Culator -- Solution or Just Another "Pool Store" Product?

[Lawrosa]

I have ordered Culator, and will let you know how it works,

I contacted them for free samples, or perform a test on a pool and document it. I was trying to contact Ben regarding this or someone that may guide it along. This is what I got from them.

[SNIP #1 by PoolDoc]

Then this after I told them what I wanted to do and I wanted no out of pocket expenses.

[SNIP #2 by PoolDoc]

Thats where I am at so far. I am curious to know if it works. He said it removes .8ppm of metals in a 20,000 gal pool. So if you had copper.8ppm and iron.8ppm would it remove .4ppm of each??? You know what I mean?

[Lawrosa]

Can someone delete the info above regarding the e mail response from Culator? I was told not to post from Culator with out consent.

Thanks

I had follow up e mails above from curlator regarding a possible test pool so we can post the results to see if this product really works. It is still in review. I wanted to get Ben or someone else involved. I have the # to call the VP directly if anyone is interest.

Possibly chemgeek, or someone, would like to look at the patent and let us know what they think. I have no clue......

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-P...,688+B2%22&OS=

Mike NJ

[Watermom]

Ok. It has been deleted.

[ PoolDoc note: I un-deleted the post, and then snipped the email excerpts ]

[PoolDoc]

I talked to David McLaren* (Periodic Products (website), maker of Culator) today. Culator (website) may be an useful product, but I can't tell and they don't have any verifiable external evidence that they are ready to share yet.

*David McLaren
VP, Marketing and Product Development,
Periodic Products
3864 SW 30th Avenue
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33312

They seem really nervous, and would like to be able to sell their product conventionally via pool stores and such. (The "snips" above are of some fairly innocuous emails from David to Lawrosa, that David got pretty agitated about.) But they have no experience with pools or the pool industry, and are having a hard time wrapping their minds around the fact that pool stores and chemical distributors aren't all excited about a product that -- if it works like Periodic thinks it will -- would eliminate a whole category of competing stain and metal products.

It also appears that the company right now consists of a handful of people -- maybe just David, a salesman, and his boss and the patent holder, Joseph Laurino. I would assume they are having a 3rd party manufacture the material "Chelok" or apparently "Poly-octadecylbutanedioate". Their address appears to be an office, and maybe a shipping, location here: (Google Map).

They also haven't thought through a number of practical aspects of how their material can be used.

Bottom line?

#1 - At present, they aren't ready to participate in any testing they don't control . . . and they don't feel like they can control pool owners.

#2 - There are some aspects of their use claims that don't seem to add up.
<Begin Geek-speak>Most reactions are often determined by molar values, not mass. But Culator's published metal uptake info is mass (parts per million, a weight to weight measure). This claim, of 0.8 ppm in 24,000 gallons of water, translates to 0.16 lbs or 2.6 oz of metal. Now that's weird, because in an ordinary reaction, if something will react with take up 2.6 oz of copper (atomic weight of 63.5) you'd expect it to take up 4.4 oz. of silver (atomic weight 107.9), or 1.4 ppm. When I asked David about this, he didn't seem to understand the question. I also spoke to my older son, who finds organic chemistry "fun", and he explained that there are multiple modes of binding between organic molecules and metals, and that ionic size can be the significant factor, rather than moles. But even so, it's not particularly likely that the "Culator" product package will neatly bind 2.6 oz of whatever noxious metal is present.

There's a further factor, that I had wondered about: most sequestrants, and also most "zeolites" tend to be pretty promiscuous about what metals they bind. Many react with sodum -- found in all pool waters, and most react with calcium, also found in most pool water. When one of these products is bound with sodium or calcium, transition metals in the solution may displace the sodium or calcium and become bound. Or, they may not. But it gets worse. Even with zeolites that take up transition metals in the presence of sodium or calcium, this uptake may reverse if the concentration of sodium or calcium is high enough.

And, there is no information about Culators performance in high sodium or high calcium pools. Probably, these levels are not high enough to be an issue, but with a "NOVEL" product - a patent claim term the Culator site repeats frequently - it's not possible to rule out that sort of interference. <End Geek-speak>

#3 - David indicated that they were testing test methods, and so far had found that pool tests for metals were unreliable. The only thing they trust is their very expensive lab instrument. I suspect they may be right about pool test methods for metals, but without an agreed upon measuring stick to use in the field, there is no way verify whether their product actually works.

So where does that leave things?

My guess is that the owner is very nervous that someone, somehow is going to take advantage of him. He seems to believe he owns a patent that's going to make him extremely wealthy, if only he can find a way to sell it without having one of the big companies take him down. I'm sure he's right that there are big companies that would happily take him down -- if his product actually works -- and would do so by any method, legal or illegal, that thought they could get away with.

But, I'm not sure he's right that his product is a practical tool for pool owners. It may be, but there's no real evidence of that so far. And, as I explained to David, the Culator website reminds me of many "Revolutionary New Pool Product, based on an Amazing Scientific Breakthrough" websites I've seen over the years. For example, here is a quote from the Periodic Products website:

We are continually applying smarter science to help solve the world's environmental issues. Our current focus is on a series of unique and versatile polymer compounds which:

Purify the world's water supply;
Bind heavy metal contaminates for removal or extraction;
Serve as a superior polycarbonate resin in the production of countless consumer products; and
Eliminate non-biodegradeable plastic waste.

http://www.periodicproducts.com/vision.html
. . . to which I can only add, in teen-speak, "Feel grandiose much?"

It especially reminds me of the sanitizing catalyst claims made by Fountainhead (the people that originated the Nature2 product) years ago. There were several PhD's involved in Fountainhead, not just one, and several patents, not just one. But, Fountainhead's claims all turned out to be more or less bogus. So the only recommendation I can make is, "Wait and see." There's no available published evidence yet, and the history of the pool biz suggest you shouldn't hold your breath waiting for it.

If we're lucky, it will all pan out, and the pool biz will have a new, affordable and functional solution to metal problems. But unfortunately it appears more likely that it's just another Fountainhead!

[Lawrosa]

The "snips" above are of some fairly innocuous emails from David to Lawrosa, that David got pretty agitated about.

Gee... I had no clue. I only wondered if he wanted to test a real world pool and document the results...I did not know he was agitated. I only spoke of this site and said many people would be interested in thier product if it worked. I was hoping some samples would be offered so we can see if this stuff works.

Gee if it was my company I would of gave you (Ben) a couple of dozen to use so you can promote the product.

Heck, if I could throw a bag in my skimmer and all metals are removed I would buy for top $$$ it if it worked.

Thanks for calling him Ben. I guess he may not be e mailing me back then. I assume you did not get some samples either.....

[chem geek]

I ran into this product elsewhere and also had some contact with the company, read the patent, etc. The results so far have been mixed from the few people who have tried it. Unfortunately, for many they didn't have measurable metal ion levels to start with so it is hard to know if it works in such cases. There was a case that seemed to work, but we just don't have enough to be conclusive. So the jury is still out on this one. I had high hopes initially since there isn't much that actually removes metals from the water as opposed to sequestring them (except for Ben's "precipitate it into the filter at high pH" method). I have a bag still in my skimmer, but I've never measured metals though have a yellowing light stain that seems to only appear at higher pH so I figured it might be iron (I have rusting stainless steel mounts where my Trichlor floating feeder caused corrosion 7-8 years ago).

[mbar]

I have also decided to try culator. I have it in my skimmer now. I didn't have any staining, since I got rid of it. It usually returns sometime so I thought I would put it in to see if it keeps it away. If it just keeps it from restraining it wii be well worth the money since I won't have to put any more sequestering agent in the water. I will let you know.

[Lawrosa]

OK guys. I found the culator product on line for 19 bucks.

I may purchase but would like to know how to test my pool for the metals it says it removes. I have iron for sure because of my well situation. I know what my water has. It is treated but my iron is .7 ppm. I probably had breakthough of the softner when refilling my pool.

Do I just have a iron test done? Before and after? I guess The instruction would explain, but do I use a sequest agent first to get the iron to souluable form?

Since I am not a chemist I want to try and use my own pool for a test and let everone know the results. Just want to get some test parameters that may be somewhat accurate.

[PoolDoc]

David indicated that their testing showed that metal test strips did NOT work if a chelant or sequestrant was present. They had not yet tested drops based metal tests. But he said one of their frustrations was a lack of reliable testing to use to evaluate results.

[Lawrosa]

Anything I can do or try then? Otherwise it would be like when you change the oil and wash your car. You think it runs better.