Rain water harvesting and slow sand water filters

This is an update on the operation of Filter 4 (see details of construction in the post on November 13, 2011). It has been in operation for six months now. At this point in time it is producing very clear water and the flow rate has stabilized at about 30 litres per hour (.130 m/hr). Another water test will go in as time and finances permit. Over 4000 liters (about 1000 gallons) of water have been filtered in the past 3 months as a result of only rainwater flowing from the 100 square foot roof of the adjoining building.  A YouTube video on the construction of this filter is in the works and I will have it up (hopefully) within the next couple of weeks. More later . . . .   .

The pond filter works, quite well. It has up to this point been fairly “biomatic” that is to say, the filter has not needed cleaning (although I have wet-harrowed it several times) and has worked with naturally occurring biological removal of pathogens – it is biomatic, so in my writing I will call these pond filters “biomatic pond filters”, or in the case of rainwater filters, “biomatic water filters”. These filters do not need backwashing – ever; in fact “backwashing” (forcing water backwards through the output to “break up” the “fouled” sand) will ruin them. For some reason there is lots of misunderstanding about the difference between a rapid sand filter and a slow sand filter. People need to get over this idea that all sand filters need to be backwashed. Perhaps some of the confusion comes from lack of knowledge, and the (deliberate?) lack of available information. For the past 40 or 50 years, sand filters have been designed to work using chemicals like chlorine or ozone to kill pathogens in the output water. This is old, non-sustainable, profit centered technology. And furthermore, chlorine and ozone are, for all intents and purposes, ineffective in preventing disease from cryptosporidium (cryptosporidiosis), or giardia lamblia (Giardiasis often called “Beaver fever”) acquired from the cyst form of these pathogens. These are two different diseases and Beaver Fever is NOT caused by cryptosporidium. The beneficial microbes in Slow sand filters (biomatic filters) remove these pathogens from water – by not just killing them, but by actually removing them in the process of consuming them and breaking them down into harmless elements.

Just a thought about catching rain water to use in an emergency (I have to have a rant once in a while). . . .

It could easily happen. An emergency situation due to an earthquake, a power outage, or the “100 year floods” that have been happening every 10 years or so. What would you do if you had no dependable water for, say; 4 weeks? Rush to the store and buy bottled water – like several hundred thousand others? How long before its gone?  Water is critical to survival, but its always there when you turn on your faucet. . .    .  If there is an extended power outage, or there has been an earthquake there will likely be no water available for a VERY LONG TIME (speaking of quakes, we just had one off the coast of Oregon yesterday April 11 – a 5.9; and one today April 12 in the Gulf of California a 6.2 ). If there has been massive flooding and all the water is contaminated, everyone else will be looking for water – 4 days without water and your in very big danger of meeting your maker; think about it, and children really need water – what do you do? Drink from a mud puddle? Drink flood water? Can you even imagine what would be in that water? Of course these two options are crazy. Now; that slow sand filtered roofwater starts looking really good, doesn’t it? – even if there are a few coliforms in it, and you’re going to be really really careful about it; right? You’re going to make sure the filter is taken care of, right?  My point here is that each person is responsible for the operation of their roofwater filter and each person makes their own decision about how to use it – but it should be an informed decision based on knowledge. Each person makes their own decisions about what to do – I am not responsible for others actions or decisions  and all of the information I provide still does not make water 100 percent safe, but in an emergency this 55 gallon barrel of filtered roof water sitting by my garage is going to look really, really good. Think carefully. Several months without water supplied to your suburban house will be a horrific situation for you. As long as it rains, you will have water – if you have set up a slow sand filter; that is.

The water clarity of the output from filter 4 has been getting worse and worse up until 2 days ago. An air vent on the top of the barrel was added after I noticed the output pulsing while the pump was in operation. I realized at that time that the pump was actually drawing water from the filter’s output because the water had reached the top of the barrel beyond the overflow drain just below the top and was forming a seal so as to allow the pump drawing water to create a vacuum strong enough to briefly cause water to be forcefully drawn through the filter much faster than it could handle. This was (apparently) causing the increased turbidity and (possibly) the biological contamination of the output water. So. . . know that:

The storage container, especially when used with a pump, must be vented above the water level in the container or the pumping action from the small recirculation motor  (or any pumping action) will actually forcefully draw water from the filter at a destructive rate.

When the filter was first set up the flow rate was too fast, a regulator valve was added.

.25mm sand on the top 4 inches;  .45 mm sand bottom; pea gravel bottom 4 inches;  carbon granule filter on output;  3 weeks running after extended freeze. As of today March 7:  24 degrees F.

March 6 2012:  flow volume:  37.5 litres per hour ; flow rate: .140 meters per hour

Compared to the other filters I have put together, this one is slightly different. The majority of the sand is .45 mm effective size. This filter appears to be more subject to variations in the input water quality. Heavy rain was followed by the water output clouding up slightly at the beginning of the filter’s initial set up. Also, filter 4 appears to be more readily effected by freezing weather. Freezing weather was followed by the output water becoming highly turbid for 10 days after the thaw. The filters with .25mm  sand in the bottom layer did not do this. It is important to note, however, that this filter was set up within weeks of the freezing weather and the biolayer was not fully developed when the filter froze. The other filters (filter 1,2,3 and the pond filters) had 6 months to develop a biolayer before winter. More later . . .   .

Feb. 28 6:30 AM PST: The output water directly from the filter is now perfectly clear based on visual inspection. The filter did not freeze last night, although the temperature was 30 degrees F.

Feb. 27 5 PM PST : The water directly from the filter output is now “clear” like it was before the cold weather set in and froze the filter. From this perhaps we can conclude that the freezing weather caused the filter to produce more turbid water temporarily?

As of Feb. 26, the output water was running clear. Now, as of Feb 27 AM, the outside temperature has dropped to 26 degrees. The filter is frozen, and there is no output.

As of Feb. 25 there has been more improvement, but very slight. I almost cannot see any cloudiness in the water at this point in time. The uv filter would probably work now, but not at 100 percent efficiency. Check the link below for an explanation of how a uv filter works. This is a good learning example. These filters will be effected by freezing weather and changes in water input turbidity. On the positive side note that the output could still be free of coliform even though it is cloudy, but we do not know for sure until the water is tested. Also know that even if the water “looks” perfectly clear, it still may be contaminated with harmful microbes, or toxic heavy metals such as mercury, or lead.

To keep out contamination, the system must be sealed, tested regularly, and the roof must not contain any non-biological contaminants; such as lead, copper, mercury, zinc or asbestos. All these are chemicals that can be found in toxic amounts in runoff from roofing material and / or gutters in a worst-case scenario.

As Feb. 24 2012 there is a very slight improvement – not enough, yet –  but it does “look” better.  Perhaps  the carbon filter has helped. . .   ?

Feb. 22, 2012: Filter 4 is putting out cloudy water. (If you can “see” cloudyness in water, it won’t allow a uv filter to work.) Specifically, the turbidity of the output has increased substantially – last week the water “looked” perfectly clear based on a visual observation – now the water “looks” slightly cloudy. I do not know why for sure, but my best guess is that the effective grain size of the coarse sand is too large – .45 mm is likely just too large – but that is just a guess. This has happened before, to a much lesser degree, on all the filters I have put together – after freezing weather. Another possible explanation for the increase in turbidity  is that the outside temperature has increased substantially immediately after the freezing temperatures, and there has been a substantial amount of rainfall in the past 3 days. I have added a carbon granule filter, but so far it has not made much difference. I’ll update as soon as there is new information.

If I were using a UV filter to assure absolute purification, the high turbidity would prevent ultra-violet light from adequately sterilizing the water. (the preceding link will open a new page, on that page click on the “GET A COPY”  link at the top of the dialogue window) A turbidity level of 5ntu is the maximum level at which a uv light will work – any cloudier and the uv system will fail. Five (5) ntu is just barely visible to the average person. The water may still “look” clear.

The water is not clear enough for a uv filter to operate at 100 percent efficiency (because I can “see” the cloudiness in the water – and that is too much – remember err on the side of caution) , and there would be a very real possibility of contamination in the output following the uv filter.  A week ago, the water was very clear; and a uv filter would have worked. This is why it is extremely important to note that a DIY slow sand filter is not foolproof; and furthermore, THERE ARE NO GUARANTEES THAT a filter built exactly like this one will work all the time. Again, I must state that I DO NOT RECOMMEND using water from any filter described on any of my websites for drinking water. The owner/operator of any slow sand filter is TOTALLY responsible for the water quality, and type of use, irregardless of what they read or hear from me; and contamination can come from anywhere at any time.

Here are some (large) photos of the sand sizes used in filter 4. The .45 mm is the lower level of sand , and the .25 mm

is the upper level.

NEW

I spoke with the testing lab this afternoon regarding filter 4. The filter is working. “Working”, means that the filter is removing coliform bacteria completely from the input water; however a word of caution here: this is only for this filter at this location and is only one test. It must be kept in mind that contamination can come from anywhere and each owner is solely responsible for the operation of the filter they build and/or own. It is totally possible to build a filter identical to this one and have bacteria show up in the output at any time. Also note that the “log reduction, (usually called “log credit”) on this filter has only been shown to be 3.08 with 1200 cfu/100ml input. This means that unless the water running through this filter is equally or less contaminated than 1200 cfu/100ml the output may be toxic.

For example, let’s say the water coming off the roof suddenly has 2000 cfu/100ml (this can easily happen anytime – contamination levels in roof water will vary SIGNIFICANTLY) ; then this filter may not work to remove all the pathogens. Or,  perhaps someone else builds an “exact copy” of this filter and starts running their roof water through it. There is absolutely no guarantee that the filter will work – it “might” work. There is no way to tell. It might produce horrifically toxic water. A test must be done on each filter, and furthermore, the water should be tested and monitored regularly with adequate safeguards for possible contamination. Even if a UV filter is used, if the turbidity goes above the limit for the particular type of light, then it will not inactivate pathogens, so the turbidity level must be monitored closely also. This filter has not had a turbidity test done yet.

The results are:

Post-filter: no detectable coliform, this means no e coli or fecal coliform are in the output water.

Pre-filter: 1200 cfu/100 ml.

Storage: 3 cfu/100 ml. no e coli or fecal coliform.

The results can be viewed here: http://www.roofwaterharvesting.org/test_results.html

Specifically, this means that water directly out of the filter has no detectable coliform bacteria in it. Water that has been going into the filter on an ongoing basis has a high coliform count, and water from storage is slightly contaminated with 3 coliform per 100ml but contains no e coli. This does show that contamination can come from anwhere, as I had meticulously and extra carefully cleaned out the storage container with disinfectant and made sure the container was closed tightly. Still, from somewhere some coliform has managed to get into the system after the filter output. However, inside the filter at the output and inside the output pipe there is only purified water. The actual paperwork will be coming back to me in several weeks at which time I will post it online.