Our pool build is at the equipment installation phase and the PB put in a Jandy Aqua Pure SWG in addition to the standard Nature2 water sanitizer. I am wondering if this was a mistake or intentional. We upgraded to the Jandy and I thought that meant eliminating the Nature2. We got a credit for it so I assumed that meant we weren't getting it. Anyone have any thoughts on this? Thanks.
SWG vs. Nature2 question
- Thread starter sheronc
- Start date
The Nature2 people make their money selling replacement cartridges, so they strongly encourage pool builders to install the Nature2 units. Of course, it might just have been a mistake.
I have just found this forum and keep seeing all this anti Nature2 bias.
What's up with that?
I have used Nature2 in my spa for over 5 years without issue and have excellent water clarity.
What's up with that?
I have used Nature2 in my spa for over 5 years without issue and have excellent water clarity.
I have read that Chem Geek (Richard) feels that using a Nature 2 or similar ionizer in a spa is probably ok, but that ionizer use in pools just isn't practical.
Here's an article about the ionizers....and another.
I had a bad experience with the Pool Frog and I wouldn't recommend an ionizer to anyone, for any purpose. Just a hyped up waste of money, IMHO.
Here's an article about the ionizers....and another.
I had a bad experience with the Pool Frog and I wouldn't recommend an ionizer to anyone, for any purpose. Just a hyped up waste of money, IMHO.
mtbarr64 said:
Clear water is not necessarily safe water. N2 does a good job controlling algae, but its ability to control pathogens is much poorer and you can't see if they are there or not.
JohnT said:
I stated 5 years without issues, guess I needed to be more precise. I was not just talking about clarity. Our family is suspectible to NGU's (bacteria based urinary tract issues). The second the water is out of PH balance or lacks proper sanitization, time to see the doctor. In five years with Ozone and Nature2 using MPS, none of us have had any problem. If I use the pool at the gym with its excessive chlorination (they think cranking up the chlorine dispenser setting is the solution to all issues) and cloudiness due to lack of proper shocking, I am at the doctors office.
I believe a balance of the right products for the conditions and loads is the answer and for me Ozone and Nature2 in a SPA (I understand different than a pool) works wonderfully. That is why I was surprised by these comments.
mtbarr64,
Free Chlorine (FC) at the proper levels relative to Cyanuric Acid (CYA) will kill bacteria and inactivate viruses much faster than either silver or copper metal ions. It also inhibits algae growth though copper does a good job with that as well. The problem in a spa is that many people use Dichlor only and the CYA level builds up to high levels making the chlorine much less effective. This can allow for more resistant bacteria such as the one that causes hot tub itch to grow. Also, one must be more diligent in a spa since the chlorine gets used up more quickly due to the higher bather load, higher temperatures, and greater aeration. Also, most people don't use enough chlorine in their spas so it gets to zero before the next soak.
So basically, Nature2 can be seen as insurance against letting the chlorine level get too low. It is analogous to someone using PolyQuat 60 in their pool to prevent algae in case they let the chlorine get too low. Nature2 is not necessary, but it isn't ineffective -- it's just not as effective as chlorine alone. Nature2 with MPS is better than Nature2 alone, but only in the higher temperature of a spa, though it's still not as fast a killer of pathogens as chlorine alone. The metal ions, especially with MPS, kill fast enough to prevent uncontrolled bacteria growth, but not fast enough to prevent person-to-person transmission which is why you won't see it used without a fast acting sanitizer (e.g. chlorine, bromine, biguanide) in a commercial/public spa (or pool).
Richard
Free Chlorine (FC) at the proper levels relative to Cyanuric Acid (CYA) will kill bacteria and inactivate viruses much faster than either silver or copper metal ions. It also inhibits algae growth though copper does a good job with that as well. The problem in a spa is that many people use Dichlor only and the CYA level builds up to high levels making the chlorine much less effective. This can allow for more resistant bacteria such as the one that causes hot tub itch to grow. Also, one must be more diligent in a spa since the chlorine gets used up more quickly due to the higher bather load, higher temperatures, and greater aeration. Also, most people don't use enough chlorine in their spas so it gets to zero before the next soak.
So basically, Nature2 can be seen as insurance against letting the chlorine level get too low. It is analogous to someone using PolyQuat 60 in their pool to prevent algae in case they let the chlorine get too low. Nature2 is not necessary, but it isn't ineffective -- it's just not as effective as chlorine alone. Nature2 with MPS is better than Nature2 alone, but only in the higher temperature of a spa, though it's still not as fast a killer of pathogens as chlorine alone. The metal ions, especially with MPS, kill fast enough to prevent uncontrolled bacteria growth, but not fast enough to prevent person-to-person transmission which is why you won't see it used without a fast acting sanitizer (e.g. chlorine, bromine, biguanide) in a commercial/public spa (or pool).
Richard
pikeman
Well-known member
I was a N2 customer for three seasons. During that time I followed the directions about FC level and had nonstop algae problems. Once I elevated the FC levels, the problem went away. At that point I neglected to replace the $80 N2 cartidge and was unable to tell any difference in water quality.
In the meantime I read many posting at Pool forum (Ben's site) and came to agree that it was a waste of money.
Pool owners are subject to lot of "snake oil" salesmen and this just seems to be another one of those gizmos that best-case, does no harm except lighten your wallet.
In the meantime I read many posting at Pool forum (Ben's site) and came to agree that it was a waste of money.
Pool owners are subject to lot of "snake oil" salesmen and this just seems to be another one of those gizmos that best-case, does no harm except lighten your wallet.
I'm in Northern California and we just had a new pool installed. (First post here)
See this for the full pool story... http://web.me.com/bilbrey/Pool_Renovation/Photos.html.
The builders installed a Nature 2 system, with a Pentair Model 300 Chlorinator.
It worked fine when the weather was cool, but we have noticed Algae blooms now that the weather has gotten warmer.
To compensate, the pool company is trying to increase the flow of the Chlorinator.
We shall see how things work out...
See this for the full pool story... http://web.me.com/bilbrey/Pool_Renovation/Photos.html.
The builders installed a Nature 2 system, with a Pentair Model 300 Chlorinator.
It worked fine when the weather was cool, but we have noticed Algae blooms now that the weather has gotten warmer.
To compensate, the pool company is trying to increase the flow of the Chlorinator.
We shall see how things work out...
Note that the last two posters are talking about N2 in pools while my response to mtbarr64 was in regard to N2 use in spas. There is very little value to using N2 in a pool (having enough copper to prevent algae also risks staining the pool if the levels get too high or the pH rises), while using N2 in a spa is not necessary but does allow one to use a nearly non-chlorine approach of N2+MPS for those who for whatever reason do not want to use chlorine regularly in their spa.
- Oct 6, 2009
- 175
- Pool Size
- 22500
- Surface
- Plaster
- Chlorine
- Salt Water Generator
- SWG Type
- CircuPool Core-55
Ahhh thanks chem geek for your last post on this issue. I was starting to feel like I was getting contradictory information about the use of N2 in my pool (previous posts advised against the use of N2 in my new plaster pool). But now I see the difference between pool vs. spa usage of N2. Makes sense. I'm still leaving my N2 cartridge out for my pool and can't wait to see what the pool service company says about it when they come to close my pool for me this Fall. :blah: :blah: :blah:
Sorry for adding confusion with pool vs. spa.
But after reading posts here, I checked with my pool company and found that they had installed the chlorinator wrong.
It seems you need a filter or heater in between where you tap off and where you return water to the chlorinator. This is to create enough back pressure to have water flow through the chlorinator.
My pool company simply tapped off one pipe and returned back a foot later and there is no pressure to divert the water to the chlorinator.
In short, my pool is getting VERY little Chlorine.
Sorry for the distraction, but I wanted to explain what we found with my setup.
But after reading posts here, I checked with my pool company and found that they had installed the chlorinator wrong.
It seems you need a filter or heater in between where you tap off and where you return water to the chlorinator. This is to create enough back pressure to have water flow through the chlorinator.
My pool company simply tapped off one pipe and returned back a foot later and there is no pressure to divert the water to the chlorinator.
In short, my pool is getting VERY little Chlorine.
Sorry for the distraction, but I wanted to explain what we found with my setup.
I was a Nature 2 user for my plaster pool from the very beginning when they came on the market. All that time I did not know about proper balance and sequestrant. I have extensive copper staining on my pool. This plaster has been acid washed three times so no more acid washes are in it's future. The last acid wash did not remove all of the deep staining. And one more year of Ionizer use, Floatron, and still ignorant about balances, led to additional staining on top of the old staining. I found TFP in summer of 2009 and immediately yanked the wicked thing out of the pool and keeping as close to perfect balance as possible at all times.
When I had the ionizers (the Nature 2 was a very large one) I shocked the pool once or twice a week and I never had any algae as long as the water pump was running many hours a day which for me was virtually 24/7. I replaced the cartridges at least three times a year, pool open year round and so much water going through cartridge. That was expensive.
I have recently seen where it is advised to keep sequestrants in pools using Ionization. That can get expensive.
And if one does let things get a little out of balance copper staining will most likely occur. Treating for copper stains is expensive. Acid washings can only be done so many times without destroying the plaster finish and they don't always get rid of all of the stain. Using a product like Jacks #2 can be expensive and can take even weeks, and you can't use the pool during the treatment, and it may not get all the stain. Using special sequestrants to slowly fade the copper staining is extremely expensive, and it may take a very, very, long time to see any results at all. And it may not totally get rid of them. That's what I've been doing for almost a year now. Although my choice of sequestrant is keeping the iron dust from staining and slowly releasing the calcium scale, it is now apparent that it is doing nothing for the deep set, old copper staining. So I'm starting tonight, Jacks Magenta. This is going to be very expensive.
Bottom line Ionizers in a pool are an unneeded expense; cartridges replacement and continuous levels of sequestrants. And, if one has problems with staining, it can be very expensive to fix.
gg=alice
When I had the ionizers (the Nature 2 was a very large one) I shocked the pool once or twice a week and I never had any algae as long as the water pump was running many hours a day which for me was virtually 24/7. I replaced the cartridges at least three times a year, pool open year round and so much water going through cartridge. That was expensive.
I have recently seen where it is advised to keep sequestrants in pools using Ionization. That can get expensive.
And if one does let things get a little out of balance copper staining will most likely occur. Treating for copper stains is expensive. Acid washings can only be done so many times without destroying the plaster finish and they don't always get rid of all of the stain. Using a product like Jacks #2 can be expensive and can take even weeks, and you can't use the pool during the treatment, and it may not get all the stain. Using special sequestrants to slowly fade the copper staining is extremely expensive, and it may take a very, very, long time to see any results at all. And it may not totally get rid of them. That's what I've been doing for almost a year now. Although my choice of sequestrant is keeping the iron dust from staining and slowly releasing the calcium scale, it is now apparent that it is doing nothing for the deep set, old copper staining. So I'm starting tonight, Jacks Magenta. This is going to be very expensive.
Bottom line Ionizers in a pool are an unneeded expense; cartridges replacement and continuous levels of sequestrants. And, if one has problems with staining, it can be very expensive to fix.
gg=alice
svenpup
LifeTime Supporter
Bilbrey - If you browse the forum, or even this thread, you will find that mineral based systems are not recommended for pools.
The reasons are insufficient sanitizer, copper staining, and expense.
The TFP recommended chlorination methods are liquid chlorine (aka bleach) and SWCG.
The reasons are insufficient sanitizer, copper staining, and expense.
The TFP recommended chlorination methods are liquid chlorine (aka bleach) and SWCG.
Thanks...svenpup said:
I don't have time to read all the posts (I tried to read a lot), but I did not want to walk away with the wrong impression given the posts I have read. It is good to get conformation. Thanks.
I hate Spa Frog with a passion. It's a rip off. So far, I'm happy with Nature2 SPA. Wouldn't touch it for pools due to the copper often cited.frustratedpoolmom said: