$17.98 for 2 pack of HDX chlorine from home depot.

2. Weekly maintenance cost (low) (1 gallon every week perhaps?)

I suspect for many this a very low estimate. With an daily average of 2-3ppm FC consumption, it’s more like about 4 gallons of 10% a week in a 20k gal pool. Around here, 10% currently runs about $5-$6 a gallon, if you can find it and if it’s fresh (can be a challenge around here). That’s far more expensive than our SWCG is costing.

YMMV of course.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mdragger88
Same here! We’ve been using a SWCG with our pool since day one (pool installed in early 2004) with no salt damage to the pool, equipment, or us (as a matter of fact, the added salt seems to make the water easier on our skin and eyes).

Even if using a SWCG turned out to be more expensive than manually chlorinating, I’d stick with the SWCG for the ease and convenience of water maintenance and better feel of water quality. Last I checked though, for us, using a SWCG has turned out cheaper than manually chlorinating.



Having to add MA with a SWCG is not a given. Many years ago I learned about better managing TA to reduce pH rise. Since lowering our TA target to about 60-70 years ago, pH stays about 7.5 all season. I haven’t had to add MA in many years.
Definitely agree with convenience and water feel.
For managing TA, it seems I have failed to keep my TA at 70, hence lots of acid required. My fill water has high 150-160(?) TA which doesnt help. I need to figure out how to lower and keep them low, been having to add a couple gallons MA per week to barely keep TA at 120 with the SWG on.
 
For managing TA, it seems I have failed to keep my TA at 70, hence lots of acid required. My fill water has high 150-160(?) TA which doesnt help. I need to figure out how to lower and keep them low, been having to add a couple gallons MA per week to barely keep TA at 120 with the SWG on.
For an outdoor pool (i.e., one with CYA), the pH isn't critical for sanitation but for saturation. Most scientific discussions on that topic take into account the saturation index is comprised of a half-dozen components, where TA is only one of them, albeit an important one (pH, Temperature, CH, TDS, CYA, etc. being some of the others offhand).

I bring that up because what you would decide to do with your TA isn't done in a vacuum, but in light of what those other half dozen levels are, where, for example, the CH matters almost as greatly as does the TA in terms of where the saturation is on the etching/balance/scale meter (which itself fluctuates greatly with temperature).

Assuming a lot that wasn't said about those other half dozen components of the saturation balance, I've seen recommendations to manage the TA and CH in tandem at something like a 3:1 and even 4:1 ratio (the ratio not being important but the saturation balance being what you're trying to maintain).

Example: If your TA is 150 and you want to drop it by 20, do so with acid and then soon thereafter raise the CH by three or four times the TA drop (that is, by 60ppm to 80ppm). Keep doing this until you have the TA where you want it (while maintaining the original TA/CH ratio).

The theory here is that process of lowering the TA (in order to better control the pH ceiling) along with the CH (mostly to offset saturation balance) maintains the etch/balance/scale saturation ratios as they were at the start.

Also notice that you want to always work in small increments, so using the same method, if your TA is 150 ppm and you want to drop it by 100 ppm, you STILL do it in increments of 20 ppm (raising the CH in increments of 3 or 4 times that) until you arrive at your goal of TA 50ppm (and concurrently your CH would have risen by 3 or 4 times what the TA fell by).

Of course, this assumed a lot of unstated levels, so treat it as a general process that you will need to customize per your own pool's saturation index (which is a function of more than just TA and CH of course).
it’s more like about 4 gallons of 10% a week in a 20k gal pool.
Thanks. I put in about a gallon of HASA (12.5%) a week but I was wondering what others use. If it's four times that for most outdoor pools, then that multiplies the forever cost by four times more.
 
Last edited:
My time not spent chasing down ever harder to find liquid chlorine, in the pandemic and supply chain chaos, has easily been worth the upfront cost of the swcg.

I can’t believe everyone doesn’t have one - it’s a magical device that makes the already easy TFP methods, that much easier.
 
You have to figure the cost of labor in using liquid chlorine because it takes time and effort to not only buy the chlorine, transport it, store it, pour it in the water etc.

Most people put a very low value on their time and vastly underestimate the amount of time spent on the process.

You also have to test more because the levels are more variable.
 
My time not spent chasing down ever harder to find liquid chlorine, in the pandemic and supply chain chaos, has easily been worth the upfront cost of the swcg.
Everyone is different. I'm retired. I have plenty of time. I enjoy zen moments taking care of the pool, lavishing my attention on managing (not controlling) the water chemistry.
I can’t believe everyone doesn’t have one - it’s a magical device that makes the already easy TFP methods, that much easier.
If the total forever costs of SWCG is many times greater than the total forever costs of pouring in liquid bleach, then it may be a wise decision on convenience but not so wise a decision on cost.

The average total lifetime cost is what matters - not the initial cost nor the weekly cost.

Likewise, if the inconvenience of testing, buying, storing, measuring & pouring bleach is onerous to any given person, then what needs to be weighed against that inconvenience is that of installing, maintaining, repairing, and periodically replacing the SWCG system components (if any).

I don't have a SWCG so I don't know if it's maintenance free over a typical lifetime (we can use either 25 years or more realistically 50 years as a basic lifetime for any one pool owner).

Do SWCG typically last 25 to 50 years without needing any repairs?
 
Last edited:
One other (albeit minor) oddity about SWCG pools is that the specification for TDS seems to go up for no reason.
Why is that?

Why would the TDS limits go up for SWCG pools?
As far as we are concerned, it makes no difference.

Where are you seeing these limits specified?

You will have to ask the people who say that it matters.
 
As far as we are concerned, it makes no difference.
I agree with your sentiment.
That's why I brought it up.

My point of view is... if suggested limits on TDS matter, then they should matter the same whether or not the pool is a SWCG or not.
Where are you seeing these limits specified?
I have seen it many times stated that the TDS range is higher (much higher in fact) for SWCG pools than for bleach pools, and yet we both already said we aren't convinced that the TDS limits matter (other than they play a role in the saturation index).
You will have to ask the people who say that it matters.
We both know there is a lot of disinformation/misinformation on the net, so the fact I can easily find DIFFERENT ranges for TDS for SWCG pools versus normal pools doesn't mean they're correct.

That's why I brought it up.

To answer your question though, I just googled for basic terms "TDS PPM SWCG LIMITS" and these popped up (and I'm NOT saying they're reputable - just that they exist).

Best Water Conditions for Pools with SWG

What Is The Correct TDS For Pools?

What is the right TDS level for pools

All of those recommend a TDS range for SWCG pools that is different (much higher) than for regular pools.

Unfortunately, I've never seen any believable EXPLANATION why the ranges would be DIFFERENT for TDS on a SWCG versus normal pool - which is why I brought up the question after all.

Richard Falk covered the topic but only a bit in this post of his.
 
Last edited:

Enjoying this content?

Support TFP with a donation.

Give Support
Cells typically last 5 to 7 years and power supplies should last about 15 to 20 years.
Thanks for that information as I don't know what a realistic "forever" period should be for comparison of the costs of SWCG versus normal pools.

Usually I use a depreciation model that is shorter for expendable items like computers (5 to 7 years) than for permanent repairs such as pools and windows and roofs, for example (which are often depreciated at upwards of 29 years).

Whatever a good "forever" period should be, it's likely in the 25 year range to the 50 year range for major pool equipment installations, is it not?

If we stick with the shorter period of 25 years for pool equipment, that information indicates the "forever cost" of the cell is about four or five times its initial cost (give or take) while the power supply is about one to one-and-a-half times its initial cost (give or take).

All I'm saying is those quoting only the initial costs aren't taking into account those "forever" costs, which are the real costs that matter (given depreciation is real).

What's nice though is that I assume the SWCG daily operation & maintenance costs are nearly zero (assuming that the salt and any additional electricity consumed is so cheap as to be negligible in these rough calculations).

Is that almost negligible monthly operating & maintenance cost of SWCG pools an assumption that can safely be made? If so, that simplifies the "forever" cost to just the expected depreciation schedules.
 
Last edited:
I don't have a SWCG so I don't know if it's maintenance free over a typical lifetime (we can use either 25 years or more realistically 50 years as a basic lifetime for any one pool owner).

Our Aqua Rite SWCG was installed with the pool in early 2004. The main board has been replaced once and cells have lasted about 7 years. With proper water management, I never have to clean the cell.

With the current price of chlorine here, I can buy a complete new Aquarite SWCG system with a 40k gal rated cell every four years for a bit less than the cost of chlorine.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Mdragger88
We don't even track or test for TDS.. Not sure where you saw that we did...
The question was only in terms of why TDS would have any different range for SWCG pools, where the cites I provided (showing DIFFERENT limits for SWCG pools) were easily found - but none were from the TFP site.

To be clear, my point in asking was because I couldn't find any scientific evidence that the much higher TDS levels would matter other than a SWCG pool, by its very nature, will likely have much higher TDS than the same incoming pool water would without the SWCG system.

The only place I can see that much higher SWCG TDS level playing any effective role is in the etch/balance/scale saturation index, and even then, not so much. Do you concur?
 
Last edited:
All I'm saying is those quoting only the initial costs aren't taking into account those "forever" costs, which are the real costs that matter (given depreciation is real).
You're really agonizing way too much over the decision.

Most people decide to get it or not and move on.

You're not going to be able to find some decisive formula that can tell you one way or the other that it is a better choice to get one or not get one.

You have enough information to make an informed decision.

If you really need to know for sure, here is the full equation that you can use to figure out if you should get a SWG or not.

1667183704605.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: Newdude and CVAL44
You're really agonizing way too much over the decision.
Well, the decision to go with SWCG or not is really based on cost & convenience factors.
I wonder what percentage of typical outdoor residential pool owners have each?

Anyone have an idea of what the ratio is?
Most people decide to get it or not and move on.
IMHO, we shouldn't be trying to be "most people" mainly because if we were like "most people", we'd be believing whatever the pool store personnel tell us.
And that's not us.

As for the total dissolved solids, it's interesting that there is a range given the only place the TDS matters is in the saturation calculation, and then, it's interesting that the saturation calculation is the same for SWCG pools and yet the range in some charts (see aforementioned cites) is greatly different for SWCG versus normal pools.
 
Well, the decision to go with SWCG or not is really based on cost & convenience factors.
I wonder what percentage of typical outdoor residential pool owners have each?
Everybody has the convenience factor using a SWG. It simply cannot be overstated how amazing it is. I checked my pool every week for fun, but my unit made it 10 weeks with no adjustments, then 2 weeks, then 2 weeks and it's been about 4 weeks since. I adjusted it twice from June to November. To be fair, this year was abnormally hot. I would normally have to adjust my pool *5* times the entire season. :ROFLMAO:


I already did the maths on a 20k pool for you back in September. Yours will be close enough to it for the sake of this discussion. An IC40 system would cost $0.42 per FC on a 20k pool.

**If you can find** any $4 gallons of 10% they would cost you $0.66 per FC. $6 gallons are $1.16 per FC and it only goes up from there.

Most people would be thrilled to find $6 gallons these days, which would still cost them close to 3X the cost of the SWG long term, while also being a PITA locating and hauling fresh jugs that weren't $9 each.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mdragger88
Well, the decision to go with SWCG or not is really based on cost & convenience factors.
I wonder what percentage of typical outdoor residential pool owners have each?

Anyone have an idea of what the ratio is?

IMHO, we shouldn't be trying to be "most people" mainly because if we were like "most people", we'd be believing whatever the pool store personnel tell us.
And that's not us.

As for the total dissolved solids, it's interesting that there is a range given the only place the TDS matters is in the saturation calculation, and then, it's interesting that the saturation calculation is the same for SWCG pools and yet the range in some charts (see aforementioned cites) is greatly different for SWCG versus normal pools.
TDS range for SWG pools is higher because salt is a dissolved solid, you add salt and TDS increases so the range has to reflect that.
 
**If you can find** any $4 gallons of 10% they would cost you $0.66 per FC. $6 gallons are $1.16 per FC and it only goes up from there.

Most people would be thrilled to find $6 gallons these days, which would still cost them close to 3X the cost of the SWG long term, while also being a PITA locating and hauling fresh jugs that weren't $9 each.
I've been really lucky this year - Menards had 12% at $3.99/gal, $3.56 if you did the rebate. Even with tax, thats $3.77/gal, and I was using maybe 4 gals a week at peak time. With our May - October season, we get maybe 20-25 weeks, so call it 100gal all in - thats basically $400. (remember, failed math, no Holiday Inn for me to stay in etc etc).

Even at that price, a replacement cell (IC40) is more, maybe even double that. The only thing stopping me jumping on the SWCG bandwagon at this point is the upfront cost of the generator, plus the fact I have an old, single-speed Hayward pump that probably would need updating too. With that said, I'd be looking at a 'payback' period of around 7 years...and never have to lug another jug from the truck to the basement again.

If my Chlorine was $9/gal, I'd already have an SWG installed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Newdude
Even with tax, thats $3.77/gal, and I was using maybe 4 gals a week at peak time. With our May - October season, we get maybe 20-25 weeks, so call it 100gal all in - thats basically $400
Guesstimates make things screwy.

$3.77 (steal of a deal price) per gallon of 12% equals $0.78 per FC for your 25k gallons.

That is both stronger and cheaper than most will find, and it's still 50% more than an IC40 over its lifespan.

I went IC40 for you with a short and easy UV season up north. $1500 for the complete system will get 2791 FCs lifetime in 25k gallons. $0.53 each.

If you pay someone $500 to install it, it's $0.71 per FC for the first unit, which is still cheaper than your steal of a deal liquid shock. Future cells would be minus the install fee, and controller fee, and very much in your favor.

Put another way, each gallon of 12% gets you 4.8 ppms. And IC40 is equivalent to 581 gallons, which would cost you $2192 at the steal price.

*not lugging 581 jugs...... 🤬PRICELESS
 
  • Like
Reactions: Saturn94

Enjoying this content?

Support TFP with a donation.

Give Support
Thread Status
Hello , This thread has been inactive for over 60 days. New postings here are unlikely to be seen or responded to by other members. For better visibility, consider Starting A New Thread.