Costco pass to
obtain it (H2O) by the caseload for her, plenty cheap enough for
drinking purposes, can be sparkling or not, and should she choose can
come in lunchpack sized bottles to take to work.

Oh, forgot to mention, you get to choose whether you want your water
to be freighted from the Scottish Highlands, Miss Marple-Esque
Harrogate, Pagan Wales, The Cotswolds, Sicily, or 50,000,000 year old
water (Best Before Feb 2010) from the Volcanic region of the Massif
Central in France. Oddly all cost more / less the same price which
doesn't seem to vary with the exchange rate. 8-|

I may be wrong

You are not.

That's a good answer.

Derek

NT wrote:
On Sep 21, 3:48 pm, "Why?" wrote:
Dear all
My daughter has just moved into a flat at Brighton. She is scientific
(of sorts)
She wishes to remove oestrogen, chlorine and a variety of other
alleged or actual contaminents from her drinking water and, it
appears, her shower water
She has cited a UK Water
filterhttp://www.uk-water-filters.co.uk/water_filters_reverse_osmosis.html?...

Which seems to me merely to filter (reverse osmosis plus filters)
drinking and cooking water at a slow rate and store it under sink for
later reuse

I am unconvinced that ordinary tap water is so bad as to need to do
this but could be with the right data

My questions a
Does anyone know the pressure in Brighton?
How could one get the contaminants or other contents of water over
the
internet - surely it is in the public domain?
has anyone experience of doing this for bath (ie whole house water)
which seems most improbable
likewise has anyone done this for cooking and drinking (very likely)
and if so
what do the recommend?
It seems to me to be money for old rope with the cost of filters etc
and that for drinking and cooking there must me a gravity filtration
or ion exchange system that would be cheaper
I may be wrong and in which case if a reverse osmosis system is the
answer - any recommendations?
Chris


Recommendation: a realistic look at the death rates from all the major
causes. Hopefully she'll soon forget about the death rate from tap
water, which is extremely small.

Yerbut that dihydrogen monoxide is lethal - its 'scientifically' proven.


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

Why? wrote:
Dear all
My daughter has just moved into a flat at Brighton. She is scientific
(of sorts)
She wishes to remove oestrogen, chlorine and a variety of other
alleged or actual contaminents from her drinking water and, it
appears, her shower water

Without wishing to be rude, your daughter needs to get a life.


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

On 21 Sep, 23:41, "The Medway Handyman"
wrote:
Why? wrote:
Dear all
My daughter has just moved into a flat at Brighton. *She is scientific
(of sorts)
She wishes to remove oestrogen, chlorine and a variety of other
alleged or actual contaminents from her drinking water *and, it
appears, her shower water

Without wishing to be rude, your daughter needs to get a life.

I Disagree
Dead rats, cats, birds, squirrels, cockroaches, in storage tanks in
attics often give people the heebie jeebies about their water supply.

On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 22:40:10 GMT, The Medway Handyman wrote:

Recommendation: a realistic look at the death rates from all the major
causes. Hopefully she'll soon forget about the death rate from tap
water, which is extremely small.

Yerbut that dihydrogen monoxide is lethal - its 'scientifically' proven.

Quote:

"An American junior high school student won first prize at a Science Fair
by attempting to show how conditioned we have become to alarmists
practicing junk science and spreading fear of everything in our
environment. In his project he urged people to sign a petition demanding
strict control or total elimination of the chemical "dihydrogen monoxide."

And for plenty of good reasons, since:

1. it can cause excessive sweating and vomiting
2. it is a major component in acid rain
3. it can cause severe burns in its gaseous state
4. accidental inhalation can kill you
5. it contributes to erosion
6. it decreases effectiveness of automobile brakes
7. it has been found in tumors of terminal cancer patients

He asked 50 people if they supported a ban of the chemical.

* Forty-three (43) said yes,
* six (6) were undecided,
* and only one (1) knew that the chemical was water."

Also:

http://www.dhmo.org/
--
Peter.
The head of a pin will hold more angels if
it's been flattened with an angel-grinder.

On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 16:20:33 -0700 (PDT), Tommy
wrote:


Dead rats, cats, birds, squirrels, cockroaches, in storage tanks in
attics often give people the heebie jeebies about their water supply.

Fitting a water filter (of any sort) on the incoming feed would only
make the problem of any decomposing wildlife in the attic tank worse
as it will remove some of the chlorine from the water before it gets
to the tank.

Perhaps a webcam looking into the attic tank so it can be inspected
for vermin before each shower would be cheaper? (or of course
simpler, cheaper and more reliable - fit a lid on the tank).

Incidentally I notice the device quoted in the original post has a
maximum capacity of only 50 litres a day and must be fed by water
which is already drinkable. This does rather bring into question its
ability to filter anything of significance.

"Tommy" wrote in message
...


I Disagree
Dead rats, cats, birds, squirrels, cockroaches, in storage tanks in
attics often give people the heebie jeebies about their water supply.

So fit a lid that complies with the regulations.
Once you have a proper lid there is enough chlorine in the water filling the
tank to keep it clean if she washes each day.
the other solution is a combi or some other mains hot water system.
You do not want to remove chlorine from wash water unless there is a
specific medical reason.

On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 09:33:22 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

I Disagree
Dead rats, cats, birds, squirrels, cockroaches, in storage tanks
in
attics often give people the heebie jeebies about their water
supply.

So fit a lid that complies with the regulations.

No proper lids on the tanks here when we moved in. All manner of
stuff in the bottoms from brick dust and rocks to dead centipeeds
beetles and a mouse. Didn't do us any harm and all the water we use
goes through those tanks as they were installed before mains water
arrived and the incoming supply was a bit erratic.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 21:27:14 +0100, Derek Geldard wrote:

Much to be said for her getting someone with a Makro or Costco pass to
obtain it (H2O) by the caseload for her, plenty cheap enough for
drinking purposes, can be sparkling or not, and should she choose can
come in lunchpack sized bottles to take to work.

I'd rather drink tap water, it has less contaminants and lower
bacterial load than bottled water.

The only reason for a "filter" on the mains water in this country
would be if it's very hard or if you have a private supply from a
spring or well. In which case you may well still be better off with
UV treatment to kill the bugs rather than a filter.

Maybe it is worth reminding this "scientific (of sorts)" daughter
that the human animal has a very effective immune system and that the
vast majority of the planets human population does not have a
purified and clean water supply. You don't, *generally*, see the
human population being ill or dying from water bourne disease.

--
Cheers
Dave.

Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 21:27:14 +0100, Derek Geldard wrote:

Much to be said for her getting someone with a Makro or Costco pass to
obtain it (H2O) by the caseload for her, plenty cheap enough for
drinking purposes, can be sparkling or not, and should she choose can
come in lunchpack sized bottles to take to work.

I'd rather drink tap water, it has less contaminants and lower
bacterial load than bottled water.

The only reason for a "filter" on the mains water in this country
would be if it's very hard or if you have a private supply from a
spring or well. In which case you may well still be better off with
UV treatment to kill the bugs rather than a filter.

Maybe it is worth reminding this "scientific (of sorts)" daughter
that the human animal has a very effective immune system and that the
vast majority of the planets human population does not have a
purified and clean water supply. You don't, *generally*, see the
human population being ill or dying from water bourne disease.

or even water borne ones. ;-)

On Tue, 22 Sep 2009 11:22:38 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 21:27:14 +0100, Derek Geldard wrote:

Much to be said for her getting someone with a Makro or Costco pass to
obtain it (H2O) by the caseload for her, plenty cheap enough for
drinking purposes, can be sparkling or not, and should she choose can
come in lunchpack sized bottles to take to work.

I'd rather drink tap water, it has less contaminants and lower
bacterial load than bottled water.

The only reason for a "filter" on the mains water in this country
would be if it's very hard or if you have a private supply from a
spring or well. In which case you may well still be better off with
UV treatment to kill the bugs rather than a filter.

Maybe it is worth reminding this "scientific (of sorts)" daughter
that the human animal has a very effective immune system and that the
vast majority of the planets human population does not have a
purified and clean water supply. You don't, *generally*, see the
human population being ill or dying from water bourne disease.

or even water borne ones. ;-)

Or boar bourne ones, although Boarbourne biscuits are very nice.

Derek

On 21 Sep, 15:48, "Why?" wrote:

My daughter has just moved into a flat at Brighton. *

Lay your own pipeline and get water piped in from somewhere civilised.
Brighton's tap water is disgusting.

She has cited a UK Water filterhttp://www.uk-water-filters.co.uk/water_filters_reverse_osmosis.html?...

Which seems to me merely to filter (reverse osmosis plus filters)
drinking and cooking water at a slow rate and store it under sink for
later reuse

If I lived in Brighton I'd have a Brita or two in the fridge (and a
bigger fridge) for starters. RO water isn't the most pleasant stuff
to drink either.

"John Rumm" wrote in message
o.uk...
Why? wrote:

My questions a
Does anyone know the pressure in Brighton?

Nope.

How could one get the contaminants or other contents of water over the
internet - surely it is in the public domain?

You can get water quality reports...

has anyone experience of doing this for bath (ie whole house water)
which seems most improbable

Its more usual to do a tap in the kitchen...

likewise has anyone done this for cooking and drinking (very likely)
and if so
what do the recommend?
It seems to me to be money for old rope with the cost of filters etc
and that for drinking and cooking there must me a gravity filtration
or ion exchange system that would be cheaper
I may be wrong and in which case if a reverse osmosis system is the
answer - any recommendations?

There are two reasons to filter water generally, to remove harmful
content, and to improve its aesthetics. The former almost never applies in
the uk unless you are on a private supply etc. The latter comes down to a
question of taste (literally in some cases).




Particulates like
grit, rust, or even water worms are generally not harmful, although they
certainly make it less appealing.

Stick a worm in Tequila and people will pay more for it!

Adam