Jon/Jill;
It's not necessary to hit my finger with a hammer, to know it's a bad idea.
The site you linked -- and I broke the link -- is not a disinterested account first person account. "Mainframereview.com" is a affiliate marketing site, selling the stuff they fluff. To quote from the index page, "You can purchase some of the products you read about in our ONLINE STORE."
Plus, the article about UV is bogus. Just to take the easiest shot at it, the pipe picture they use, presumably to illustrate what happens without UV, is actually a steel water pipe, probably used for potable water. It has tubercular corrosion, mediated by bacteria growing in the tubercular cells.
The picture below, is a totally bogus picture, when used for that article. Steel pipes have not been used on pools for at least 45 years, plus that particular pipe is too small to have been used on pools at all. Instead, the writer just lifted a random photo found elsewhere, because it served his intention to deceive gullible readers.
In the picture, you can see it's just a 3/4" galvanized water pipe, probably used in household water:
Foxeau, please do NOT post any more links to bogus 'reviews' of UV systems for pools or potable water. If you want to post links to peer-reviewed scientific or engineering studies, that's fine. But post another link like that one, and you're gone.
You've asked your question; we've responded -- TWICE. Asking again is NOT going to make an outdoor pool at 0.5 ppm FC functional or practical.
If you want a different answer, go elsewhere. There are plenty of 'environmentalist' discussions where you can find someone to tell you that the absolutely best way to take care of your pool, is to use a solar-powered ozone-generating UV-irradiating "GREEN" system sold by some company, like "HippiesWhoNeverPassedHighSchoolChemistry, Inc", OR "AsianMarketingSharksRippingOffGullibleLaowai, LLC".
But, we're not going to do that here.
photos & article archived in Picasa album folder
Bookmarks