UV or not UV

[crsublette]

Well, heck, I gotta jet. My sprinkler just called me on my cell phone saying, " come help me!! i need help!! ". So, I got business to get done with to keep my farm going.

There are absolutely organisms that can be effectively controlled, with significance, and other organisms that are much tougher to control with UV devices that are available to even us hobbyists, as referred by the aformentioned brands.

Here are a few studies (below the video), by universities and others involved in the production facet of the aquaculture industry, that verify UV absolutely does have a significant and health improving impact on aquatic wildlife, in our type of "conventional closed system where all water is recycled, pathogens are added at a constant rate, and removed at a rate proportional to concentration", as described by PDF shared below titled "Pathogen Reduction in Closed Aquaculture".

Actually, the "Pathogen Reduction in Closed Aquaculture" document does very well at explaining the idiom, "pollutant equilibrium", and how UV can be quite ineffective, but, as my other sources state, there is a definite positive impact UVs have on increasing the mortality and overall health of the aquatic wildlife in a "conventional close system", although the "Pathogen Reduction in Closed Aquaculture" study tries to dispute this.

If folk want to continue to believe these UV devices do not have a noticeable impact at improving the health of our ponds, then this is quite fine with me and I will let ya have the last word on the matter unless something can be provided, from the real world, that suggests this is all hogwash, such as the above study I referenced attempts to disprove and is very well rebutted by others.

I was going to notate the documents in a Cliff's notes version, maintaining integrity and context of the documents intent and data, and along with a few more documents except Life called... So, I will leave ya with this video...


Ain't Nobody Got Time For That !!

[video]

 

[Waterbug]

What anecdotal observation can YOU provide to suggest, with common conventional filtration found with avid koi hobbyists, that suggests one of the high quality actual UV sterilizers can NOT have a significant impact on the kill rate of organisms mentioned above ???

Who said they don't have a significant impact? You do this a lot, read things that aren't there. Very difficult to have a conversation.

 

[crsublette]

Who said they don't have a significant impact? You do this a lot, read things that aren't there. Very difficult to have a conversation.

Ya got me pegged like a donkey missing his tail. :blueflower:

Yet, I never claimed the kill was significant enough to make clean drinking water (post73). Actually, post#68, you were first to proclaim the 100%, which the AES chart only ever stated 99.999% that I addressed in post (post#72).

Ok. So, "Impossible to tell what the kill rate is in any pond" (post73) and, since you "don't think this is not true" (post68), which "this" was referring to post#61 (which pst61 was extrapulated from the AES chart and a company's UV device rating), so we can agree to disagree on the accuracy and how low the threshold goes yet we do not disagree they have a significant impact on the organism population in the pond as mentioned above, except "if I were betting cash I'd put it all on some percentage way below 99.999%" (post#73).

Glad we're making progress now from this conversation! :banana: :claphands:

Clarity is more important than agreement.

As Katsumoto said in the movie, "Last Samurai", "this is a very good conversation." :fechten2:

 

[Cdsdave]

This has been a very good conversation. Most enlightening, pardon the pun.

My water is very clear and I am satisfied with my purchase. Hopefully I will continue to be satisfied through the years with its use.

I for one didn't buy it with the hope of creating potable water, but to each his own

Thanks for all the good threads fellas!!