they said I can't take it out
They lied. Or perhaps, if it's a pool builder, they simply don't know how.
I'm not interested in low to virtually no FC levels with this thing. I like clean n sanitized water.
You say that as though the two are mutually exclusive. You can have clean and sanitary water without having a constant chemical residual. With ozone, you still use chlorine, you just don't have to shock as the ozone does it for you. Since burning off high cc requires a high fc, maybe too high to use it until fc drops, and mps has it's own list of problems, ozone is the best way to do this in a private spa. In a public spa, regulations require constant chemical residual, so ozone can be more of a problem than a help.
Will I run into any issues just using chlorine while it runs too?
Ozone will burn off fc as well as cc. This allows you to overdo your chlorine after use and still be able to use the spa the next day, as the ozone will burn off the excess. Once fc is low, contaminants entering the water will not be destroyed as quickly. Sanitation is the result of residual and time, and low fc can still destroy pathogens in the water, it just takes longer than the regulations say it can. With the cover in good condition and closed, no new contaminants are entering the water so no residual is needed to destroy them in a private covered spa, and no regulation exists saying that you have to have one. You are the greatest source of contaminants in your spa. If you want a residual during use, add a little chlorine before you get in.
The biggest minus with an ozonator is that it mostly injects air into the water and that aerates the water. If the ozonator is always on (and many are), this leads to a rise in pH if you use a hypochlorite source of chlorine.
Yes, it injects a steady stream of tiny bubbles into the water, which will raise ph. The amount of air injected on a 24/7 injection system is still significantly less than the air injected from running the jets for 30 minutes. This statement above is pure conjecture, in my opinion. If someone actually tested it, I would love to read the post.
As for 24/7 systems, they are the only ones I recommend for ozone. When used on a timed system it is usually not enough ozone to make a noticeable difference, and is there as a selling point. The original ozone systems were a 24/7 injection, and a huge selling point for them. Others started slapping in ozone generators without the necessary equipment and plumbing to use it effectively, just so they could say they had ozone. These were often damaging to covers and equipment.
Though spas circulate water faster than pools, it still takes 4.6 turnovers of the water to get 99% of the water through the ozonator
A 24/7 system will turn over the entire volume of the average spa in under 45 minutes. 4.6 turnovers for 99% ozone exposure will happen around 6 times a day on the average spa. It is not 100% guaranteed, and you do still need chlorine, but very little is going to be able to grow under those conditions in a covered and pre-sanitized (chlorine after use) spa.
An ozonator probably makes more sense in a bromine spa than a chlorine spa
I don't personally use or normally recommend bromine in a spa, or anywhere else for that matter. In my experience, ozone, even on a 24/7 system, has little noticeable affect on bromine generation. I assume that, while it does oxidize bromide into bromine, it also oxidizes bromine, just as it does chlorine. Otherwise, you would see ever increasing bromine levels until you ran out of bromide to convert. I looked, but could find no studies on bromine/ozone outside of manufacturer claims.
bromine systems are net acidic
Only if you use tablets, which contain trichlor. No different than using chlorine tablets. If you oxidize your bromide with liquid chlorine it is not nearly so hard on the ph.
it is technically unnecessary if one maintains a residual sanitizer
True. But unnecessary does not mean useless.
the sanitizer usage in a spa is MUCH higher than in a pool due to the lower water volume (higher bather load)
Which results in high cc, which is where that ozone earns it's keep.
If you use your hot tub a lot and keep it covered when not in use then an Ozonator can help, however if you only soak in it on the weekends, etc. then an Ozonator will actually consume more chlorine than the tub would use to oxidize bather waste if you did not have one.
If you only soak on weekends, you only chlorinate on weekends. You will use less chlorine under those circumstances. Not enough to pay for the ozone replacement, or likely even the electricity it uses, but if you're counting pennies, it will use less. It's advantage is not in using less chlorine, it's in being able to use more and still use it the next day. It's about eliminating disadvantages of straight chlorine use in spas, not saving you $5 a month in chlorine.
If you still want to get rid of the ozone, post some pics of the equipment area, circuit board, and wiring diagram and I'll tell you how to do it.
For that matter, post them anyway and I'll tell you if it's worth having ozone in the first place.
