New water borne disease surfaces....

Mark Eatherton

The local station kept putting teasers out on TV last night, and I kept telling my wife it sounded exactly like Legionaires disease. Turns out it is similar, but not the same.



The real sad thing about this was, that in the printed article, the best solution was to turn the water heater up to 140 degrees F, but the reporter neglected to say this on camera.



If people really knew what grew in their potable water pipes, they'd probably never drink it again. And our country is MUCH better than most...



<a href="http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/29608363/detail.html">http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/29608363/detail.html</a>



The comments are just flat plain ridiculous. It's real funny until you contract it yourself, and then it becomes a life and death scenario real fast. I'm luck to be alive...



ME

Jean-David Beyer

I hope I do not sound argumentative.

I wonder about the benefit of running the hot water at elevated temperatures, such as 140F. Not that this will not kill a lot of the bacteria in the tank. I believe it will; though perhaps not all of them. But after the hot water leaves the tank, gets its temperature reduced by the tempering valve, and then sits stagnant in the distribution pipes, will not the bacteria grow in those pipes? I do not happen to use hot water to drink, nor do I use it for cooking. If I thought all those bacteria came in from the water company, killing them off in the heater tank would be a good idea. But if even one gets past the heater, they can colonize my distribution piping. Even if I had no tempering valve at the output of the heater, but had one at each tap, this would only reduce the problem unless I recirculated at 140F, which in my case would be impossible. Idiot contractor who built the house ran most of the water pipes embedded in the concrete slab.



So when the money tree blooms and I can get a tempering valve put in after my indirect, how do I keep the distribution pipes in sterile condition?

Gordan

I doubt that sterility is achievable

Reducing bacterial population, however, should be. Hot water pipes don't stay hot for very long once flow has stopped. Once they cool down, the ideal growth environment for the nasties should no longer exist. Contrast this with a tank which is maintained in the ideal (for them) temperature range.

njwebdevguy

Biofilms

The biggest problems in water systems come from mixed microbial communities that loosely fall under the category of "biofilms". As opposed to "planktonic" organisms, the biofilms adhere to the sides of whatever they live in and one another making them very difficult to eliminate as chemicals do not penetrate into the fiilms well. Mycobacteria and some other organisms also can become resistant to disinfectants.



Some disinfectants and drugs actually help them by eliminating their competition.



If any of that kind of stuff interests you, a good place to find out more is PubMed. Its free, surprisingly entertaining, and an amazing resource on health-or-science-related anything.



Here is an example search on "biofilm+water"



http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=biofilm+water

Gordy

Doing what you can

 To reduce the population is what is most important. While you will never completley eliminate the bacteria. You can put a serious hurt on it. This can be done by the 140* plus tank temp.



 Do the mixing at the shower, tub, or sink faucet. This will allow the pipes to get the hottest water possible verses mixing down at the tank. I know no one wants to spend big money on new thermostatic valves for their showers, but a shower is where the highest probability is of inhaling the nasties in the mist.



Gordy

Mark Eatherton

Up hill battle...

The utility companies are telling people to turn it DOWN, the LP suppliers are telling people to turn it DOWN, in fact everyone but myself and a few other educated people are telling everyone to turn it down.



I get the impression that lawyers have more sway than epidemiologists in this country....



I say, TURN IT UP and INSTALL AN ANTISCALD MIXNG VALVE...



Still fighting the battle...



ME

lchmb

your

not alone Mark...I keep pushing mixing valves and higher temps...

Mark Eatherton

Thanks for fighting the good fight...

and spreading the word as well.



ME

Jean-David Beyer

I think you are right, but ...

"I know no one wants to spend big money on new thermostatic valves for their showers"



I would love to put one of those valves in, and am willing to pay for a 2-stage valve to do it; one with a pressure balancer followed by a thermo regulator. I have one of those in my darkroom and it holds +|- 1F if I keep the flow above 1/2 g.p.m. I had a plumber in here to quote on replacing a toilet and a wash basin, and asked what it would cost to replace my (no longer code) three valve shower controls. He said he cold not do it because he would have to rip out the tile wall to get access to the pipes (they cannot be accessed from beneath (in slab) or behind. So I would need to replace all the tiles in the bathroom wall as well. And if I were to do that, I would want to replace the 60 year old bathtub at the same time.



I wish it were just a matter of putting in a tempering valve after the hot water heater and dialing up the heater's temperature. Being a curious nut, I would have three thermometers plumbed in to measure the hot and cold water temperature going in, and the mixed water coming out. Maybe I do not need one to measure the cold.