A carbon based tank with a backwash system should do the trick. Activated carbon or carbon block should be equally effective for your purpose. There is no regular maintenance although at some point your carbon will need to be replenished. But, that time is measured in years not weeks or months. It will depend on volume of water and level of chlorine - I forget exact calculations.

Contact local plumbers or water softener/treatment companies if you want installation assistance. Otherwise there's plenty of places online to buy one. A Fleck brand head is good - this is the thing that controls the backwash.

The backwash will occur regularly, say every 7-14 days depending. It does what it sounds like - washes water back through the tank to remove loose particles.

These are readily available as stand-alone units.

It is not a good idea to remove chlorine on a "whole house" basis. Doing so can cause odor and bacteria problems.

And if you do, you wouldn't need a backwashed filter, a 4.5" x 10" disposable carbon cartridge filter would work and provide a few months of operation before needing replacement (on most city waters).

The problem with most Fleck control valves is that you need control valve specific special Fleck tools to remove and replace the piston seals and spacers. You don't have that problem with the Clack WS-1 control valve, which is the new and improved Fleck valve that Fleck didn't make, but three of their ex-engineers did, for Clack.

Gary

I'm a little puzzled by Gary's comment saying to avoid whole-house carbon filtration. He's in the industry but it's the first time I've ever seen that. I'm surprised the manufacturers of point-of-use filters don't say that in their advertising as a benefit over whole-house filtration.

Clearly, in your case, improving your health would be a good reason to use one even if there might be some risk of odor or bacteria.

You can always bypass the whole-house filter occassionally to run chlorinated water through the lines. That said, none of the literature or sellers of whole-house systems has ever suggested that it's necessary.

I've used them myself to good effect. I can't imagine drinking the water here in my FL home without one. The water is heavily chlorinated and otherwise just unpleasant. It would be impractical to have point-of-use filters on my fridge for water/ice, kitchen sink, and bathroom sinks.

The only drawback we've noticed is our bath towels tend to smell musty a little quicker. Maybe this was simply because we relocated to FL from a drier climate. In any event, we remedied that by adding color-fast bleach or Oxyclean during the wash cycle (both are chlorine-based cleaners).

Gary's suggestion of a large replaceable filter system would be good if you couldn't afford or plumb in a larger tank with backwash. I think going years without maintenance is far preferable than ongoing filter replacement.

Clack, Fleck, they're both good. Heads for carbon tanks are very simple devices - unlike the more complicated water softener heads.

Sorry Gary,

I have to agree with MacQ. I have no use for inline filters and do like the idea of getting rid of all chlorine if at all possible.

I have a computer store next door to my shop and we installed him a 9" X 48" with a manual bypass and an in/out head. He does bypass it once a month, lets in a little poison (chlorine) and unbypasses it and goes on. The computer shop is also a WiFi coffee house on the order of a small Starbucks and without the filter he was gagging on the coffee because of the chlorine.

Before the one we installed a plumber buddy of his installed a hitech in line filter with sensors that told him when the cartridges needed replacing. After a few months of that he was over here seeing me about our nstall. It's been 3 years and he's still happy.

bob...

Okay guys... lol All carbon comes with a Caution: Not to be used on water of unknown microbiological content; you'll find it on the packaging of carbon cartridges sold in stores, and water treatment dealers are schooled in it. The reason is due to bacteria loving to live in carbon (charcoal). It has a great surface area plus it removes organics that bacteria live on. And even in chlorinated water, there is bacteria UNLESS there is a .2 to 1.5 Free Chlorine content, and even then bacteria can survive and multiply under sediments where the Free chlorine can not penetrate. Hence my suggestion of whole house (POE) removal of chlorine not being a good idea.

Bob, I have equipment in a gourmet coffee shop up here that is in a large commercial multiple business building served by its own well. I've put in a large water softener for the iron and hardness, then a UV light for the whole coffee shop and a 200 gpd RO with pressurized 40 gallon storage for the coffee shop machines. If your neighbor wants good coffee, he needs a RO not just a GAC filter to remove chlorine. People will rave about his water and coffee, tea and anything else he makes with the water.

Gary

Gary, the guy has health problems he's trying to improve by treating his water. And, he's already been using POU carbon to good effect. POE or POU doesn't change the risk factor for bacteria (I think it's far far less than you) and he's already accepted that risk. In fact, I'd argue POU is more likely to have bacteria due to lack of timely replacement, more stagnant water, and no backwash.

Frankly, I don't understand your objection to carbon. Refrigerators have carbon filters and POU filters are sold in droves. Or is it just POE carbon? If so, do you have any scientific studies you can refer to that show POE carbon is unsuitable?

I'm simply telling you about the caution concerning carbon filters and that many of us water treatment guys have had to remove them when they are used for whole house chlorine removal.

I think the much larger vaolumes of water through a whole house carbon filter is like getting shot at with thousands of bullets rather than a few. I think it's more likely for bacteria problems with higher volumes of water than a POU counter top filter sees.

And then there is the fact that leaving a carbon cartridge in too long usually leads to odor problems and the guy finally replacing the cartridge... Bacteria are causing the odor; on his chlorinated water. So IMO that is that enough proof preceding the caution.

Gary

There are so many of these POE whole house filter on-line.
Which one of those POE whole house filter (type, brand, model, and where/site/link) do you all recommend?

We aren't allowed to advertise here, or we all get banned so you will have to do your own surfing.
I do think we can all agree that maintenance is key in keeping these things effective. Bacteria will grow in any carbon filter like Gary says, so in my opinion it would be a matter of preference. I don't like big box stores and internet sites calling one faucet filters "whole house filters" IMO that's false advertising and should stop.

Gary, if I could get the guy next door to get off a few bucks, I would love to fix him up like you suggested, but the filter he has is barter for computer service when something major happens that I can't handle.

bob...

Ed, there are a number of different types of carbon. One is better than the other for specific use such as chlorine removal. I think that may be coconut shell carbon but don't hold me to that. Then there is a SFR (service flow rating) you need. That is based on the volume of mineral and your peak demand gpm flow rate.

So going off to buy one of these things is a bit more involved than a recommendation based on what someone else bought due to price or the looks of the web site or what the store clerk suggested...

That's IF you want it to work for more than a few months and not to cause you to throw more good money after bad.

I suggest the control valve be a Clack WS-1 w/by-pass valve, the tank a Structural Fibers, gravel underbed and 1.05" distributor tube. Backwashing should be like once per week but... it doesn't do much more than get rid of some sediment. It doesn't bring the carbon back, or 'clean' it, because the chlorine is absorbed into the carbon and it can't be backwashed out of the bed (carbon).

Now I'll get into "dry skin". The usual cause is hardness in the water, not chlorine. I know you don't want a softener (I sell 1-2 a day everyday for much less than a $1000) but a carbon filter isn't going to prevent dry skin that is caused by hardness in the water.

Bob, I see the problem. :)

Gary

Just to kick a possibly dead horse

Bacteria is everywhere and much of it does no harm to humans. Right now thereÂs bacteria in your mouth, your intestines, on your hands. It seems to me the word bacteria is thrown around as a scare tactic these days.

Certainly there are waterborne bacteria that can be harmful. E. Coli is one example but even of its hundreds of strains most are not harmful to humans and some live in aforementioned human intestines. (see EPA link below) Cryptosporidium is also a water-borne thing that is serious although technically thatÂs a parasite.

Gary mentions bacteria growing in POU (point of use) carbon filters create an odor and this would trigger the owner to replace it. OK, but a bacteria that just creates odor is a nuisance  not a health risk. Replace the filter  problem solved  no biggee.

I donÂt know why POE (point of entry, i.e, whole-house) filters wouldnÂt then also create an odor should this same bacteria colony start to grow. So, if this were true just replace the carbon in the tank. I admit most homeowners wouldnÂt do this themselves but itÂs a lot cheaper than buying a new tank. WhatÂs a cubic foot of carbon cost  maybe $50? $100 retail for really good stuff maybe. I donÂt know why the experts Gary mentions would remove the whole tank and replace it with some other (presumably POU filters) when they could have just replaced the suspect or used-up carbon.

A house I lived in about 8 years ago had our well water contaminated by an old small landfill where some illegal dumping occurred. The EPA got involved to force the local city to bring water out to our rural area. In the two year time it took to build the water main the EPA demanded our homes (at our townÂs expense) be fitted with whole-house water treatment which included POE carbon tanks. They were not at all concerned about a possible build-up of "bacteria" in these tanks and there was no other treatment to prevent bacteria.

If you get harmful bacteria in your water supply (like O157:H7) itÂs not good  regardless of what kind of in-home water treatment you have. If this happens you should probably replace carbon filters  all of them and of any kind. If you live with a well thatÂs frequently affected by coliform bacteria a carbon filter of any kind probably isnÂt a good idea. If your water utility often issues boil-water advisories, carbon filters probably arenÂt great either. If your water supply is fairly good, like much of America, some kind of carbon filter can be helpful for a variety of reasons. I prefer POE, others may prefer limited or lots of POU systems.

You might want to check your water supplier to see if they have any plans to change to using chloramine rather than chlorine in their water. If a typical small POU system was working for you then just about any POE carbon would also suit for now. But, might want to get one that's chloramine capable if that's in their plans.

KDF claims to make a product that helps fight bacteria growth in carbon filters. It's available as a product imbedded in carbon or as a prefilter. I have it in one of my tanks but I really don't have lots of factual material to support their claim. But, for what its worth: http://www.kdfft.com/index.htm

I really don't think a particular brand or type of tank is the most important factor. POE tanks are pretty simple. I think getting one from a good local supplier is best so when/if you replace the carbon they can do it for you. You should be able to get a good one installed for well less than $1000 ($700?). They'll also factor the flow-rate and other issues that Gary mentioned for you as part of this. Just call a couple and see what they say.

Mac, I've been in this business for 18 years now and it sounds as if you are a homeowner with a carbon filter. As an example of information not usualy avaiable to the home owner, what do you know about Legionella bacteria in domestic water heaters? How about helicobacter pylori. There are others but those two are comonally found in "potable" water when folks get sick, yet they are never tested for on any level beforehand. Coliform bacteria is made up of many types of bacteria and the vast majority of people never test their water for Coliform; including those with their own well but... there are many municiple waters that also have Coliform bacteria contaminations periodically and many that don't chlorinate their water. Are you taking those people into account here? I am.

I'm stating a caution and you're making blanket statements supporting the use of carbon to remove the chlorine and/or chlormines. Frankly I don't think you know enough to disagree with me but I understand it's not so much that you disagree, it's more to learn from the exchange. BTW, the government used to say that DDT was safe to dust ourselves with and anywhere else we wanted to. They sent spray trucks up and down streets sparying it all over the neighborhoods all across America; for a few decades. There are many other things like that if we want to get into them. Such as all govenrment agencies saying that you should shock your well with bleach, swimming pool chlorine etc.. And they tell us the chlorine in our water isn't a problem WHILE they constantly reduce the allowable level of DBPs (THMs) that doing so can create. I think you get my point...

Yes you can rebed the POE carbon filter, you wouldn't throw the tank away! I was talking about the quality of a control valve, not the make of tank.

BTW, the last I heard, there are 56 different types of very dangerous bacteria found in groundwater and they are not identified with a Colifrom bacteria test. And that bit of chlorine, and now ammonia added to it making chlorimines, isn't sufficient to 'kill' all of them. And if you think that's scare tactics, check it out and recall that I'm not selling anything here, I'm freely donating knowledge; which you and others may benefit from by simply taking the time to read it and maybe some time to check it out.

Gary

Well Gary, you are just getting too violent for my tastes. I'm objecting to comments that implied POE carbon was bad whereas POU was OK. I didn't make a blanket statement that carbon was ok I said you shouldn't use it in cases of suspect water. I also readily admitted there are dangerous waterborne bacteria but that would be a serious problem no matter what. Would that be aggravated by carbon - sure - but you still have a problem. As for my chloramine statement that wasn't to imply it would kill everything only that not all carbons can remove that.

Good Bye.

IMO we have been discussing or debating the subject, and now you call me violent!! I'm sorry you see this as a fight, I didn't.

BTW, Ed didn't say the shower head filter uses carbon, so it could be KDF instead; many are. And you brought up POU carbon in the first reply to Ed. Then you said you think POU is more likely to cause a problem than a POE with much more water flow through it than a counter top filter. I don't agree simply because there is much more exposure to bacteria in the much larger volume of water in the much larger surface area in POE than POU carbon filters.

Many dealers will agree on not using carbon on a whole house basis for the removal of chlorine. Many will also say that backwashing carbon is not needed or helpful to the carbon; although I believe in backwashing to remove dirt and small pieces of carbon that otherwise cause higher pressure loss across the filter that continues to increase over time. But backwashing will grind the carbon into smaller and smaller pieces and then backwash it out of the tank and you can't get rid of the absorbed chlorine by backwashing anyway.

Furthermore, I gave you reasons for my statements while I think you expect me and others to just believe what you are saying with no basis other than your use of a POE backwashed carbon filter and what some sales people probably told you in selling it to you.

I'm sorry your feelings have been hurt, just understand that that wasn't my intent.

Gary

For the record, you didnt hurt my feelings. The term violent was not correct. I got caught up in the exaggeration that was permeating this thread. Sorry for that.

In talking about me you said "I don't think you know enough to disagree with me". Wow, now Im not allowed to have an opinion. In your most recent post you said my knowledge was limited to what some sales guy told me. You have no idea what I know or how I know it. This kind of language is mudslinging not discussion.

Bringing up DDT spraying which occurred for decades prior to 1972. Sheesh. What does that have to do with water treatment in this thread. If you were trying to discredit the EPA with that example you are off-base. The EPA originated in 1970 and banned DDT in 1972. Of course, people do make mistakes I imagine its possible even you have been or will be mistaken at some point as certainly I have been mistaken in the past and will be in the future. Maybe others are interested in your opinions about that sort of thing but I dont find it helpful to this thread.

You said I mentioned POU carbon in my first reply to Ed. I did not.

Now, back on point:

Im still just trying to understand your objections to whole-house carbon filters. Im hearing mixed messages from you: Early in the thread you say a tank with backwash is not good but a whole-house disposable cartridge is ok. In your most recent post you said that many dealers dont believe in backwashing carbon but that you do. Earlier you also said "all carbon comes with a caution" but yet you recommend POU filters and the whole-house disposable cartridge. Until your most recent post you didnt distinquish between KDF or plain carbon filters. In fact, I was the first one in this thread to mention KDF. Its available in whole-house systems so that wouldnt be different between POE and POU.

I"ve given some reasons (EPA, POU marketing) why I have the opinion that whole-house carbon filtration is fine to use unless you have suspect water. And, I gave a couple examples of that kind of water. I wish I still had the research material that showed POE was slightly less likely to become contaminated. Im content with my previous research but I can appreciate why you might not accept that particular comment of mine without further support.

Youve said POU was less likely to become contaminated. Is that the only reason you prefer it? Well, how much less likely? Surely in your 18 years of experience youd have run across countless independent test reports or comparisons of these products. Perhaps you could share some to substantiate your opinion. No solution (even doing nothing) is without risk and let each person make their own risk/reward decisions.

In trying to bolster your opinion that whole-house carbon isnt good you say "many dealers will agree". The issue must not be so clear otherwise youd have been able to claim that all, or at least a vast majority, of dealers and experts would have a similar opinion. And, frankly, saying "many dealers" is not persuasive to me as I have no knowledge of how many these are or their reasons for their opinions.

If you provide some scientific reports to support your opinion Id surely look at it. Barring that, I think were done here.

Edw05, I hope you find a satisfactory solution for you and your daughters health problems.

Mac, you said "Activated carbon or carbon block should be equally effective for your purpose.".

Carbon block cartridges are only capable of being used in POE. That's why I took you to mean or include POU; or that you were suggesting either POE ot POU.

Certainly you are/were entitled to your opinion. I'm not giving just an opinion, I'm relating personal firsthand experience with carbon and customers' problems with it when they were removing chlorine on a whole house basis. And over the years, I've heard from many other dealers that have had the same complaints.

Also, I've done a thousand plus Coliform bacteria tests. I used to average 18 a day at one time using the filtration/petri dish method and I've seen 4-5 out of ten test negative for Coliform and/or E-Coli but... The dishes were full of other types of bacteria. Sometimes there was so much growth it was difficult to see the grid paper. The EPA and state said since there was no Coliform and/or E-Coli, I had to say the water was just fine. Well none of those customers would have agreed had they compared their petri dish results with those with no bacteria.

Yeah, you're right, I'm done with this.

Gary

Yeah, you're right with the carbon block. The flow rates would not be suitable for POE - my mistake.

I'm not surprised that you find customers that are worried by "bacteria". I think many people hear that word and get afraid - I said so earlier. The fact is the vast majority of kinds of bacteria are harmless to humans. But I'm sure lots of folks would be scared by seeing a petri dish full of them just the same. I'm sure lots of folks would be suprised how many things they consume and touch would also cause a petri dish to overload with bacteria.

Our goal though should be accurate information. If someone's fears still prevent them from doing something that's their choice. We should distinguish between bacteria that is a hazard to people (pathogenic) and ones that aren't. Water, air, objects, and food are all full of bacteria and we need to understand the actual health risks. Trying to avoid all bacteria is impossible.

Trying to reduce harmless bacteria is wasting money that could be spent on efforts that actually do provide a health benefit.

The link below is very interesting. It is an article from Water Conditioning and Purification Magazine. The article is titled "Bacteria in Drinking Water - Public Health Implications" and is dated July 2002.

It is a consensus review of material from a NSF International and World Health Organization (WHO) International Symposium.

The article specifically talks about activated carbon and the growth of bacteria - among other things. It's fairly, uh er, dense, reading but if there's any hardy souls still reading this thread they might find it interesting.

I encourage anyone to read the entire article, and, for that matter, peruse other material on the site. But, for those who want the executive summary, below are some choice parts. Oh, I have no association in any way with this publication or it's authors.

I'll note this article talks about tests with POU devices, I'll be doing another post shortly with another reference that talks about POE and POU jointly. This article at least clearly shows that changing from POE to POU will not prevent drinking "bacteria". It talks about the health risks of this bacteria and I believe that POE and POU have largely the same health risks. POE carbon-based devices are not nearly as common as POU so I'm not surprised these large organizations don't focus as much attention on them.

In the quotes of the article below, know that "HPC" is a measurement of naturally occurring bacteria.

**************************

"Interestingly, HPC levels in foods haven't raised the same concern as in the drinking water industry. It's not unusual to find very high numbers (>50,000 cfu/gram or ml) of HPC bacteria in a wide variety of foods such as pasteurized milk, cheeses, meats, yogurts and fresh produce. HPC bacteria consumed with food is generally several orders of magnitude larger than those consumed in water. A million HPC bacteria have been documented on a single gram of leaf lettuce and carrot sticks.(1)"

***********************

"Granular activated carbon (GAC), commonly used in the water treatment industry, is known to concentrate bacteria and their growth substrates. As water passes through the GAC, bacteria may also be released. Point-of-use (POU) treatment devices have been shown to reduce the level of waterborne gastrointestinal disease and remove known microbial pathogens. It's not uncommon, however, to note a significant increase in HPC bacteria post treatment, possibly several-fold higher than the influent water. Re-growth of bacteria in POU devices occurs frequently during periods of non-use."

****************************

"In addition, HPC bacteria didn't survive well at low pH (i.e., conditions of the human stomach). In fact, only 1-2 percent of HPC bacteria were found to have possible virulence factors, but still weren't associated with human disease."

**************************

"Several large epidemiological studies were conducted in an attempt to define the public health impact of HPC bacteria in drinking water. The first was conducted in the United States and showed that a large number of households using various GAC POU devices had high HPC levels but no demonstrated health effects.(5) Likewise, a recent study conducted in California attempting to correlate HPC in tap water to gastrointestinal illness provided no such evidence.(6)"

****************************

"In summary, an overwhelming body of evidence from human feed studies, animal studies, epidemiological studies, risk assessment, and virulence data all confer there's no medical rationale to control HPC concentrations in drinking water. The general consensus at the HPC symposium was that such common bacteria in drinking water wasn't associated with a significant public health risk."

Benefits of HPC? Didn't I just say HPC was bacteria? Yes, I did. Beneficial, hmmmm? This article discusses both POE and POU granular activated carbon filters.

There is lots of interesting reading in this article but the one thing that really stood out to me was that HPC bacteria in these filters would compete with pathogenic (disease-causing) bacteria that might come along. The higher volumes of HPC would overwhelm the pathogens, preventing them from reaching your tap, showerhead, or whatever and preventing you from getting sick from them.

In addition to the above summary, here's a choice quote from this article:

**********************************

"To date, there are no documented cases of persons outside of the hospital environment becoming ill from HPC bacteria. More specifically, there has never been a documented case of waterborne disease associated with HPC bacteria."

And, one more article from the same publication. If you are still reading this thread I applaud your vigor :)

This one discusses issues of possibly encouraging HPC bacteria in public water supplies. It considers the likely consumer reaction (probably not good).

Here's a teaser quote from the article linked below:

"Arguably, the leading microbiologist in the point-of-use/point-of-entry (POU/POE) segment of the water treatment industry, University of Arizona professor Charles Gerba, is currently investigating these issues. (Gerba presented his most recent findings at the WQA Las Vegas convention in March 2003). He has indicated that the inhibitory effect of HPC bacteria on pathogenic bacteria is so significant that HPC bacteria proliferation shouldn't be discouraged. Obviously, for semiconductor rinsing, pharmaceutical manufacturing, hemodialysis and other applications requiring microorganism-free water, this isn't an option, but, for most drinking water uses and many other applications, it is."

Enjoy all, it's been fun.

Since you said you were done, and then returned to this 3-4 times, I believe I will be excused for returning once or twice...

First, I've read all of all of the articles. We aren't talking HPC. As far as anyone knows, that is nonharmful to humans and not all waters contain HPC; many don't. I was talking about pathogens living and mutiplying in carbon filters but...

This about says it all:
"This one discusses issues of possibly encouraging HPC bacteria in public water supplies. It considers the likely consumer reaction (probably not good).".

Wherever I post, I am talking to 'consumers' and have been doing so for years, so I have a 'feeling' of what they will and will not accept. I tend to know what they shouldn't accept too and I say so. Just yesterday I read about some water company being sued for not adding chlorine and fluoride to their water.... There are 82 homes invloved, I wil bet some of them have carbon filters because they don't know any better and guys saying it is okay and no problem.
http://www.pantagraph.com/stories/111605/new_20051116036.shtml

These articles validate my caution about the use of "whole house" chlorine removal. I wasn't talking about HPC in this until I mentioned the petri dishes; and I nor the boss etc. had any idea what was in the dish. " Heterotrophic plate count (HPC) is a non-specific term for the measure of growth of viable, naturally occurring bacteria in water.".

HPC interferes with Coliform etc. sample testing and possibly leads to a TNC (too numerous to count) result. Two hundred CFUs and the sample is deemed TNC and must be recollected and tested again. So adding it too municipal water supplies is never going to happen. And what do you do with the millions of private and commercial water wells and the millions of the population using them?

To my knowledge there is no research as to any potential airborne problems with high HPC bacteria in a shower etc..

Gary

Hi All,

i have purchased a whole house water filters fro aquasana. it's really a cheap one and handy enough to adjust. i found that one cheaper and full of health concern. i purchased that one from http://www.watergiants.com

What health concerns do you have and how does this filter address them?

Andy

I hope you all don't get too annoyed and leave this forum for good. I'm building a house right now that will be completed in June 2007. It has a well, which was drilled three years ago (630'). The last time I had one was 25 years ago. The water came out of the tap cold and had no taste and that was all I knew. This time I know just enough to be nervous. This is one of the best web sites going. I'm happy to hear your strongly-held opinions. It makes me a more informed person. Don't go away, please.