Moblaine's pool

[moblaine]

FWIW - my opinion - get rid of the Frog. At best, it will add copper which will cause you a problem later. Just say no to metal(mineral) algae control. It doesn't kill fecal coliform, only algae. We can eaisily see when algae gets out of control, but, butt bacteria you can't see, but, it'll make you really sick.

I contacted King Technology -- they tell me there is NO copper in their Mineral Reservoir. What do you make of that?

[PoolDoc]

I contacted King Technology -- they tell me there is NO copper in their Mineral Reservoir. What do you make of that?

image and quote from: http://www.kingtechnology.com/produc...s-poolfrog.htm; archived 7Jun2012
The POOL FROG® Mineral Reservoir, which contains our EPA registered mineral formula and fits inside the Cycler. The minerals continually replenish themselves for added protection against bacteria, as well as keeping your pool's pH balanced by acting as a neutralizer. One Mineral Reservoir will last the full season or up to 6 months; use two reservoirs for year-round pools.

In the pool industry, the term "minerals" has been applied to three things: copper, silver, and zinc. At effective levels, copper kills algae, inhibits bacteria a little, and stains hair and pools. At effective levels, silver inhibits algae, kills some bacteria slowly, and stains pools gray or black. I've seen no evidence to date that zinc can be added to pools at levels that are effective at anything . . . but it doesn't stain.

I'm going to try to look up the King Tech EPA registration, but it may be they've revised it to remove copper (which stains) and silver (which stains and is expensive) and left zinc (which AFAIK does nothing much). This allows them to keep the claim "minerals", charge more, and still not stain your pool. Of course, if they DON'T have copper or silver, then the question would be, why replace the unit . . . EVER?

Ok, I found it (below) -- the mineral pack is 99.5% inert and 0.5% AgCl, silver chloride. Now, that's interesting: silver chloride is not likely to stain your pool, because it's so very insoluble in water. The "efficacy" data (last link below) is also very interesting: in a glaring typo, not only does it ID the effective agent as "0.5% sodium chloride" (salt) in the front of the report, the efficacy data appears to me to show that the added silver has ZERO effect on sanitation.

I'm going to ask Chem_Geek to take a look, and see if it looks as weird to him, as it does to me; he's much more familiar with EPA registration standards.

But it appears to me that, when you purchase a "mineral reservoir", you are buying a product that's almost perfectly safe to use . . . because it does almost nothing!

Just a caution: this discussion is likely to get into deep technical waters, resulting in this thread moving to the "China Shop" section.

===================================
Found it:
http://iaspub.epa.gov/apex/pesticide...PLS:4:0::NO::: - King Tech index
http://iaspub.epa.gov/apex/pesticide...EG_NUM:53735-2 - Trichlor pack
http://iaspub.epa.gov/apex/pesticide...P8_PUID:463787 - Mineral reservoir
http://www.epa.gov/opp00001/chem_sea...7-Oct-06_a.pdf - Efficacy data

All reports archived 07 June 2012 @ SwimmingPoolResearch

[chem geek]

The efficacy data says "The product must be used in conjunction with an EPA-registered source of chlorine (such as Chlorine Bac Pac)." They amended the registration for use in spas and bromine may be used in place of chlorine. They did their actual tests using the equivalent of what would occur from the use of bromine tabs (BCDMH) with their product with 1.3 ppm BCDMH with 2.6 ppb silver ions. The lab results supported use of the Spa Frog with bromine in the 0.9 to 2.25 ppm range. The EPA approved their label which has 0.5% silver chloride as the active ingredient to claim disinfection and the use of chlorine or bromine at 50% of the levels they would be used at by themselves. So instead of 1 ppm FC or 2 ppm bromine, it's 0.5 ppm FC or 1 ppm bromine. Note, however, that their claim that it reduces chlorine or bromine "use" by 50% is only true to the extent that ALL chlorine or bromine loss is from sources proportional to their level such as loss from sunlight or oxidation of fixed amounts of chemicals or surfaces. So IF one maintained a lower chlorine or bromine level in an outdoor residential pool, then one would use less chlorine or bromine. HOWEVER, silver ions (unlike copper ions) do not prevent algae growth so in practice one still needs to maintain a chlorine or bromine level sufficient to prevent such growth. For chlorine in an outdoor pool, this means an FC sufficient for the CYA level and that level will not be lowered at all by the presence of silver ions. The loss of chlorine or bromine from killing bacteria is too small to be measurable in test kits.

In a spa used every day or two, it is the bather load that determines the bulk of the chlorine or bromine usage, not the minimum level of chlorine or bromine that is to be maintained. So there will be no savings when using silver ion in a frequently used spa. In a spa used infrequently, once a week or less, then one can maintain a lower chlorine or bromine level so could get a modest amount of savings in usage.

So for an outdoor residential pool, there is no savings from using the Frog. If one wants to spend more to have "savings", then one can use an algicide. Copper ions would work to prevent algae, but can stain pool surfaces and turn blond hair greenish, but Polyquat 60 weekly would also work and let one have a lower FC target level relative to CYA and therefore save on chlorine. However, the cost of the Polyquat exceeds the savings in chlorine so this is not normally done. It only makes sense for those who want a lower active chlorine level in their pools and are willing to pay for that possibility.

By the way, silver ions can most certainly stain pool surfaces (mostly plaster) and they are very nasty black stains. This is why the silver ion level is kept so low and why pH also needs to be controlled so that it doesn't get too high.

I'm missing the point of the Pool Frog discussion in this thread. It doesn't provide any practical value so why is it being discussed? The only benefit of having the silver ions in the water is some level of "insurance" if the chlorine level gets to zero since uncontrolled bacterial growth will be somewhat inhibited. However, since it won't prevent algae growth it's really not that great insurance.

[PoolDoc]

I'm missing the point of the Pool Frog discussion in this thread. It doesn't provide any practical value so why is it being discussed? The only benefit of having the silver ions in the water is some level of "insurance" if the chlorine level gets to zero since uncontrolled bacterial growth will be somewhat inhibited. However, since it won't prevent algae growth it's really not that great insurance.

I believe Moblaine (the OP) has a Frog system, and was questioning some of our suggesting that he simply abandon it. As I understand it, he's cutting open the trichlor refills, so he can refill them manually himself, but is still buying and replacing the mineral component. I think he was uncomfortable with the suggesting that Pool Frog (or at least, the mineral component) "doesn't provide any practical value", and questioned our claims, based on the report from King that no copper was present.

[moblaine]

I did feel a bit like I was being attacked for using the Frog even though I've never had any problems. My pool person (a friend who installs and has one himself) set me up with it and it's worked great for 7 years. This year, my only problem was initially not getting any FC reading and now that I have my Taylor test kit, I'm seeing that my CC is higher than my FC and I attempting to correct that. Various people on this forum started talking about copper in my water but I have verified my copper test is showing no copper and we've NEVER had green hair. So, I did ask King Technology about the copper and they told me there was no copper but by using the mineral pack (which includes silver and limestone) I am able to operate at chlorine levels of 0.5 to 1 ppm but that if I removed the mineral reservoir then I need to do at least 3 ppm. So, I'd like to just resolve my 1.0 ppm CC problem and then worry about algaecide and copper and all that other stuff later. I thank you for all your research into that issue. I saw bucket test directions on this forum somewhere but cannot locate them now. Is there a link?

[PoolDoc]

You can run without the Frog, while you are adding the bleach.

I don't think the Frog is the problem, and it sounds like it may be a better than average trichlor feeder. You pay a premium for it, but if it doesn't bother you, it doesn't bother me.

It's unlikely that the Frog is actually helping you run lower chlorine levels. But, I looked at the patent, and I think it's not impossible -- but the mode of action is probably not what they say. However, my guess is the DE filter helps more.

But, I'm going to make a suggestion: instead of worrying about CC levels, concentrate on whether chlorine levels hold from 8PM to 8AM. If you lose more than 1 ppm of FC overnight., you probably STILL need to shock. If you do NOT, you can probably move on to just enjoying your pool

[moblaine]

Thanks Ben. That seems like a bit of good news. It's a little after 8 pm so I am going out right not to add 4 gallons of 12.5% liquid chlorine. When I get up in the morning, I will test but how will I know how much FC it held overnight?

[BigDave]

Ah! so it's silver.