Hemess
0
Even with the scaling I have had by not effectively controlling my ph, I would always choose SWG. Period. Love it.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Salt water/chlorine vs just chlorine
- Thread starter MGood
- Start date
I want to comment on the stated fact that SWG's need MA weekly. I rarely need to bring PH down. When I was much newer here I even asked that question as I was reading and taking everything in. My pool has that sweet spot keeping TA at about 60-70 my PH is almost always 7.5 when I check it. It's actually so consistant that I don't check it as often as chlorine and CYA.
I wish I could get my pH to stabilize like that ... although given the fact that I KNOW my CYA is too low and therefore KNOW my SWG is having to work harder and thus driving the pH up and I KNOW I have not lowered the TA enough ... it is pretty much my fault 
It's kind of funny Jason......my PH dropped significantly not long after the build in 7/2011. We new our eyes were burning and even the kids skin a bit. I only had test strips as my builder did initial water treatment upon opening. I was clueless. That's when I found this site. Ran to the store and pretty much blindly poured borax in the pool after a tiny bit of reading here. Closed the pool shortly after and read a lot over the winter. Opened in April of 2012 with my TF-100. So I never got pool stored. Not at all.
I'm still learning everyday. That's why I'm a supporter.
Hope that's not too off track for this thread.
I'm still learning everyday. That's why I'm a supporter.
Hope that's not too off track for this thread.
Well, it's pretty much a given that everyone has likes and dislikes about SWG. The order came from the boss when the new liner went in last summer that we would switch to salt. I tried to do my homework and get a decent one AND oversize a bit. Everyone loves it and says they see and feel a difference. I personally don't see a huge change, but I defer to the group (they have me outnumbered) That being said I really like having it. Of course my only comparision was the lousy puck feeder that always gummed up and was hard( for me at least) to adjust. Having found this place and the tf100 I probably had my family drowning in CYA all these years ! I'm really looking forward to tinkering with the settings this year. Plus I will probably give the borates a shot. From what I've read, I might really surprise them with even better water. And I'll take ALL the credit for it. That's a long winded way of saying I vote yes on SWG :blah:
Saturn94
Bronze Supporter
- Mar 11, 2015
- 1,746
- Pool Size
- 20000
- Surface
- Vinyl
- Chlorine
- Salt Water Generator
- SWG Type
- Hayward Aqua Rite (T-15)
Since finding my pool's sweet spot with TA and borates, pH settles at 7.5-7.6; I haven't had to add a single drop of MA in over 2 years.
To the OP:
I've had a salt pool for 11 years now and would go with salt again in a heartbeat. A couple seasons ago my main pump was out for about 2 weeks, so I had to manually chlorinate (bleach). I guess I'm lazy/spoiled.....manually chlorinating was a pain....I was so happy when the pump was up and running and I had my SWCG running again!
The decision whether or not to go with a SWCG should be based on facts, not marketing BS/misinformation from manufacturers (SWCG manufacturers are guilty of this as well).
This is absolutely true ... I am sure we could go find some of the SWG makers with some junk marketing too. Like calling them no-chlorine pools.
- Jul 3, 2013
- 9,028
- Pool Size
- 15000
- Surface
- Vinyl
- Chlorine
- Salt Water Generator
- SWG Type
- CircuPool SJ-40
well this has turned into an interesting thread, so I will say why I have a SWG:
I went with the SWG because I sometimes leave for 2 weeks at a time out of country, I know my wife will not add and test daily while I am gone but i can get here out there once or twice a week to check things... I know that as long as she see's bubbles coming from the cell it is good
I went with the SWG because I sometimes leave for 2 weeks at a time out of country, I know my wife will not add and test daily while I am gone but i can get here out there once or twice a week to check things... I know that as long as she see's bubbles coming from the cell it is good
Jason (jblizzle) really covered this well, so I'll just add some links to some other posts and scientific papers, though it's pretty ridiculous for anyone to actually believe what any manufacturer's website says without double checking against real science. There are older threads such as this one and this one that have talked about the pros and cons of SWCG pools.
It is incorrect to claim that higher sodium chloride salt levels attack the plaster. It's high sulfate levels that are detrimental to plaster but that has nothing to do with an SWCG. The higher salt level is only an issue for soft stone (i.e. coping) from splash-out and evaporation cycles as described in this paper and is why the issue is primarily seen in drier climates since in areas with summer rains such salt is diluted by the rain. Also note that non-SWCG pools also have salt so the issue is only a matter of degree. All pools will degrade soft stone and all can be mitigated by use of stone sealant or use of harder (less porous) stone or concrete. I do not have an SWCG but I seal my concrete, not so much for salt splash-out but to limit weathering in general.
As for metal corrosion, the higher salt level does corrode metal faster and in particular higher chloride levels are more detrimental to stainless steel since they interfere with restoration of the passivity layer that prevents corrosion. However, in practice, if higher quality stainless steel is used then this is not an issue. It's usually aluminum or lower quality stainless steel that show problems, but even here one can use a zinc sacrificial anode buried in moist soil and connected to the bonding wire to protect all metal in contact with the water. Here again, such corrosion is always occurring in all pools so is only a matter of degree.
I believe you've seen enough posts for stable pH to know that the strong rise in pH from SWCG systems is not an absolute. If one follows the recommendations for pH, TA, and CYA levels on this forum then one can minimize this effect that is due primarily to the increased aeration causing greater carbon dioxide outgassing. For SWCGs with very short runs, there can also be undissolved chlorine gas outgassing.
Obviously, no additional products (algaecide, clarifier, shock, etc.) are needed and you've been on this forum long enough to know that we do not change our recommendations for extra products for SWCG pools. It is true that borates can be helpful, but that's true for all pools and is still optional.
As for cell replacement, they used to not last as long, but improvements now even have the manufacturers giving a 3-year warranty and in practice the cells last around 10,000 hours. See the thread Economics of Saltwater Chlorine Generators where one can see significant savings if one buys a larger unit. Doing so will have the cell last for many years -- not just 5, but 7 or more years.
Chlorine does NOT become significantly less effective at higher pH when CYA is present. While the active chlorine level drops by 50% when the pH goes from 7.5 to 8.0 when there is no CYA in the water, the drop is only 15% when CYA is present. See this post for technical details. It is true that chlorinating with an SWCG is similar to chlorinating with "liquid chlorine" as they put it, but they are wrong to quote the high pH because they completely ignore the fact that chlorine usage/consumption is acidic so there is effectively no net change in pH. This is described technically in this post.
Regarding sodium, they go completely over the deep end and not in a good way! Do they even realize that the level of sodium chloride salt in blood plasma and tears is around 8000 ppm (see this link where for sodium 136–145 mmol/L is 7948-8474 ppm sodium chloride) which is far higher than the 3000 ppm of the pool? Do they realize that sodium skin absorption is minimal? 90% of the sodium we get is from our diet. It's one thing to worry about it in drinking water, but not from absorbing it through the skin.
Dioxin, really? Dioxin is only formed at the high temperatures in incineration stacks and with very high chlorine and organic levels such as found in wood pulp bleaching. Seriously?
Saltwater pools have NOT been banned in Los Angeles County but rather in ONE community named Santa Clarita (see this link). Also, existing pools ARE grandfathered in. The ban is on new installations or conversions and even then only if discharge of water is into the sewer because they want to limit the amount of chloride going into the Santa Clarita river.
Saltwater chlorine generators do NOT use high voltage. They vary, but are typically in the 18-24 volt range going to the plate stack. The current is somewhat high, but so what?
They are right about oversizing the unit for the best economics, but they are completely wrong with the wattage which is in the 150-220 Watt range, NOT 500-1000. See my linked thread on the economics (again).
They are right about cleaning the cell when needed, but maintaining proper water balance and the use of borates can significantly reduce scale and the required frequency of cleaning thereby further extending cell life.
It is incorrect to claim that higher sodium chloride salt levels attack the plaster. It's high sulfate levels that are detrimental to plaster but that has nothing to do with an SWCG. The higher salt level is only an issue for soft stone (i.e. coping) from splash-out and evaporation cycles as described in this paper and is why the issue is primarily seen in drier climates since in areas with summer rains such salt is diluted by the rain. Also note that non-SWCG pools also have salt so the issue is only a matter of degree. All pools will degrade soft stone and all can be mitigated by use of stone sealant or use of harder (less porous) stone or concrete. I do not have an SWCG but I seal my concrete, not so much for salt splash-out but to limit weathering in general.
As for metal corrosion, the higher salt level does corrode metal faster and in particular higher chloride levels are more detrimental to stainless steel since they interfere with restoration of the passivity layer that prevents corrosion. However, in practice, if higher quality stainless steel is used then this is not an issue. It's usually aluminum or lower quality stainless steel that show problems, but even here one can use a zinc sacrificial anode buried in moist soil and connected to the bonding wire to protect all metal in contact with the water. Here again, such corrosion is always occurring in all pools so is only a matter of degree.
I believe you've seen enough posts for stable pH to know that the strong rise in pH from SWCG systems is not an absolute. If one follows the recommendations for pH, TA, and CYA levels on this forum then one can minimize this effect that is due primarily to the increased aeration causing greater carbon dioxide outgassing. For SWCGs with very short runs, there can also be undissolved chlorine gas outgassing.
Obviously, no additional products (algaecide, clarifier, shock, etc.) are needed and you've been on this forum long enough to know that we do not change our recommendations for extra products for SWCG pools. It is true that borates can be helpful, but that's true for all pools and is still optional.
As for cell replacement, they used to not last as long, but improvements now even have the manufacturers giving a 3-year warranty and in practice the cells last around 10,000 hours. See the thread Economics of Saltwater Chlorine Generators where one can see significant savings if one buys a larger unit. Doing so will have the cell last for many years -- not just 5, but 7 or more years.
Chlorine does NOT become significantly less effective at higher pH when CYA is present. While the active chlorine level drops by 50% when the pH goes from 7.5 to 8.0 when there is no CYA in the water, the drop is only 15% when CYA is present. See this post for technical details. It is true that chlorinating with an SWCG is similar to chlorinating with "liquid chlorine" as they put it, but they are wrong to quote the high pH because they completely ignore the fact that chlorine usage/consumption is acidic so there is effectively no net change in pH. This is described technically in this post.
Regarding sodium, they go completely over the deep end and not in a good way! Do they even realize that the level of sodium chloride salt in blood plasma and tears is around 8000 ppm (see this link where for sodium 136–145 mmol/L is 7948-8474 ppm sodium chloride) which is far higher than the 3000 ppm of the pool? Do they realize that sodium skin absorption is minimal? 90% of the sodium we get is from our diet. It's one thing to worry about it in drinking water, but not from absorbing it through the skin.
Dioxin, really? Dioxin is only formed at the high temperatures in incineration stacks and with very high chlorine and organic levels such as found in wood pulp bleaching. Seriously?
Saltwater pools have NOT been banned in Los Angeles County but rather in ONE community named Santa Clarita (see this link). Also, existing pools ARE grandfathered in. The ban is on new installations or conversions and even then only if discharge of water is into the sewer because they want to limit the amount of chloride going into the Santa Clarita river.
Saltwater chlorine generators do NOT use high voltage. They vary, but are typically in the 18-24 volt range going to the plate stack. The current is somewhat high, but so what?
They are right about oversizing the unit for the best economics, but they are completely wrong with the wattage which is in the 150-220 Watt range, NOT 500-1000. See my linked thread on the economics (again).
They are right about cleaning the cell when needed, but maintaining proper water balance and the use of borates can significantly reduce scale and the required frequency of cleaning thereby further extending cell life.
n240sxguy
Well-known member
It's my experience that any time you see the seven secrets of anything, you should immediately turn and run. It's always some kind of Ponzi scheme, scam, over priced worthless product, etc. This one doesn't seem to break away from that experience. I'll keep my SWG. TFP works whether you want to use a swg or not. Toward the end of last year and the first of this year I used bleach because my old swg died. The pool was exactly the same. I was just adding the chlorine myself instead of the swg adding it. It's all personal preference.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
- May 23, 2015
- 24,409
- Pool Size
- 16000
- Surface
- Plaster
- Chlorine
- Salt Water Generator
- SWG Type
- Pentair Intellichlor IC-60
I am an SWCG user, always have been. For me it was all about convenience but, because of where I live and the fact that my pool is always open (no one swims in January but the attached spa steaming at 95F when the air outside is 45F is a pretty cool effect!) just means an SWCG works best for me. As well, the monetary cost of the SWCG works out for me (it would cost the same to dump bleach or use an SWCG). In other climates where a pool season might be very short or if it's a simple setup, then bleach dumping might be a better choice.
Given the maturity of the SWCG market and the constant downward price pressures, the choice really comes down to subjective matters of equipment pad complexity, automation, ease of use, etc. So whenever I see sales documents that try to prove "once and for all" that one method of chlorination is superior to all else, I just laugh and move on.
To the OP - whatever chlorination method you choose to implement, the smart people here on TFP will encourage you and help you out with any problems should they arise.
Given the maturity of the SWCG market and the constant downward price pressures, the choice really comes down to subjective matters of equipment pad complexity, automation, ease of use, etc. So whenever I see sales documents that try to prove "once and for all" that one method of chlorination is superior to all else, I just laugh and move on.
To the OP - whatever chlorination method you choose to implement, the smart people here on TFP will encourage you and help you out with any problems should they arise.
I have a faulty flow switch (new one arrives Friday!!!) and am having to add bleach every day. It's not a big deal, but considering for a couple of years, I got my pool so balanced (I don't have to winterize mine) that I only check chemicals once a week. It saves on reagents and on my piece of mind. I've never had an algae outbreak with my SWG. I cannot weigh in on coping etc. as I have a fiberglass pool with tabby decking.
I ran across the "seven lies" stuff early on in my pool research. Some of the claims seemed a little over the top to me, so I dug deeper. You could say that I choose SWCG as a direct result of exploring their claims.
I plan on using natural shell stone or travertine. I will have it sealed. Hopefully this should mitigate any negative impacts to the coping from salt water system. I keep on hearing the negative impacts to soft coping. Can someone please post pics of their coping or deck evidencing how salt water damaged it?
These photos are mostly of concrete. This link shows photos of travertine. This link gives some additional information on sealing and avoiding the problems.
Thanks for this. Very helpful. I think you have just convinced me to not use a salt water system. I get the benefits if you are sensitive to chlorine and the lower maintenance of a salt water system. However, for me and my family who are all ok with regular chlorine pools and will have a pool service company maintain my pool on a weekly basis...I think forgoing the salt water system is the way to go as I would rather have limestone/travertine coping and decking.
Wow, there is a lot to disagree with in that last post. The chemistry is the same between a SWG and "regular" chlorine pool. And I certainly hope you do not expect a pool service to maintain the quality water that would be acceptable to TFPers ... They just do not as many of us experienced prior to coming to the forum.
There are many people with stone surfaces who seal them with SWCG pools, but in your case there is another factor and that is that you are in Florida where you get frequent summer rain. Such rain will dilute the salt splash-out so there are far few problems reported in pools in Florida than in places like Texas or Arizona where the summers are dry and hot and not humid (i.e. evaporation is higher).
Also note that the second link I gave (the one that showed travertine damage) was from Australia where they generally run their SWCG pools at 5000 ppm rather than the 3000 ppm we use in the U.S. That accelerates the problem. I only showed you those photos because you asked to see what such damage looks like, not to scare you off from SWCG.
You should ask around to others with pools with stone in your area and ask PBs in your area because it's less likely there will be issues if you get frequent rain dilution. You can always seal the stone for extra safety and it will have the stone last longer anyway against general weathering and it sounds like that is what you were planning to do. In that case, your risks are minimal. And don't forget that a non-SWCG has salt too that builds up over time, but it's average level is generally lower and with rain dilution (if allowed to overflow) likely kept lower.
Also note that the second link I gave (the one that showed travertine damage) was from Australia where they generally run their SWCG pools at 5000 ppm rather than the 3000 ppm we use in the U.S. That accelerates the problem. I only showed you those photos because you asked to see what such damage looks like, not to scare you off from SWCG.
You should ask around to others with pools with stone in your area and ask PBs in your area because it's less likely there will be issues if you get frequent rain dilution. You can always seal the stone for extra safety and it will have the stone last longer anyway against general weathering and it sounds like that is what you were planning to do. In that case, your risks are minimal. And don't forget that a non-SWCG has salt too that builds up over time, but it's average level is generally lower and with rain dilution (if allowed to overflow) likely kept lower.
I posted above that I am delighted with my SWG. I have a VS pump that I run on 1000 RPMs for 6-12 hours a day, season dependent. My cost to run the pump at this rate is like having a 100 watt light bulb on. For the ease of not having to dose manually, plus we travel quite a bit, a SWG is far away the best choice for us. Every individual and pool situation varies and you must do what feels right for you.
