Need help with algue in a oxygen pool

[PoolDoc]

Wow. I just wouldn't have guessed there were that many pools in Spain. Are those vacation rentals, expat homes, or do they typically belong to native Spaniards?

[PMS SAyMI]

a bit of all 3 to be honest but my area has a huge expat community and loads of rental properties and the natives are only just starting to buy into the area in the last year or so - looking forward to a slightly more balanced future now that is has just been confirmed that paramount pictures are building there next theme park here 20 mins up the road if you fancy a holiday will be finished in 2014

[PoolDoc]

Not sure what area of Spain you're in, but my family's idea of a holiday would not include a theme park, but some thing more like this (on Menorca):

That looks just about perfect, except that too many people got there first. ;-)

Larger: http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5202/5...861a0e7d_b.jpg (arcfolder: "thread 14317")

from http://www.flickr.com/photos/visbeek/ (this would be the Dutch "Ben", not the one in Georgia

[PMS SAyMI]

oh we have loads of places that look like that just with much bigger mountains and not so much green lol, I am based in Mazarron, Murcia - or known as Costa Calida in Southern Spain.

Another question - I have been reading with great interest your BBB information - ask a stupid question get a stupid answer but do companies over there use this method - would really like to talk to you more about it but dont want to look stupid on a open thread.

[PoolDoc]

Many experienced pool service guys have worked out bits and pieces of "the method" I've posted here and at PoolSolutions (and that Chem_Geek and others have extended). But I'm not aware of any active practicing pool service guys who admit using the "BBB Method". Even guys that I learned from, in generating this 'method', don't acknowledge significant elements of it.

For example -- and Chem_Geek may correct me -- there are STILL no pool books that acknowledge that the only EFFECTIVE way to lower carbonate alkalinity levels is via reduced pH *PLUS* aeration. And that is one of the bits of the BBB Method that's ironclad, with scads of anecdotal evidence, a comprehensive analytical explanation (thanks to Chem_Geek), and some clear experimental evidence. But, folks prefer being wrong, to admitting that they have been wrong.

Still, it's a hard thing for folks in the trade to accept. When I started PoolSolutions, I knew the methods I was using worked for me, and I had some pretty good ideas chemically about why. But I still wasn't sure I was right for a very simple reason: EVERY SINGLE pool book in existence at that time, and every pool publication, and every pool operations training program . . . said I was completely wrong.

It turns out I wasn't. But, that's very hard for people in the pool business to accept; that they should come to a website, written by a guy who never went to an NSPI meeting; who never worked for a big pool chemical company, and who was never very financially successful in the pool business . . . and believe what he says, over against what EVERYONE else in the pool business says. Oh, yeah, there are some smart-a$$ pool owners there too, but what do they know?

That's a pretty hard sell.

Some of the pool chemists know I'm right. The reasoning is not that hard to follow, and the evidence, once you consider it, is very, very strong.

But they have a simple problem: the BBB Method reduces pool chemical consumption by 50% or more, in almost every case. Most pool chemical companies today are struggling. Chemtura, which owns most of the US brands of chemicals, is in bankruptcy. Arch Chemical (or whatever holding company has that brand farm today) owns most of the rest. Neither company would survive a 25% reduction in US chemical sales; much less a 50% reduction. But, if they and the NSPF published the BBB Method (even if they didn't call it that, or acknowledge it), would see at least a 25% reduction in sales.

One of my long term moderators, CarlD, is fond of this quote from Upton Sinclair, "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it. " I'm quite sure those working for the big chemical companies, and for small pool chemical stores, perceive that the BBB Method is a threat to their businesses.

It scared me to death when I first realized that. For years, I was afraid that BioGuard / BioLab (now Chemtura) would file an expensive -- if bogus -- lawsuit against me, and shut me down, just because I couldn't afford to defend. I gather that it was considered -- I KNOW they were all over my site on a daily basis for at least two years. I'd found their network ip ranges, and they were constantly in my web server logs.

But, it's too late for them to do so, now. Even apart from the large body of BBB users, the rise of the SWCG systems is destroying the pool chemical market, and the chemical companies no longer have the money for bogus lawsuits.

Still, the success of the BBB Method has been built one desperate pool owner at a time. For most, once they try it, they never turn back. My guess is, with one major and several minor websites competing with mine to explain the BBB Method, in 30 years it will be the ONLY method of pool care. But, the demand for it will come from the pool owners rather than the pool builders or chemical companies.

But, while it's entirely true that the BBB Method is incompatible with the continued operations of the big pool chemical brands, and the pool stores that focus on selling chemicals, it is completely compatible with service companies like yours, that make money from results, not from how many pounds of chemicals they peddle.

Eventually, the pool trade media will acknowledge the BBB Method, and once it does, pool services guys will began switching over. Those that switch first will be the ones that gain a competitive advantage from it.

[waterbear]

Here in Florida there are service tech that do use parts of the method (but are probably unaware they are doing so). Liquid Chlorine (sodium hypochlorite, bleach) is a common chlorine source here and if the pools are only serviced weekly they will often run a high CYA level (up to 100 ppm) and then just shock the pools weekly (to about 25 ppm) and the FC tend to stay above 8 ppm (which the the minimum recommend FC level for CYA at 100 ppm) until the next weekly service call.
This is similar to the way gas chlorinators run their pools with weekly chlorine gas injections.
Hope this helps.

[PoolDoc]

Actually, I worked out some of the "BBB Method" from operational descriptions I got from one of the BIG companies shooting gas. Ironically, though they haven't acknowledged some of the chemistry behind their process. In part, they probably DO understand what's going on, and consider it a 'trade secret'. But, with respect to carbonates in pool water, they've published data that contributed to my working out what was going on, but have nevertheless never accepted that aeration + lowered pH is the ONLY method that works.

And, I found a few years ago, that there are segments of the potable water treatment industry that fully understand the aeration + lowered pH, along with all the chemistry.

But old habits . . . and old understandings . . . die hard.

[PMS SAyMI]

Ben, Can i Pm you or have a email address as I want to discuss this further but not to the detriment of my business, as you know we run quite a big Pool maintenance service but we also have a shop for selling products now obviously the shop relies on the sales of the typical pool products and from this point of view not sure the BBB method would be good for this side of my business however for the pools we maintain we have a few with problems that so far I have not found a single product that has helped so what im thinking is using your method on for example 10% of our pools to see for myself if successful then we will use it for all. As with any normal company I am interested in things that cut the costs of the running and keep the pools in the same or better condition if my company can be in the lead this way then this is good for me and my business.

[PoolDoc]

When you have a successfully operating service business, I completely agree that you should cautiously *TRY* a new method, before rolling it out for all your customers. There are going to be local variations in what's needed, to make it work in your area.

Beyond that, it's up to you. I don't know what pool chemicals are sold in your area, what typical pool and filtration systems are like, what the code requirements are, and more.

But, what I can tell you is that, if you are in pool chemical sales in the USA, there are 3 possible attributes you can have:
1. you can be knowledgeable
2. you can be honest
3. you can be an aggressive salesman of profitable chemicals

But, you can only have 2 of those 3 attributes at any one time: you can't be knowledgeable AND honest AND sell the profitable chemicals.

When I first started PoolSolutions, I fairly regularly got what I called 'nasty-grams' -- emails or phone calls of the "you traitor to your trade" variety. I found those amusing, and used to have a page publishing them. But, I remember one call from a lady who very much wanted to be honest, but who had a profitable pool chemical store selling chemicals that her customers didn't need. She was almost in tears, because she was afraid that I was right, but couldn't figure out how to keep her business AND be honest, now that she was more knowledgeable. She didn't do pool service, so I couldn't help her, which I greatly regretted.

But, since you do service, there may be another option.

Pool owners don't "want" chemicals; they "want" their pool to be right. When I started doing commercial pool service, I rapidly discovered that, the better the job I did on the pool, the less I made selling chemicals. I switched to flat fee service, typically charging $2500 - $4500 per season for all chemicals and service it took to make the water right. The customer had to agree to let me train their staff, and enforce water checks every 3 - 4 hours, and I agreed to come as often as needed, and with as much chlorine as needed. They were happy, because they'd often been spending more than that on chemicals alone. I was happy, because labor and chemicals were costing me about 1/2 of that. Later, I got smarter, and tried to set my prices at 10% OVER what they'd paid for chemicals alone . . . and they were still happy.

But, I made a serious mistake that ended up costing me most of my business. I'll warn you, so you don't do the same.

With commercial pools, staff tends to change from year to year, and after three years, typically none of the people who hired me -- and who remembered how badly the pool had run before -- were still at the pool. They'd heard about it, though. But, after six years, the staff simply assumed that the way their pool ran was the way pools mostly ran, and thus, that I was doing nothing special.

So, when someone came along promising them the moon, they got suckered; I lost my contract; and afterward they were too embarrassed to admit the mistake and hire me back.

What I SHOULD have done is collected info (photos, if possible) of how the pool had run BEFORE, and then continued to market my services to my NEW customers (old pool; new staff!) with annual newsletters and such that documented what their pool had been like before. Doing so would have allowed me to keep many of those customers much longer.

So, if you choose to go to flat fee service with your customers . . . then the money you save on chemicals will be yours. But, you need to make sure to continue "selling" the very real benefits of your service to your customers, so they don't get suckered by the flashy promises of your competitors.

[chem geek]

For example -- and Chem_Geek may correct me -- there are STILL no pool books that acknowledge that the only EFFECTIVE way to lower carbonate alkalinity levels is via reduced pH *PLUS* aeration. And that is one of the bits of the BBB Method that's ironclad, with scads of anecdotal evidence, a comprehensive analytical explanation (thanks to Chem_Geek), and some clear experimental evidence. But, folks prefer being wrong, to admitting that they have been wrong.

As I noted in the post Certified Pool Operator (CPO) training -- What is not taught, the 2009 "CPO® Handbook, National Swimming Pool Foundation®" with front cover title "Pool & Spa Operator™ Handbook" indicates that at higher levels of TA, the pH is usually higher than ideal and becomes very difficult to change, but does not indicate that TA itself is a source of rising pH due to carbon dioxide outgassing. In the Spa & Therapy Operations section, when discussing pH, there is a discussion of aeration and carbon dioxide outgassing causing the pH to rise (and it says the TA decreases which is incorrect; the TA only drops when acid is added as acid lowers both pH and TA). However, even in this discussion it is not made clear that this effect can be reduced by lowering the TA level (nor how to do that efficiently) and supplementing pH buffering with a different non-carbonate pH buffer such as borates.

So there are bits and pieces of the correct chemistry, but not the definitive procedure as Ben describes in Lowering Swimming Pool Alkalinity -- A Step By Step Guide. Unfortunately, the industry still too often touts the "slug" or "acid column" method which is dangerous and inefficient as described in this paper, a shorter version of which may be found in this paper and this link. The fact is that 25-1/2 fluid ounces of full-strength Muriatic Acid (31.45% Hydrochloric Acid) in 10,000 gallons will lower the Total Alkalnity (TA) by 10 ppm no matter how you add it. The only thing you can affect is how quickly you can bring the pH back up without changing the TA, and that is accelerated by increasing the amount of aeration and having the pH be lower (at least near the water surface). This chart shows how over-carbonated the water is with respect to being in equilibrium with the air. The rate of outgassing increases with how far you are out-of-equilibrium, though the effect with TA is non-linear and appears to vary as the square of the TA (this effect is not shown in the table).