"Lifesaver Bottle" Filters Viruses Out of Water

gihan_ripper writes "British inventor Michael Pritchard has developed a small self-contained filter system that instantly cleans water, removing all particles larger than 15nm. He said that he was inspired after seeing the effects of Hurricane Katrina and the Boxing Day tsunami in 2004; people had to wait for many days to get fresh water and many died from drinking contaminated water. The filter is so effective that it can purify dirty river water and even fecal matter. His bottle will shortly be available for sale from Lifesaver Systems at an expected cost of £190 (approx. $385)."

SpaceSuits anyone?

[Creepy Crawler]

This sounds like what was in Dune... A rehydrator from excrement (sweat, fecal matter, urine).

If anything, along with rebreathers and this rehydrator, one could stay in horrendously inhospitable areas for a long while.

Re:

[Just Some Guy]

Totally off-topic:

I was thinking about Dune and stillsuits on warm day and realized that I must have missed something. How would those work in a hot environment anyway? Since we sweat to remain cool, how much heat could you give off without allowing any of that water to evaporate?

Re:

[Just Some Guy]

The suits weren't skintight, they captured the moisture after evaporation.

Yes, but how would they offload the waste heat, since the warm moist air couldn't just blow away into the atmosphere?

Re:

[Bender0x7D1]

Disclaimer: I don't have the book with me, so I am going from memory.

I believe the evaporation occured in the first layer of the suit, allowing for the cooling effect. The cooling is from the phase change from liquid to gas and not from losing "warm moist air". (That's why sweating can cool you even in environments above body temperature.) The vapor was then captured in the second layer of the suit for processing and collection.

Re:SpaceSuits anyone?

[lubricated]

"In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!"

and condensation heats the air back up. You still have to get rid of the waste heat, somehow. Merely transfering it from the inner part of the suit to the outer is insufficient.

Re:

[pclminion]

and condensation heats the air back up. You still have to get rid of the waste heat, somehow. Merely transfering it from the inner part of the suit to the outer is insufficient.

I think it could be possible. If you have a thin sheet of highly reflective material between the inner and outer layers, this will help to reflect the thermal radiation outward instead of inward.

Also, why were the suits black? Probably the same reason that Bedouins wear black or other dark colors instead of white. It helps to s

Re:SpaceSuits anyone?

[jollyreaper]

The suits weren't skintight, they captured the moisture after evaporation.

Yes, but how would they offload the waste heat, since the warm moist air couldn't just blow away into the atmosphere?

The man's name is a killing word, foo! You don't think he can fuck with thermodynamics any time he feels like it?

Re:SpaceSuits anyone?

[joto]

The suits weren't skintight, they captured the moisture after evaporation.

Yes, but how would they offload the waste heat, since the warm moist air couldn't just blow away into the atmosphere?

Through a mechanism known as "this book is a work of fiction". Another option would be active cooling with fans and cooling ribs. I'm sure you could think of other options too.

Re:

[posterlogo]

This filtration bottle will filter out anything larger than 15 nm particles. But it does not include any sort of distillation mechanism or activated-charcoal or ion-exchange column to filter out the salts, ions, and other small molecules, like toxins. It's nice that it will eliminate disease causing microorganisms, but this dude's bottle will still make your piss taste like piss.

Re:Stilsuits

[PeelBoy]

And they weren't bottles ;)

They covered your entire body and even had breathing apparatus and nose fittings to catch the moister while you breath.

When you slept at night you slept in a stilltent.

$385!?

[Loosifur]

Fantastic idea, except for the fact that anyone in the path of Katrina who could have afforded a $385 water bottle could have afforded a $90 plane ticket, $35 bus ride, or $27 tank of gas.

Re:

[Opportunist]

Now think big, create an industrial size good-for-the-whole-town version and sell it to the government...

Re:$385!?

[fastest fascist]

They're called water purification plants, and a centralized solution isn't so great for dealing with massive infrastructure failure.

Re:$385!?

[jabuzz]

As I understand it a lot of people could have afforded to get out. However they didn't think it was going to be that bad, it's just another huricane after all, and prefered to stick it out and make sure their stuff was not looted. However once it hit, and it turned out to be bad, getting out became a problem.

Re:$385!?

[C0rinthian]

I lived in South Florida for 27 years. I'm one of the first people who says "It's just another hurricane." When I saw the predictions for Katrina, even I thought anyone sticking around was stupid.

For the last time....the problem was not katrina

[tacokill]

It wasn't the hurricane that was the problem. It was the levies. Had the levees not broken, we would not be talking about Katrina today.

Obviously, they are related because the levees would not have broken without the hurricane. But the point here is that the Hurricane did remarkably little damage on it's own. The levees, on the other hand, were responsible for almost all of the issues you read about today.

Just another example of the edges starting to fray with respect to our national infrastructure. Without the levee issues, Katrina isn't special. Powerful? yes. Scary? yes. Destructive? Not really, when compared to something like Andrew or Hugo.

...and don't even get me started on the emergency response.

Re:For the last time....the problem was not katrin

[Anonymous Coward]

Damn folks still thinking that Katrina only affected New Orleans. Katrina
wiped out entire cities on the Mississippi Gulf coast. Infrastructure
was destroyed for at least 100 miles inland. The military had to **cut**
their way down HWY 49 to reach the coast.

So, to correct your statement, A large percentage of New Orleans problems
were caused, post hurricane, by the failure of the levees. A large percentage
of the problems caused by directly Katrina were actually in Mississippi.

Re:For the last time....the problem was not katrin

[j00r0m4nc3r]

The problem is the idea that you can keep a historic city below sea level and nothing bad will ever happen.

You seem to have forgotten about a little place called Atlantis. Thousands of years below sea-level and I've never heard any bad stories. In fact, their Chupacabra production levels are at an all-time high. I've heard that famous celebrities like Elvis Presley and Bigfoot own real-estate there...

Re:For the last time....the problem was not katrin

[JDevers]

Well, New Orleans wasn't "built" below sea level, it just sank to that point... When it was constructed the land was chosen BECAUSE it was the highest land near the mouth of the Mississippi. The problem is the weight of the city has caused the land to sink over time, resulting in it actually being BELOW sea level currently.

Re:$385!?

[AvitarX]

But I bet it is easier to get these to people after the fact that to get them as much water as it can produce.

Re:

[CogDissident]

Knock the price down? thats 400$ for 4000 liters of water. or 10 cents per liter. Thats extremely cheap for how much water you get, and they would make an excellent thing to airlift in. Even at 1$ per liter of water, they can be small and easy to transport, and light enough to be airlifted easily.

Even at the current price, I'd say these things are a steal.

Re:

[bobcat7677]

$385 is a high price but not really out of line considering the expected lifetime of 4000 litres (about 1000 US Gallons). But somehow thinking this is a new product or technology is stupid. There are lots of products out there that already do this.

http://www.rei.com/product/662937?storeId=8000&catalogId=40000008000 [rei.com] (Filters about the same amount of water and can filter it faster for dispensing to multiple people, but costs a bit more)

http://www.sportsimportsltd.com/exxrwabopu.html [sportsimportsltd.com] (has to be rep

Re:$385!?

[joto]

Are they rated for 20 nanometers, or 0.2 microns? Because they aren't the same. 1 micron is 1000 nanometers.

While this distinction seem important, it really isn't. Most people who are getting sick from bad water, is not getting sick from viruses. Most people getting sick from water aren't even getting sick from bacteria, they get sick from parasites. Furthermore, bacteria and viruses aren't usually swimming alone in the water. Usually they cling to each other, or to other particles, forming what is known as "biofilms". Thus, even a filter with larger pores will filter out most of the harmful organisms, even if the pores are much larger then the organisms you look out for.

A water filter that has smaller pores need more time (or pumping force) to filter the same amount of water. There is no silver bullet. Your filter is either good, or fast. You can't have both.

And saying your filter is "good for 4000 liter" is completely useless. Does it mean 4000 liters of already-clean tap-water, 4000 liter of somewhat unsafe water, or 4000 liter of disgusting feces? Does it mean that after 4000 liter the filter is completely clogged, or does it mean that after 4000 liter the filter is only half as effective in letting water through as when it was new? Besides, what maintenance does the filter need in order to be useful for 4000 liter? Can additional maintenance prolong the life even further?

But there's more. Chemical treatment (e.g. iodine) kills small organisms (e.g. viruses) fast, but takes a long time to kill the larger parasites. So by combining a large-pored (i.e. fast, cheap) filter with chemical treatment (2-5 drops of bleach per liter, or iodine pills if you don't like to taste bleach), you get the best of both worlds: fast and safe.

Re:

[usfGPM]

I think the initial idea is to let the first responders and shelters have a few of these in storage so that they can be distributed to the areas that need them in an emergency. After the are in wider use, the price will come down and it will start to be feasible for individuals to buy them.

Re:

[NeoTerra]

"...could have afforded a $90 plane ticket, $35 bus ride, or $27 tank of gas"

Difficult to do when there is no bus drivers, or no electricity to pump gas or run the airport. You forget the largest problem in Katrina was getting to the people, and getting the people somewhere safe, among other local government problems.

Re:

[Loosifur]

Those were all problems after the fact, however. Prior to landfall those options were open, and even moving from New Orleans to, say, a Motel 6 in East Texas would greatly improve your situation in that scenario, moving you out of the path of the eye. Besides which, once the storm hit, it would be as difficult to buy those bottles as it would be to get transportation. Buying the bottles beforehand presumes an attitude of preparedness that I don't think was there, or else you would have seen more evacuation

Re:

[doooooosh]

I've been using the First Need Deluxe water purifier for 10 years. It costs ~$100 for the whole thing, ~$40 for a replacement cartridge. It deals with virii and has been around forever. Sure, each cartridge is only good for about ~100 gallons, but I'm skeptical of the claims that this bottle can do 10 times that without changing the filter.

Re:

[PakProtector]

I've been using the First Need Deluxe water purifier for 10 years. It costs ~$100 for the whole thing, ~$40 for a replacement cartridge. It deals with virii and has been around forever. Sure, each cartridge is only good for about ~100 gallons, but I'm skeptical of the claims that this bottle can do 10 times that without changing the filter.

In English, the plural of Virus is Viruses. In Latin, Virus was a mass noun, and was not used in the plural.

Re:

[Angstroem]

Besides, its correct plural in Latin -- if ever used -- would have been "vira" or "virus" (long u), but never virii.

Re: Nouns

[Flwyd]

Mass nouns can be pluralized to indicate multiple types of mass. For instance, "I ate lots of meat" and "I ate several lunch meats."

Re:$385!?

[Mr. Underbridge]

Fantastic idea, except for the fact that anyone in the path of Katrina who could have afforded a $385 water bottle could have afforded a $90 plane ticket, $35 bus ride, or $27 tank of gas.

Easier to hand out one bottle per person than one gallon of water per person per day. You also fail to note that there were mile-long lines at the pumps, and flights and buses were full. This is in part due to infrastructure, part due to the realities of evacuating a large city, and partly because the evacuation order was given ridiculously late.

Re:

[darkmeridian]

You know how you never want to be the first to acquire new technology because of the high prices? Right now, the dude is targeting the military with this product at this price. He sold out his entire 1,000 bottle stock at a military trade show. Just like GPS, night vision, and sat phones, the prices will come down as the armed forces acquire these things. Eventually, these suckers will become commodities. I hike a lot. I would love to have one of these things because right now, you have to either carry lots

The myth of safe water from lakes and rivers

[mi]

...or live in a country where you can actually just drink the water from lakes and rivers.

There is no such country, and there never was. That the pastoral stories you read never mentioned water-born parasites and illnesses (except for the one Slavic fable, where a boy turns into a goat after drinking from a puddle agaisnt his older sister's cautioning), does not mean it never happened.

It is not so much due to the much maligned modern pollution, it is due to the many organisms, whose existence predates man's. Stomach worms are just one — and fairly benign — example.

And if must drink such unfiltered and unboiled water, don't drink from a lake or other standing water. Try to find the fastest running stream you can — you'll have a better chance...

Re:

[Phisbut]

...or live in a country where you can actually just drink the water from lakes and rivers.

I'm sorry, I didn't get the chance to select the country in which I was born. How did you manage to do that?

Re:

[tylernt]

Not to mention the fact that hikers and backpackers have used $60 filter bottles [google.com] for years now that do pretty much the same thing. Not only that, but I already have filter straws [google.com] with activated carbon in my 72-hour kits [google.com]. They cost about $10. Another company makes a small battery-powered water filter with a UV light in it to sterilize pathogens.

I'm to lazy to RTFA, but this thing sounds like a ridiculously expensive non-invention. The already existing, less-expensive technology might not get virii out, but y

Pretty much, but not quite...

[interactive_civilian]

tylernt said:

Not to mention the fact that hikers and backpackers have used $60 filter bottles for years now that do pretty much the same thing.

Based on the summary, not quite the same thing. I have a Katadyn Pocket filter [katadyn.com] which is generally regarded as one of the BEST consumer water filter systems (I've been told that it is basically a scaled down version of what the UN uses for refugee missions). It is rugged, not too heavy (though much lighter ones exists), pumps about 1 liter per minute, and a single filter cartridge is good for 50,000 liters.

HOWEVER, it can only filter particles down to 200nm, which is good enough to get just about all bacteria and some viruses. But, this new one filters down to 15nm which covers just about everything. Slap a charcoal filter on it to absorb toxins, and it sounds like a hell of a water system.

Still, you can have my Pocket filter when you pry it from my cold, dead, dysenteric fingers. ;)

OT: Why the Swiss Flag

[SerpentMage]

I looked at the Katadyn device and I always wonder why people slap on the Swiss flag. Is that supposed to mean Swiss use it? Heck I am sitting here in Switzerland and have hiked quite a bit through the mountains. Never seen the device. Want to know what people do? They drink the water fresh from the creek, or from one of the fountains that you find scattered throughout the mountains.

Re:Pretty much, but not quite...

[raddan]

Of course, with such a fine porosity, I wonder how well the filter actually works in practice. Having had a lot of experience doing field maintenance on an MSR filter (I've hiked roughly 4000 miles with this one so far), I can say that even around 200nm, the filter needs regular cleaning. Cleaning becomes harder and is required more regularly as your filter gets finer (often referred to as the "tightness" of the filter).

My BuonVino wine filter, which I once [idiotically] ran beer through, clogged in a matter of seconds, thus drenching me and my kitchen in about a quart of beer before I could turn it off. See, wine yeast tends to be highly flocculant-- it clumps together and drops out-- which means that there isn't a whole lot of filtering to be done to make it "bright". Beer, on the other hand, contains yeast of a lower flocculence, and so my filter clogged immediately. And filters that fine can't be reused-- you have to throw them away. This is why big beer manufacturers (like Budweiser) tend to invest a far amount of money in making sure that they have a lot of filter material available (they often use diatomaceous earth [wikipedia.org]).

Re:

[Phisbut]

My thoughts exactly. Nobody is going to shell out $300 for something they don't expect to ever use. So it's a great invention, but it won't be saving many lives after all.

You know what? You're right. Why should I buy a first-aid kit when I don't expect to get hurt. Why did I pay a little more for my car so it would have airbags when I don't expect to run into a wall. Why would I buy fire insurance when I don't expect my house to burst into flames? Heck, why even get life insurance as I don't expect to die

It even purifies fecal matter?

[ettlz]

No shit!

What about LifeStraw?

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.lifestraw.com/ [lifestraw.com]

Re:What about LifeStraw?

[Just Some Guy]

And on that subject, jackasses like this [bbc.co.uk] are why it's hard to help anyone:

However, a spokesman for UK charity WaterAid, which works to supply clean water and sanitation in 17 of the world's poorest countries, condemned the device as overly expensive, and said it was not a real solution.

The organisation's Paul Hetherington said that while he thought the LifeStraw is an 'amazing-sounding idea,' he did not ultimately think it would help.

"$3.50 sounds like very little to you and me - but most people in those countries earn less than one dollar a day, with which they have to feed their families," he said.

He added that he felt the problem is that many people live very far away from their water, often walking a total of 20km or more carrying a weight of 25 kilos.

"That's what takes it out of them - the long journey," he explained.

"The LifeStraw isn't going to prevent that long journey, even if it does improve the water they drink.

"They're not going to have the education, because they're not going to have the time. It's girls in particular who suffer, because it's women and girls who have to collect the water.

"It only costs a charity like WaterAid £15 per person to provide them with water, sanitation and hygiene education, which, provided there is decent water resource management in the country, will last them a lifetime.

"At that rate, $3.50 is expensive."

Of course, if "there is decent water resource management in the country" in the first place, none of this would be necessary. And never mind that if I'd have to make a trek for water anyway, I'd prefer it to be clean when I got there.

If the LifeStraw at $3.00 will actually hurt women and girls and not solve the rest of society's ills, I can only imagine what Mr. Hetherington would think about a model that cost 100x more.

Re:

[Just Some Guy]

The charity doesn't have infinite resources. If you had $300 dollars to spend, would you:

(A) Put in place a water system (which lasts for a lifetime) that would provide water directly (so no trekking 20 km), that was sanitary and have money left over to provide some hygiene education

(B) Buy 100 LifeStraws (which last 6 months) for them instead?

I would likely:

(C) Buy 16 lifestraws so that the people I'm helping don't die of dysentery before we get their new water source finished.

I don't think Mr Hetherington is a jackass for rejecting the latter suggestion.

Neither do I. In fact, he's clearly correct that LifeStraws wouldn't be a long-term solution. I think he's a jackass for going out on a tangent about sexual inequality in sub-Saharan Africa rather than recognizing that they could help provide short-term relief until more permanent solutions can be established.

What most irks me is the mindset that if an idea does

Re:

[dylan_-]

Who says that they require short-term relief of this form? Maybe they can implement sanitary measures immediately once they have the money, without spending as much as 16 LifeStraws would cost. Or perhaps 16 LifeStraws per village would save a few lives in the first three villages, but leave no money left for any improvement at all to the fourth, ultimately resulting in more death and disease.

I don't know. But I'm betting that Mr Hetherington knows better than either of us since he works in that area, so

I want my still-suit now.

[expro]

Just what I have been waiting for. I want my still-suit now.

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Cheap Water Filtration

[grassy_knoll]

You need 2 buckets, a cotton t-shirt, propane camp stove ( or a heat source to boil water of some kind ) and bleach.

Cover the mouth of the empty bucket with the cotton t-shit.

Fill the other bucket with suspect water.

Pour the water from the full bucket into the empty bucket through the t-shirt. This filters out the larger baddies.

Presuming at least one of the buckets is metal, you can boil water in that. If not, a pot of some sort is required. The idea is to boil the water to a rolling boil for at least one minute.

Allow the water to cool for at least 30 minutes. Once cool, add 16 drops of bleach per gallon ( or 8 drops per 2 liter bottle ). If the water smells faintly of chlorine, it's safe to drink. If not, repeat adding the bleach.

Thanks to the Red Cross [redcross.org] for directions.

A $400 water filtration system is nice, and can be cost effective in some cases ( as others pointed out, shipping and distributing small empty bottles is easier that shipping and distributing water ), but not having one doesn't mean you have no options.

Re:Cheap Water Filtration

[Kozz]

Well, shouldn't most of the microorganisms be killed by the boil itself? Granted, the boil doesn't filter chemicals, but if you're simply trying to kill giardia, e. coli and cryptosporidium, you probably only need to bring the water to a boil and that's it.
http://www.survivaltopics.com/survival/how-long-do-you-need-to-boil-water/ [survivaltopics.com]
If you disagree, I would like to know more about which points the URL above got wrong -- I'm always open to learning.

Expensive

[eknagy]

Water purifier pills are way cheaper. Still, most people don't keep a box of them "just in case" in their backpack (right next to the dry rations, water-proof matches and raincoat).

Re:

[Radon360]

Water purifier pills are way cheaper.

I wholeheartedly agree, but they don't remove suspended solids or do much to remove odor (other than to perhaps mask it).

Something tells me that the marketing point of view was taken to draw more attention to the product ("hey, look! this can save lives!") rather than selling it on where most of the buyers are going to be, the military and extreme outdoors recreationalist types.

Obligatory

[__aagbwg300]

Is there one for Windows?

makign these for 3rd world countries

[peter303]

I've read, probably in Technology Review, of people making this for 3rd world countries where bad drinking water is rampant. I think they've gotton costs minimal (@$15) and reliability high. .

Good idea, wrong location?

[spooje]

Sounds great, but what are the odds that the average citizens in Ache or any of the other poor areas affected by the tsunami could afford the bottle.

On the other hand, it sounds great for places like in Tokyo where you'll need a water cleaning kit for the big one. People will still have plenty of access to water in the form of Tokyo Bay and the rivers, but nothing clean enough to normally drink. It would have to be better than the current stratergy of leaving filled bottles of water outside houses and in local parks.

LifeStraw

[mutende]

More than one year ago, BBC mentioned the LifeStraw [bbc.co.uk] that filters water as you drink. It's able to filter 700 litres of water and was at that time priced at less than two quid (probably the wholesale price). See also the inventor Torben Vestergaard Frandsen's website [lifestraw.com].

4000 liters for $385? Not outrageous!

[Tsu Dho Nimh]

This makes economic sense under some conditions: Instead of cases of bottled water, you have one bottle and filter as needed.

If this can deliver 4,000 liters at under $1 a liter, and is shipped empty, it's cheaper than shipping pallets of bottled water for military and aid organizations. And when mass production hits, I can see this becoming popular with campers, tourists, business travellers and others.

Re:

[Tsu Dho Nimh]

$400 / 4000 liters = $.10/liter, not $1/liter

Damned metric system!

real or just an ad?

[kurthr]

It's been possible to buy similar "virus level" filters for hiking since at least the 80s. The typical problems are cleaning, and clogging. See Katadyn or your local REI for a variety of samples. Then there's the "$2" (really about $7) LifeStraw, that was advertised on gizmodo 2 years ago... is this just a running theme?

If the filter is small enough to block viruses, then it is so small that even very small 1u particles will clog it. The whole filter system has to be optimized... and they still clog. They claim 1000 liters, but I'm not really buying it. If it really has something to do with distilling, then I'd be more positive, but that's usually pretty darn complex.

Perhaps he's using a teflon reverse osmosis filter? At the price, it's certainly possible. Those take significant pressure, but they would take out viruses. The water has to start pretty clean too or they develop a film which clogs them too. People have tried iodine on them as well... it works for a while. Whithout knowing what this thing is (and the website's no help), I don't think we can really talk coherently about it.

If it is just a filter you can reverse flush and clean and do a variety of other things, but if your filter clogs after a few liters you'll be _very_ unhappy. This is made more difficult by the fact that you're trying to clean out biologicals, which will happily grow in the filter so it clogs up even quicker, and the cleaning is even more important and difficult to do completely. That's why people make throw aways or just add a halogen (chlorene/iodine) to a tub of relatively filtered water (so things can diffuse) and wait an hour.

Most hikers (who bother) use a more coarse filter (for bacteria only). Often these are treated with iodine as well, and perhaps charcoal to remove bad tastes. These keep clogging problems down, and make cleaning somewhat more easy. That's what the LifeStraw is based on.

I hope this is really an advancement, but it has the smell of an ad.

Yes, but...

[freyyr890]

Does it remove Dihydrogen Monoxide [dhmo.org] from the water?

$ 93 "First Need" Filter

[westlake]

His bottle will shortly be available for sale from Lifesaver Systems [CC] at an expected cost of £190 (approx. $385)."

Simple, portable, anti-viral filters are not new. The First Need Deluxe Water Filter/Purifier [amazon.com] is $93 at Amazon. First Need is one filter that claims to meet EPA virus-removal standards by filtration alone -- a nice change from the yucky taste (and for some, the health risks) of iodine. Most antiviral filters involve an iodine element; when its job is done, a carbon element rids your water of any face-scrunching aftertaste. How To Buy a Water Filter [outdoorreview.com]

Better Use

[apodyopsis]

So there is a 15nm filter that can get even viruses and bacteria out of water?

How about using it for home use, recycling "Grey water waste" and rainwater into drinking water. £400 a pop seems more impressive when considered that way. Assuming the filters can be made economically enough there is a huge potential market there.

I like the idea of anything that reduces our dependence on piped convenience.

From the website

[RealErmine]

From the lifesaver systems [lifesaversystems.com] "unique features" page:

LIFESAVER bottle is fitted with a chew-proof non-tasting replaceable teat.

Finally. I hate when my teat gets all chewed up. It's also pretty creepy that my previous teat can taste me whenever I use it.

ultraviolet light is also good purification method

[SethJohnson]

Another method of killing bacteria in drinking water is to expose it to excessive ultraviolet light. You can do this by putting it in clear plastic bottles, then set the bottles on a mirror in the sun. A reflective tin roof will also work. After an hour or so, this method kills 98% of harmful bacteria. Bacteria has a tolerance of normal amounts of UV light, but the mirror doubles the exposure, which they are unable to survive.

I don't know if fecal matter in water would be cleaned by this method.

Water purification methods [freedrinkingwater.com].

Seth

Is it safe?

[SnarfQuest]

During something like Katrina, there is a lot more crap in the water than just bacteria.

What does this thing do with gasoline, pesticides, and other chemicals coming out of drowned cars, stores, homes, and factories? If it isn't removing these chemicals, then you can't be sure the processed water is safe to drink. You will probably see a lot of sick people who relied on this product, and got poisoned because of the false sense oc security.

Doesn't add up.

[guidryp]

I am a hiker, I use an MSR pump filter.

The MSR pump allows you to exert a fair bit of force and you will get tired pumping a single liter.
The MSR has a coarser (more open filter).
The MSR will start to clog withing tens of liters of what looks like fairly clean water. You then need to clean the filter.

The MSR is actually one of the better filters on the market.

Now how can a filter that is supposedly much tighter, be easier to pump (squeeze bottle) and last for thousands of liters of brackish water with no cleaning requirements mentioned.

I also noticed no technical info when I clicked it on the web page.

Personally I would stay far away until there was independent lab reviews and field testing, because this really doesn't add up.

Re:

[damaki]

Pee is not toxic. So, unless you rather wait for a good tasting liquid than survive, there is no problem.

Re:

[petermgreen]

It's not immediately toxic but the body does use it as a way to get rid of toxic chemicals so if you keep drinking all your pee then those chemicals will just build up in your system.

Re:Pee

[808140]

This actually takes quite a while; for most people, urine is upwards of 98% water. Sure, if you drink nothing but urine for months you may develop problems -- but if you're stuck somewhere and water is in short supply, you should definitely drink your urine. It only takes the average human 3 or 4 days to die of thirst, and if you don't know when help will arrive, don't risk it.

Re:Pee

[Anonymous Coward]

I wholeheartedly agree. In fact, you should start drinking your own urine, so you get used to the taste, just in case the water suddenly runs out. I know I have!

Re:Pee

[BugAttack]

aww man why did you have to post as an AC? I wanna be your friend!

Re:Pee

[Loke the Dog]

You'll develop problems much faster than that if you drink your own urine.

98% sounds much, but it isn't. It means that the salinity can be up to 2% - not far from sea water. If you drink it, it will make you dry out faster than not drinking at all. See, that's how the (healthy) kidneys work: the stuff you pee out can never have a lower salinity than the rest of your body.

Re:

[Rei]

You know that show is fake [daughtersoftiresias.org], right?

Re:Pee

[exp(pi*sqrt(163))]

In fact, pee into a bottle now and store it in your hiking/camping kit for emergencies.

drinking pee is harder than you think

[tacokill]

Drinking pee is harder than you think. I speak from personal experience.

I was lost in the Ozark mountains for 2 days without any supplies. The temperature was over 100F and I had almost no water. The little water I did have was exhausted quickly and the next best alternative was my own pee. I became thirsty enough that drinking my own pee was not even a question - it was a necessity (or so I thought).

I removed my flashlight batteries and peed in my flashlight because it was the only thing I had that could hold liquid.

Guess what happens to your pee when you are dehydrated? It's get much more concentrated. So much so, that I think you'll have a hard time drinking it unless you are, literally, getting close to death. Mine was so strong, I couldn't even stomach the smell much less, drink it. I have never been as thirsty in my life as that day and I have never since, been in a situation as dire as that one. Yet, I couldn't drink it.

While it may be an option early on, as dehydration starts setting in, drinking your own pee becomes less of an option as each hour passes by.

Re:drinking pee is harder than you think

[Anonymous Coward]

Having a father who was a POW in Vietnam, a survivalist, and a firm believer in everything that came out of Soldier of Fortune, I've learned a few things.

Sure, I learned to build shelters and fires. And I learned how to set deadfalls and snares, improvise weapons to hunt or ways to fish, places to scavenge for insects to eat (I'm a vegan, actually - but I'll be damned if I'm going to deny myself a meal if I'm starving), and all of the other survival techniques.

One of the other things I learned is that as long as you're healthy, fresh urine is sterile and can be used to clean wounds in the field if no source of potable water is available. And if you're in a position where you think there's a chance you'll be going more than a few days without finding water, it's best to start drinking your urine early - before you're dehydrated and it becomes so concentrated it's unbearable. Even if you have water available, if you're well hydrated drinking your urine will help prolong your supply. In the process it also helps replenish electrolytes that you may not be getting if you're struggling to find food (speaking as someone who's experienced it, hyponatremia [wikipedia.org] is really not fun.)

Re:drinking pee is harder than you think

[Palpitations]

As an aside, carrying condoms in your wallet is generally a bad idea if you plan on using them for their intended goal - but since this is /. after all, I doubt anyone here has much of a use for one. An unlubricated condom in your wallet is a great way to collect urine, or transport water back to your fire. For anyone who spends time in the wild, a simple unlubricated condom or two in your survival kit is a great, and often overlooked, thing.

Re:

[Palpitations]

For one thing, condoms definitely make the collection of urine easier, for obvious reasons. They are also thinner and have a wider opening, which makes it easier to collect water from a river (larger opening and less resistance to filling up and stretching to max capacity). Not only that, they come in a protective foil package which helps resist punctures while being stored, and they're sterile.

Re:drinking pee is harder than you think

[Rei]

I hate to say it, but your father is just plain wrong about drinking urine.

So says the US Army Field Manual [equipped.com]. So says the SAS Survival Handbook (no link, but page 494). So says Dr. William Elfarr [statesman.com], former head of the Texas Urological Society. So says Master Sergeant Gary L. Benton [simplesurvival.net], survival instructor to B-52 crews. So says Tom Brown Jr. [trackertrail.com], survivor school founder and instructor. So says Equipped.com [equipped.com], a survival site. So says Adventure Sports Online [adventures...online.com] in its 5 basic survival tips. And on, and on, and on.

Your body is getting rid of urine for a reason. Urea is toxic, and the saline component of urine means that it dehydrates instead of hydrating.

Re:drinking pee is harder than you think

[geobeck]

Survival tip:

Whenever you go hiking or exploring, take a deck of cards with you. If you get hopelessly lost, sit down and start playing solitaire. Within five minutes, someone will be standing over your shoulder, telling you which card to move next.

Re:

[hcdejong]

Alternatively, bring a length of optical cable. In case of emergency, bury it. A backhoe will be along shortly to dig it up.

Re:

[Rei]

You laugh, but the general advice for if you get lost *is* to stop moving. If a deck of cards will help with that, then by all means! The natural instinct when lost is to panic and run off -- doesn't matter which way. This is the worst thing you can do. Some people even ditch their packs to try and save time, thus losing the gear that they needed to keep themselves alive.

The simple facts are that if you're lost and you don't move about, rescue has a very good chance of finding you. If you do move about

Re:drinking pee is harder than you think

[commodoresloat]

mod the parent up... i'm peeing myself laughing

Quick! Drink it!!

Re:drinking pee is harder than you think

[tacokill]

Did you read my post? It was 100F outside.

What I did not mention was the heat index was 114F and it was during a period of serious drought. All creeks were dried up and there was not a pool of water that I could find. Believe me....it was not my choice. I gladly would have taken ANY water at that point but your assertion that water is plentiful is a bit naive. Even in the Ozarks. Grab a topo map and you'll see. It's not just nice, pretty creeks and lakes back in those hills. There are vast expanses of land between them.

Water is not as easy to find as you think. Especially when you are on foot, tired, and dehydrated. Already, your mind is playing games with you and it feels like each step is your last. Of course...it is easy to be a Monday morning quarterback. :)
(and I do that a lot to myself over this experience)

Re:drinking pee is harder than you think

[xSauronx]

What I did not mention was the heat index was 114F and it was during a period of serious drought. All creeks were dried up and there was not a pool of water that I could find

you forgot to add "and i *liked* it!" if youre going to be hardcore. sound hardcore ;)

Re:

[Radon360]

Not to mention urine is usually sterile until it exits the body. The real question is whether the filter will remove any/enough of the waste products that the body is trying to rid itself of to make such a recycling loop acceptable for more than a couple of passes.

Re:Pee

[bigdavex]

I'm not sure you understand the purpose of peeing.

Re:

[arthurpaliden]

No, but a simple evaporator made from a piece of plastic sheeting, a container of some kind and a stone can.

Re:Pee

[icepick72]

Hey MacGyver is that you!?! This is Pete Thornton. Call into home base will ya buddy... it's been a while.

Re:

[Palpitations]

It may sound funny, but it's actually a really valid, and incredibly easy way to make a solar still.

You place stones in a container to weigh it down, place that in a larger container filled with water, and cover it in plastic. A stone placed on top of the plastic sheet, directly over the inner container, allows the condensate that forms on the plastic to run down and drip into the inner container. Simple, effective way to get water that is safe to drink.

Saying you need a few containers is complicating

Re:Pee

[ObsessiveMathsFreak]

<Tyler Durden>
Urine is sterile. You can drink it.
</Tyler Durden>

I know this, because Tyler knows this.

Re:

[Anonymous Coward]

It removes all particles larger than 15 nm, but chemical bond lengths are typically 0.2 nm, so this bottle will not filter small molecules such as Urea [wikipedia.org].

Re:No Shit?!?

[Dogtanian]

It removes all particles larger than 15 nm, but chemical bond lengths are typically 0.2 nm, so this bottle will not filter small molecules such as Urea.

Well, at least we know they're not taking the piss.

Re:No Shit?!?

[Pentavirate]

The LifeStraw filters particles from 125 micron down to minimal 15 micron [lifestraw.com]

The Lifesaver Bottle cuts out everything larger than 15nm. 15nm = .015 microns [google.com]

So yes, this is new news.

Re:

[LWATCDR]

If it filters everything down to a virus exactly what is left for the UV to kill?

This wouldn't filter out toxins like hydrocarbons and other nasty stuff that is in flood waters.

Re:

[kcelery]

most of the area facing water problem also facing power outage problem.

Re:

[digitig]

Until it can turn my pee into vodka, I agree.

I can turn vodka into pee -- will that do?

Re:O rly?

[Nimey]

He can't just pull the raw materials and equipment to make these out of his butt, dipshit. Those have a non-zero cost, and for a superfine filter like he's making the cost of production must be non-trivial.

It it sees widespread production, the cost will go down (economies of scale) and advances in materials science and manufacturing techniques could also get the price down. Eventually.

Re:

[Radon360]

Presumably it's disposable, and considering that it's probably the bulk of the cost, the whole bottle would be disposed/recycled at the end of its usefulness...which I might add is projected at 4,000 - 6,000 liters of filtered water, according TFA.

Re:

[Oktober Sunset]

It's true abortion is such a waste. A few more months and I could have cooked and ate that baby.

Re:

[trolltalk.com]

"Day 5 after conception I doubt that you can think or feel at that point, but you are certainly a human being at that point by definition because you now have the full 23 pairs of chromosomes in your DNA "/i>

Pardonez-moi, but that line of thinking is totally f$cked up. You shed skin every day that has the foll 23 pairs of chromosomes. Is it a "human being"? No, its dead skin. What about when you bleed, or accidently chop off a finger - is that a human being? the finger has a full complement of human d

Re:Nothing new here

[jonnythan]

You do realize that 15nm is .015 microns, right?

This isn't a micron filter. A micron filter has pores a few orders of magnitude too large to filter out viruses.

This one, however, does filter viruses.