Researchers Develop "Tea Bag" Water Filter 119
cybernanga writes "A group of researchers in South Africa has developed a filter that can purify water straight from the bottle. The filter sits inside a tube fitted on top of a bottle and purifies water as it is poured on a cup. From the article: 'The designer behind the filter, Dr Eugene Cloete, from the Stellenbosch University in South Africa, says the filter is only as big as an ordinary tea bag. He says the product is cost-effective and easy to use. "We are coming in here at the fraction of the cost of anything else that is currently on the market," says Dr Cloete on BBC World Service.'"
Say it with me. (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The filter in the article is just an ordinary active carbon filter. This [ted.com] is waaay better.
Re:Say it with me. (Score:4, Insightful)
I think their target market is "cheap", not "best".
The "lifesaver" water bottle may save lives, but a few very rich lives
This "tea bag" thing may not produce water as pure or safe, but might save many more lives if it really is cheaper, easy to use and practical.
FWIW the 100% way to prevent many trillions of human deaths is to kill all humans now, so be careful if you ever ask a super smart AI to minimize the long term total number of human deaths per year
Re: (Score:2)
I think you can buy them online for about $100 each. I bet you'd get a discount if you bought 1000.
If they can do 6000 liters of water then the price is probably competitive with teabags. I guess it depends on how people are organized and how they pay for them. Individuals won't have $100 to spend but governments and humanitarian programs will.
Re: (Score:2)
My bad, the price I remembered was in pounds. They're $149 each and $300 for the jerrycan version: http://www.lifesaverusaonline.com/ [lifesaverusaonline.com]
Re: (Score:1)
At 300 $ / can useful for 6000 liters isn't it better to drill a well?
Best method however would most likely be:
a) kill their leaders.
b) confiscate all weapons.
c) give them 100% freedom and democracy.
d) have them ban import of foreign food.
e) give them generous (as in not greedy) small loans.
The rest they will solve themselves.
Point a and b isn't really necessary if part c is in place.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
And part d is likely inhumane.
(Do you really think it's that easy? Take democracy, add water, poof! It's like a libertarian's wet dream)
Re: (Score:1)
If they get anything working and some money I assume they can afford to build infrastructure at some point. I doubt it will just pop up from nowhere.
D isn't inhumane. Growing their own food would be more humane than depending on eventually getting hold of a surplus from the rest of the world, or not.
Re: (Score:2)
c) give them 100% freedom and democracy
This clearly hasn't worked - read Amy Chua's "World on Fire" for an explanation of why. Better still, but probably too dense for the average reader is Barrington Moore's "Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy".
Re:Say it with me. (Score:5, Informative)
With those prices and 3rd world exchange rates, they'll never develop their economies! They'd be in perpetual debt for water bottles.
Even Britta costs a fraction of that, and, of course, chlorine bleach (as a pre-treatment to kill bacteria)is dirt cheap.
Meanwhile, a solar still can be made with a bucket, a plastic sheet, and some manual labor. Unlike a filter, it will continue to produce clean safe water year after year with no expendable. The construction technique is simple enough that adult supervised children can do it (and learn a science lesson in the process with an immediate application).
The developed world seems to have a bias against such solutions that don't make the 3rd world dependent on a continuous stream of "manna from heaven" in the form of manufactured goods. Part of that seems to be a bit of Marie Antoinette syndrome (just can't imagine a place where such cheap ubiquitous materials are expensive and rare). Part is that people imagine that accountant run businesses will lay off their drive for profit just a bit for the sake of humanitarian aid (they won't). Perhaps part because they might then start growing their own economy rather than becoming dirt cheap labor for our clothing industry.
Meanwhile, much of the problem will stop when the developed world kindly stops selling greedy warlords automatic weapons and all the ammo they can carry.
Re: (Score:1)
That bit is not true though. The machete has been used to kill millions and needs no ammo.
I even saw a pic of a recent war/"clash" in Africa where a number of people were armed with bows, the rest with whatever they've got.
As long as someone can convince other people to kill many you'll have wars.
Re: (Score:2)
To be certain, it wouldn't end all warfare, but it would limit it's scope considerably. It's a lot harder to keep desperate people suppressed when you can't just pick them off from 100 meters away.
When everyone has about the same weapons capability, there's a lot stronger incentive for leaders to make sure they're not TOO universally hated.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Look at the post I was replying to for context (generally a good idea in a discussion forum). You'll see that I was talking about another product that sells for $150.00.
Once you realize that, the rest of my post probably seems a lot different, eh>?
Re: (Score:1)
Another cheap method for killing microbes is just to fill PET bottles (old coke bottles) with the water and leave them in the sun for a couple of days, of course the UV light breaks down not just the nasties but the bottle itself eventually.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
I read that you can filter out e-coli or whatever common bacteria there was in water with a regular piece of cloth since the bacteria where grouped into bigger groups/particles.
Too lazy to try to find the magazine but maybe someone else know what I was supposed to talk about :D
Anyway, simple techniques can obviously be beneficial to, even if they won't solve all.
Re: (Score:2)
The filter in the article is just an ordinary active carbon filter. This [ted.com] is waaay better.
Cool piece of equipment. It's basically an RO filter. The pressure required for operation comes from the user pumping it up with an air pump. It's also small enough to take camping or on long hikes if you have a source of untrusted water nearby.
Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)
Eet's joost a waifer theen filter.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Wow! (Score:2)
It's almost as if someone invented a disposable Brita water filter!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
for cheaper too, so even if it worked as well as Brita, you'd still be saving money.
Re: (Score:1)
http://www.brita.com/intl/ [brita.com]
Funny how we (Sweden) are not on the list. Guess they know our tap water already is just fine (if you have your own well maybe less so.)
I've read about a few drops of Klorin (NaClO) is supposed to help to. Though not against chemicals or heavy metals and such.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Heh, funnily enough I prefer the taste of my mineralaceous tap water to stuff that's been filtered through a Brita.
Taste: there's no accounting for it.
Viruses.. (Score:2)
So, it removes bacteria, but what about viruses, dont they need UV or RO to be removed??
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Leave the bottle in the sun for six hours to kill them (use a transparent PET bottle).
Activated Charcoal (Score:1)
Its just a bag of activated charcoal. Great at filtering out larger organics, not so good with microbial life forms and minerals.
I bought "cassette tape" sized bags of activated charcoal for my tropical fish tanks in the 80s. Glad to see the technology reinvented.
I'm not sure any amount of AC can protect fish from nearby rotenone spraying, then again its very hard to prove that without the AC bags my fish would not have died, its not like I was about to tempt fate. Thus plenty of opportunity for psuedo-s
Small filter (Score:2, Insightful)
"We cover the tea bag material with nano-structured fibres, and instead of tea inside the tea bag, we incorporate activated carbon.
"The function of the activated carbon is to remove most of the dangerous chemicals that you would find in water."
1. It would have to be one shot - I don't see that little bag filtering more than one bottle.Wouldn't that little bit of carbon be exhausted after 500ml?
2. The pour rate would have to be really slow so that the water stays in contact with the carbon long enough to absorb the toxic stuff. Five minutes+ for a cup of water??
3. It doesn't say anything about metals.
Re:Small filter (Score:5, Insightful)
1. Yes, that's the point (might be a bit more than 500ml).
2. Not everybody is as impatient as you seem to be.
3. It's good old activated carbon again. There's plenty of info out there...
Re:Small filter (Score:4, Insightful)
2. The pour rate would have to be really slow so that the water stays in contact with the carbon long enough to absorb the toxic stuff. Five minutes+ for a cup of water??
5 minutes for water versus running to the toilet every 5 minutes. Good trade.
The Clorox solution (Score:2)
A doctor that I knew back in the '70s did volunteer work for the World Health Organization, and spent a lot of time in some god-awful places. He told me that they would use Clorox bleach to purify their water. One cap full for a bucket of water. It tasted terrible, but as for the alternative for an industrial scale case of diarrhea . . . it was the lesser of two evils.
So I wonder how cheap this gadget is compared to Clorox?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
The charcoal filter would be good to use *after* you sanitized the water with chlorine bleach. Kill off the biologicals and then get rid of the chlorine taste.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, what they really need is the west to stop subsidizing farm production, thus depressing world market prices. They need the west to stop dumping free food into their economies, thus depressing local market prices. They need a level playing field where they can finally fucking compete. Maybe then they'll be able to invest in improved infrastructure and other necessities.
Re: (Score:2)
Government corruption is so rampant that pretty trying to organize pretty much anything on a large scale will fail. The only way to help is to get in there where the normal people live and solve their daily problems (water, food...). Things will only improve when they've got some free time left over after the daily subsistence tasks for other stuff. Free time equals education and building.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Free time equals black-jack and hookers
Fixed that for you :)
Re: (Score:2)
Government corruption is so rampant that pretty trying to organize pretty much anything on a large scale will fail.
Correct. Which is why you need a fair market in which communities and individuals can actually participate, such that wealth can be injected at the bottom of the socioeconomic ladder, rather than relying on handouts that are funneled through corrupt regimes.
Things will only improve when they've got some free time left over after the daily subsistence tasks for other stuff. Free time equals edu
Re: (Score:1)
Of course we should subsidize it since that keeps us alive if things goes bad. If no-one wants to grow an excess of crops you're screwed if it does.
That's not the issue. The issue is that they don't. And that the excess is dumped there for prices they can't compete with.
But food is just one thing.
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah but China has started fixing that.
And they generate jobs for themselves while doing so.
Plus they get more people to sell and buy goods from.
Also are the west really "buying food for them" as much as "dumping food into their market for cheap because we got plenty to not risk a starvation, too bad they don't once the crop season goes bad in the western world"?
Re: (Score:2)
Also it doesn't make sense to spend millions on infrastructure when it will be destroyed in the next civil war... which will be next year.
Maybe we shouldn't be supplying warlords with weapons and ammunition... Oh we can't do that because then Communists/Islamists/Eurasia/Eastasia might take over the country!
Re: (Score:2)
I think the Chinese have already bought most of Africa anyway.
Re: (Score:1)
I think the Chinese have already bought most of Africa anyway.
Yeah, stupid China! Weird how financial and constructional help seem to be more popular than militarily one.
Re: (Score:2)
It's true that China have not invaded any parts of Africa. And I'm sure they never will, at least until they feel it's in their best interests to do so.
Coups-d'etat are more common than elections in Africa. When we see the president of Bongobongoland who signed a nice deal with the Chinese overthrown by someone who thinks he can sell the same stuff to someone else and stick the proceeds in an alpine bunker, then it'll get interesting [wikipedia.org]
P.S. I agree, Europe and the USA are equally bad and historically have be
Re: (Score:1)
Kenya was doing well until they had an election and proceded to burn the country.
Kinda like when you elected Bush as president? Twice! .. :D
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes but that solution doesn't remove any contaminants in the water; it only kills microbes.
The bleach will also break apart many kinds of contaminants, it won't remove heavy metals and whatnot, but I think bleach can break poisons.
Re: (Score:2)
The bleach will also break apart many kinds of contaminants, it won't remove heavy metals and whatnot, but I think bleach can break poisons.
Depends on the poison. Heavy metals like lead are unaffected by bleach as is arsenic. Both are known to be in groundwater whether naturally occurring or by pollution. It's often best to filter water before disinfecting it. Even then, bleach is only partially effective against common pathogens. From wikipedia: "Neither chlorine (e.g., bleach) nor iodine alone is considered completely effective against Cryptosporidium, although they are partially effective against Giardia".
Clorox was "different" in the 1970s ... (Score:3, Informative)
"Disinfection of Drinking Water (Potable)
Also, does this approach work from bacteria to virus to cryptosporidium? My understanding is that the old s
Clorox not effective against cryptosporidium? (Score:3, Informative)
"Results of the present study show for the first time that C. parvum oocysts exposed to undiluted laundry bleach for as long as 120 min are infectious for animals. Although bleach is widely used as a bacterial and viral disinfectant, the present findings indicate that under practical conditions it is not an effective disinfectant for C. parvum oocysts."
http://aem.asm.org/cgi/reprint/61/2/844.pdf [asm.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.vaccinationsguiden.se/vaccinationsguiden/vattenrening.asp [vaccinationsguiden.se]
Clear and lukewarm: 2 drops 4-6% / liter of water.
Murky or cold: 4 drops 4-6% / liter of water.
Shake and wait for at least 30 minutes.
Re: (Score:2)
There are basically two different types of treatment that work on two different types of microorganisms. Iodine and othe
Re: (Score:2)
One cap full for a bucket of water. It tasted terrible,
The water treatment guys screwed up. Chlorinated water shouldn't taste awful after purification, certainly not even as bad as swimming pool water. The "art" of chlorination is to use just enough hypochlorite to oxidize all the microbial life, anything over and above that is wasting supplies, aim for the "faintest taste of chlorine". Also you can aerate the water, just pouring it from cup to cup for a few minutes will help noticeably. Storing treated water after Cl dissipates will allow whatever was grow
Re: (Score:1)
How can it grow if everything is sterile to begin with?
Re: (Score:1)
I think the chlorine taste may disappear by itself if you let the water sit for long enough (with ventilation that is)
No?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
One of the hats I wear is that of an emergency water engineer in disasters, conflicts and other public health emergencies. I've worked all over Africa, SE Asia and now the Caribbean.
One cap of chlorox is beyond excessive and detrimental to anyone who would drink it. Bleach to chlorinate water is okay in an truly urgent situation but is not an idea solution.
Your question implies that your understanding is that filtering versus chlorination are processes that are exclusive of the other. In almost every sit
These have been around (Score:1, Interesting)
http://www.campmor.com/aquamira-water-bottle-filter-kit.shtml?source=CI&ci_src=14110944&ci_sku=25674WC
For example, is what I have had for years to take backpacking. And they aren't even expensive. I guess I don't see how this is innovative.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, it can go in *any* bottle, rather than needing a special bottle, meaning that you don't need to worry about losing your special bottle in areas where social stability is ephemeral at best. So a filter that can go in any old bottle you have laying around, and can be made cheaply, and is small, yes, is innovative. Sometimes it's not about function, it's about form.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
It gets rid of those liberal microbes.
Yeah, but does it work? (Score:2)
I don't know about the "nano-fibers", though I've gotten to be suspicious of "nano" as a meaningless marketing term like "cyber" was ten years ago, but activated carbon's efficacy as a filter depends on how long it is kept in contact with the water, which is why those pricey tap filters are generally a waste of money. It's probably better than nothing if you're drinking water out of a stream or lake, but I'd be genuinely surprised if it was much better than nothing.
"tea bag" means single use (Score:2, Informative)
Better article [scienceinafrica.co.za] says:
The inside of the tea bag material is coated with a thin film of biocides encapsulated within minute nanofibres, which kills all disease-causing microbes.
The bag is filled not with tea leaves but with active carbon granules that remove all harmful chemicals, for instance endocrine disruptors.
Each "tea bag" filter can clean one litre of the most polluted water to the point where it is 100% safe to drink.
Once used, the bag is thrown away, and a new one is i
Tea bag, except you don't use it like one (Score:1, Insightful)
my BS detector went wild (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I agree. I've seen many of the water purification straws which make a claim of making water safe but they never back it up with independent testing. These do have reams of association approvals and testimonials but no testing. I found and tried one that made claims of being tested by the military and that it had reams of testing done. I found that with great effort it worked for about two liters and then clogged and was useless. I didn't have to pay for it and didn't bother trying one again.
I have bought o
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's a filter with washable inlet filter, charcoal filter then a ceramic block. I've abused it and the brand name and product name are gone, sorry. I remember the process I used to find it but don't recall who I bought it from or what the brand name is.
You can google Individual Water Purifier mil spec and look for ones that are issued to troops. I was in error on having an NSN being enough and someone I know berated me for that.
You should request information from them such as "What military specifications d
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's close, I don't see any prefiltering but it has a ceramic filter which does all the work. I'd trust that if the British military uses it though I would want another filter for unclear water. I like the system farther down it can produce enough for a small group and the price is good. It would also need something to pre-filter unclear water unless I'm misreading it.
Re: (Score:2)
You can get these and GNC (Score:1)
Just how little does it cost? (Score:2)
"Half the cost of anything else out there" is very nice, but doesn't tell us much. Wandering around the web, I find the lowest (retail) cost to be around $.50/gallon for single packaged filters. (Which will obviously be considerably lower in bulk and/or multi-packaged.)
can I get a few larger ones? (Score:2)
I wonder if a similar principal could be used to purify water after an oil spill?
Thats too bad (Score:1, Flamebait)
Since tea baggers can't filter bullshit, I image this causing a lot of e-coli spreading.
Comment removed (Score:3, Informative)
PET bottle + sun (Score:1)
But then what about: the possible heavy metals, nasty chemicals, and what if there is no roof, and if it rains the whole week, can you wait a week,
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
and does not make inappropriate sexual comments about Tea Partygoers.
I thought Teabaggers were all for restoring the rights given by the constitution, regardless as to whether what's being said doesn't agree with their worldview?
Oh, sorry, I got caught up in theory and rhetoric.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, theory and rhetoric often clash with reality.
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Wrong! Teabaggers are just another radical religeo/political movement that uses misinformation and outright lies to influence an ignorant public and gain members and momentum.
Recall the recent Beck rally on the steps of the Lincoln memorial.
WARNING SIGN: Beck states "religion and christianity have returned to America"
Same old christian coalition bullshit, different wrapper: "Separation of church and state is a luxury we can
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
Yes, the whole point of the TEA party is to give other people a group to demonize so that they won't turn on people in power. In two years when the presidency is up again there will be a ton of conservatives spouting TEA party lines to get elected. The people who really believe in minimalistic government and a return to the constitution won't be found in the media or any mainstream political party. Everyone in the "middle" just wants more control over us. When you vote democrat or republican all you're doin
Re: (Score:2)
Too bad politics and life today is nothing short of stupidity in action.
I have little faith we will be able to free ourselves from the slime that encumbers us these days.
Those in power keep the masses in ignorance and darkness. Very effective method of control
Re: (Score:2)
Vote for someone who cares! Basic Campfire for President 2012!
Re: (Score:2)
not an USian here: if i am not mistaken Tea Party came to life as a result of grassroot efforts tied to the Ron Paul's presidential campaign of 2008 in rep party. Originally it was about returning to the strict constitutionalism - nothing more, nothing less.
Now it becomes a sad caricature of its former self as Palins and Becks, seeing the growing discontent among masses and TP's numbers, decided to steal the momentum of the movement. They hijacked it for their own goals, twisting the founding principles.
It'
Re: (Score:2)
Politics today is nothing short of organized crime.
Actually it's pro wrestling for grownups. [amazingsuperpowers.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Not quite, they are in favor of restoring the rights they like from the constitution, and then removing the first, 14th, and any other ammendments they don't like, and placing a wonderful totalitarian theocracy on top of it, rewriting our history, fucking all of the poor people until they live in tent cities or just flat out die, eliminating our education system and making church mandatory, and eliminating all non-christian thinking, as according to them it is a lie from the pit of hell.
Also, they plan to d
Re: (Score:2)
i see a hole in your logic. How can there be a totalitarian state with a constitutionally limited government with majority of powers delegated to the states and with no public education brainwashing the masses? and how on earth the US survived the 19th century? There were no centralized education systems, no social security and no mandatory health insurance, no federal reserve micromanaging the economy.
Re: (Score:2)
If my logic had a tiny hole, yours is a supermassive black hole.
How can the government brainwash a large number of people? They don't, Fox news does, and then takes over the government. To be fair they weren't the government when they brainwashed people by somehow convincing them that all of the false shit they say (literally, take notes for fox for 5 minutes, then fact check what they say. It is all bullshit pretty much, I do this when I want to get angry and pumped). Also, I believe public education ne
Re: (Score:2)
"I thought Teabaggers were all for restoring the rights given by the constitution, regardless as to whether what's being said doesn't agree with their worldview?"
That would conflict with being the same Religious Right who Karl Rove so brilliantly exploited in the past. Rove is mostly out of the current game, but it's being played by very capable (and rich) people.
Unwitting and very earnest sock puppets are still sock puppets:
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_mayer [newyorker.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Not sure what the Jehovah's Witness does for their worship or belief, with exception they are always there to knock on my door during dinner and hand me some crap declaring how much better the world is getting with each passing day.
Most Seventh Day Adventists however actually attend a traditional protestant church service. The difference is they observe the original "Seventh Day Sabbath" hence the name, as the Jewish faith does. There are NO s
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
There are NO similarities though between Seventh Day Adventists and Jehovah's Witness's.
They both worship the god of Abraham.
Re: (Score:2)
Reality has a well known liberal bias.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I suppose the only problems would be the fuel (wood and other biofuel consumption would suddenly take a hike), training (operating the still), and maintenance (cleaning the crud out).
Materials, portability, scalability, possibility of being used by small children, safety of use, etc.
They're looking for something they can airdrop on refugees.
Re: (Score:2)
Another advantage over boiling water that I can think of is that these filters cannot (easily) be used for anything else. If you need firewood/fuel to sterilize your water, you might face the choice of either the meat or the water being raw when you have limited fuel (or more likely porridge of some sort will take the fuel, since meat is a luxury). This filter makes the water pure, making the fuel available for other things by default.
Re: (Score:2)
"They're looking for something they can airdrop on refugees."
Ouch.