This is an archival version of the original KnowledgePoint website.

Interactive features have been disabled and some pages and links have been removed.

Visit the new KnowledgePoint website at https://www.knowledgepoint.org.

 

Revision history [back]

click to hide/show revision 1
initial version
John Cody gravatar image
RedR

The purpose of including the silver in the ceramic filter is that it has an anti-bacterial action, it kills bacteria on contact. This increases the effectiveness of the filter against diarroheal diseases above that which could be expected from purely mechanical filtration, which relaxes quality control and tolerances required during the ceramic manufacture process.If chlorinated water is passed through the filter then the result will be the silver will be stripped from the ceramics. This will result in a reduction in the effectiveness of the filter in removing pathogens. If the water has been effectively chlorinated this will not be a problem, as pathogens will have been destroyed prior to filtration. According to the WHO Water Drinking Water Quality Guidelines there is insufficient data available to derive health based guideline values for water. However the guidelines do state that a concentration of 0.1 mg/L could be consumed over 70 years without adverse impact on human health. (pg. 434, https://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/GDW12rev1and2.pdf?ua=1 ) The concentration of silver in the water will obviously depend on the concentration of the chlorine, the amount of silver initially present and the form of the silver in the ceramics. This will also determine how long it will take for the silver in the ceramics to be depleted/removed.The WASH Cluster should consider the following questions:Why is there a need to chlorinate the water when ceramic filters with an anti-bacteriological agent incorporated are being supplied? The only benefit that is likely to accrue from the addition of chlorine to the process is prevention of post collection and treatment disinfection due to the residual chlorine. If the filters are being used correctly, and the WASH agencies are providing effective training and hygiene promotion on the safe water chain and the correct use of the filters, then the risk of post collection or post treatment contamination should be negligible. The benefit of the residual chlorine is also questionable, as the effectiveness of the residual chlorine as a disinfectant reduces with time. In high ambient temperatures the residual effect will probably have quite a short lifespan.Why chlorinate the water pre-filtration? If the turbidity is high enough to interfere with the effectiveness of Chlorine as a disinfectant (a tubidity of < 1 NTU should be the target when a pre-treatment process stage such as flocculation & coagulation is incorporated in the treatment process)? The Sphere standard guideline value of <5 NTU is intended for use in the initial stages of an emergency. From the description given the the WHO Water Quality Guidelines guideline values for turbidity and effective disinfection would be more appropriate target in this context.It may be preferable in these circumstances for the WASH Cluster to consider increasing retention time in the process, by providing additional storage (point of collection, household etc), rather than chlorinating. If chlorination is deemed absolutely necessary then a strategy based on using point of use (POU) chlorination, following filtration using the ceramic filters may be most appropriate.The formation of chlorine by-products (CBP's) such as THM's is most likely if there are organics in the water. Thus the risks associated with CBP's is likely be greatest from the pond water sources. Again this risk is likely to be greatly reduced, or negligible if the water is chlorinated following filtration (or simple storage for 24 hours). The presence of THM's does not present an acute health risk. In the face of a risk of an AWD outbreak the best approach would be to chlorinate, and ignore the possiblity of CBP's. Of greatest concern here is that the presence of CBP's may render the treated water unpalatable, causing people to prefer water from untreated sources. This can occur at quite low concentrations of chlorine, as the water will smell and taste like a disinfectant.Based on the description then potentially the best strategy would be:Chlorinate bulk water supplies to provide residual disinfection through distribution networks. In this case the initial dosage of chlorine should be high enough to provide a 0.2-0.5 mg/L concentration at the tap. This will depend on the state of the system, leaks and points of ingress and the presence of organics in the network itself. Water entering the networks should have a turbidity of < 1 NTU prior to chlorination, which will require pre-treatment. This would probably entail coagulation and flocculation (Oxfam produces kits for coagulation and flocculation based around their storage tanks. Details for these can be found in the Oxfam Equipment Catalog;Providing filters and additional storage to users not being supplied by the bulk distribution networks;Where residual disinfection is felt to be critical (e.g. users not supplied with ceramic filters) provide POU chlorine products;Target users of ponds as priority for receiving ceramic filters;Budget for a minimum three months of hygiene promotion on the safe water chain and the use of any Point of Use Treatment products (Ceramic filters, Chlorine, combined coagulants and disinfection products) Ideally this needs to begin prior to a response;Plan bucket chlorination activities as a contingency in the event of an AWD outbreak for users collecting water from the wells. If budgets allow these should be the second priority users for receiving ceramic filters);M&E Activities on the effective use of the supplied products should be a continuous process;Provide capacity to store water for at least 24 hours (based on litres per person per day target and the number of members of the household);Hope this helpsJohn Cody------ Original Message ------From: admin@knowledgepoint.orgTo: extcody@yahoo.co.uk

click to hide/show revision 2
No.2 Revision
KnowledgePointAdmin gravatar image
RedR CCDRR

The purpose of including the silver in the ceramic filter is that it has an anti-bacterial action, it kills bacteria on contact. This increases the effectiveness of the filter against diarroheal diseases above that which could be expected from purely mechanical filtration, which relaxes quality control and tolerances required during the ceramic manufacture process.If process.

If chlorinated water is passed through the filter then the result will be the silver will be stripped from the ceramics. This will result in a reduction in the effectiveness of the filter in removing pathogens. If the water has been effectively chlorinated this will not be a problem, as pathogens will have been destroyed prior to filtration. According to the WHO Water Drinking Water Quality Guidelines there is insufficient data available to derive health based guideline values for water.

However the guidelines do state that a concentration of 0.1 mg/L could be consumed over 70 years without adverse impact on human health. (pg. 434, https://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/GDW12rev1and2.pdf?ua=1 )

The concentration of silver in the water will obviously depend on the concentration of the chlorine, the amount of silver initially present and the form of the silver in the ceramics. This will also determine how long it will take for the silver in the ceramics to be depleted/removed.The depleted/removed.

The WASH Cluster should consider the following questions:Why questions:

Why is there a need to chlorinate the water when ceramic filters with an anti-bacteriological agent incorporated are being supplied? supplied? The only benefit that is likely to accrue from the addition of chlorine to the process is prevention of post collection and treatment disinfection due to the residual chlorine. If the filters are being used correctly, and the WASH agencies are providing effective training and hygiene promotion on the safe water chain and the correct use of the filters, then the risk of post collection or post treatment contamination should be negligible. The benefit of the residual chlorine is also questionable, as the effectiveness of the residual chlorine as a disinfectant reduces with time. In high ambient temperatures the residual effect will probably have quite a short lifespan.Why lifespan.

Why chlorinate the water pre-filtration? pre-filtration? If the turbidity is high enough to interfere with the effectiveness of Chlorine as a disinfectant (a tubidity of < 1 NTU should be the target when a pre-treatment process stage such as flocculation & coagulation is incorporated in the treatment process)? The Sphere standard guideline value of <5 NTU is intended for use in the initial stages of an emergency. From the description given the the WHO Water Quality Guidelines guideline values for turbidity and effective disinfection would be more appropriate target in this context.It context.

It may be preferable in these circumstances for the WASH Cluster to consider increasing retention time in the process, by providing additional storage (point of collection, household etc), rather than chlorinating. If chlorination is deemed absolutely necessary then a strategy based on using point of use (POU) chlorination, following filtration using the ceramic filters may be most appropriate.The appropriate.

The formation of chlorine by-products (CBP's) such as THM's is most likely if there are organics in the water. Thus the risks associated with CBP's is likely be greatest from the pond water sources. Again this risk is likely to be greatly reduced, or negligible if the water is chlorinated following filtration (or simple storage for 24 hours). The presence of THM's does not present an acute health risk. In the face of a risk of an AWD outbreak the best approach would be to chlorinate, and ignore the possiblity of CBP's. Of greatest concern here is that the presence of CBP's may render the treated water unpalatable, causing people to prefer water from untreated sources. This can occur at quite low concentrations of chlorine, as the water will smell and taste like a disinfectant.Based disinfectant.

Based on the description then potentially the best strategy would be:Chlorinate be:

  • Chlorinate bulk water supplies to provide residual disinfection through distribution networks. In this case the initial dosage of chlorine should be high enough to provide a 0.2-0.5 mg/L concentration at the tap. This will depend on the state of the system, leaks and points of ingress and the presence of organics in the network itself. Water entering the networks should have a turbidity of < 1 NTU prior to chlorination, which will require pre-treatment. This would probably entail coagulation and flocculation (Oxfam produces kits for coagulation and flocculation based around their storage tanks. Details for these can be found in the Oxfam Equipment Catalog;Providing Catalog;

  • Providing filters and additional storage to users not being supplied by the bulk distribution networks;Where networks;

  • Where residual disinfection is felt to be critical (e.g. users not supplied with ceramic filters) provide POU chlorine products;Target products;

  • Target users of ponds as priority for receiving ceramic filters;Budget filters;

  • Budget for a minimum three months of hygiene promotion on the safe water chain and the use of any Point of Use Treatment products (Ceramic filters, Chlorine, combined coagulants and disinfection products) products). Ideally this needs to begin prior to a response;Plan response;

  • Plan bucket chlorination activities as a contingency in the event of an AWD outbreak for users collecting water from the wells. If budgets allow these should be the second priority users for receiving ceramic filters);M&E filters);

  • M&E Activities on the effective use of the supplied products should be a continuous process;Provide process;

  • Provide capacity to store water for at least 24 hours (based on litres per person per day target and the number of members of the household);Hope household).

Hope this helpsJohn Cody------ Original Message ------From: admin@knowledgepoint.orgTo: extcody@yahoo.co.uk

helps

John Cody