View Full Version : Does anybody just boil drinking water?
I was considering trying to boil my water, as apposed to using some kind of
expensive filter things. I don’t like the Iodine or Potable Aqua.
I have a GSI pinnacle soloist that came with a 1L bag that doubles as a bucket.
I was thinking I could haul my full bucket back to camp, boil it, strain it for any flotees as it goes into my bottle. I will be using a Beer can stove & windscreen and should have enough fuel to do everything I need. I do plan to bring some Potable Aqua as a back up.
What do you think, I’m I trying to be Too “Old school”?
white_russian
04-25-2010, 18:25
Do you really want to break out the stove for the mid day fill up?
garlic08
04-25-2010, 18:42
You might find the fuel requirements to be excessive, as well.
bullseye
04-25-2010, 18:43
It can be done, but it'll get old fast;).
shelterbuilder
04-25-2010, 18:43
White Russian has the right idea.
Now, there's nothing wrong with boiling your drinking water - that's how you make "sterile" water anywhere in the world. But it is time-and-fuel-consuming, and THAT'S the drawback.
However, if you have the fuel to do it, and the time to bring your water to a boil AND let it cool down enough so that it won't melt your water bag/bottle or burn your fingers and lips, then go for it.
HYOH.
bullseye
04-25-2010, 18:44
Not only that, but when it's hot out and you just want a cool drink..........
Amigi'sLastStand
04-25-2010, 18:56
Just use a filter. They are light, cheap and most importantly, they work.
On a canoe trip on a muddy river (too thick to drink, too thin to plow), I was told that the simple way was to boil and then pour of the clear water after it had settled. Boiling coagulated most of the silt and clay. However, it used a lot of fuel. I wouldn't try it with alcohol or cartridge fuel. It worked ok with an MSR Whisperlite, because the fuel came by the litre and was cheap. It also worked with wood fire. But note that I was on a canoe trip. I only had to carry the fuel over the odd portage.
I was considering trying to boil my water, as apposed to using some kind of
expensive filter things. I don’t like the Iodine or Potable Aqua.
~
Disadvantages:
1. It takes a lot of time to boil several liters of water.
2. It takes a lot of fuel to boil several liters of water.
3. It takes a long time for boiling water to cool enough to be refreshing on a hot day.
3. If you boil, you're likely to carry more water because while you're in "production mode", you may want to boil enough water for the whole day. More water means more weight in your pack.
4. Depending on your container, the hot water may pick-up the taste of plastic. Who knows if this is a health risk.
If you decide to boil, consider a wood burning stove. You'll save a bundle on fuel costs.
If your motivation for boiling is that you don't like the taste of chemical treatments, there are other options.
1. Filter
2. UV sterilization
3. Be selective where you collect water and don't treat it
springerfever
04-25-2010, 21:16
give Aquamira a try.............no taste, super light-weight.
MapleLeaf
04-25-2010, 21:31
Meh...do what works best for you...I'm a filter gal myself. There's less waiting : P
Uncle Cranky
04-25-2010, 21:55
What your thinking IS old school and best done base camping. I did hear of a guy using a wood fire to boil his water in beer cans at the end of the day at the shelter then leaving them overnight to cool for the next day.
Slo-go'en
04-25-2010, 22:43
Boiled water doesn't taste all that great either. Unless you add flavoring. Get a filter for the few times you run into questionable water.
Thanks everybody for the replies.
I did hear of a guy using a wood fire to boil his water in beer cans at the end of the day at the shelter then leaving them overnight to cool for the next day.
That is kind of what I was thinking of doing it at the end of the day, but the more I think about it I’m not so sure. For this trip I will only be out 2 weeks.
Everything I know about filters are the price tags I see at rei. So what would be a good one for someone who’s gear budget is getting pretty low?
...Everything I know about filters are the price tags I see at rei. So what would be a good one for someone who’s gear budget is getting pretty low?
I just got one of these:
http://www.sportsmansguide.com/net/cb/cb.aspx?a=455792
I haven't tried it out as of yet; the price isn't all that bad.
It might fit the bill for you. :sun
One way to split the difference would be if you make food that doesn't need to actually go in the pot (i.e., freeze-dried, zip-loc cooking, oatmeal, hot chocolate), to just boil some extra water and let the rest cool down overnight. We did that once on our first trip and it worked pretty well. I have heard from one person who took the remaining water from meals actually cooked in the pot and used them to make his apres-dinner cocoa. Whether this would taste good or not, I don't know. :-?
How you handle water treatment depends a lot on what bad stuff you expect to find in the water you will have to use. Here in the US, filtering is usually adequate. In foreign countries, you may need to add virus treatment to basic filtering.
First, let me put in a suggestion for your original plan of just boiling. All the drawbacks are already mentioned. But, if you are taking a white gas stove, are not an ultralight packer, and don't mind thinking ahead, you may find this will be your best choice. And you will not have to buy or carry anything you do not have already.
Walmart and Cabela's carry plastic squeeze bottles (Sawyer?) with internal filters for about thirty dollars. One of these might be enough to get you through the times you can't boil your water or need a quick drink.
For a two week trip, you might also use tablets as a primary or backup treatment method. They are expensive for a long trip though and the drops would be a long term choice. I think the aqua mira tablets are tasteless.
If you want to filter, consider a gravity filter. You don't need the fancy bags. Just buy the in-line filter and some tubing to connect the filter between two soda bottles. There are several designs here at WB to show you how others have done this. My in-line filter goes between two platys and is simple and easy.
For a regular filter you want it to be field cleanable and easy to use. I have a Hyperflow and have had no problems with it though others have had trouble with the old models. I still carry some tablets as a backup.
Hope your two weeks out is awsome.
Just to stir the pot a bit more, if you want to sterilize the water, you need to boil for about ten minutes to kill everything. Even more on a big mountain. That means two things: more fuel, bigger pot to compensate for what you evaporate (a lid helps a lot). If you do it once a day, you also need more capacity for a full day of water. All of which makes your kit heavier, including a whole day's water to carry each morning. This makes more sense in the Winter.
Tennessee Viking
04-26-2010, 00:56
Other than burning lots of fuel and taking a lot of time, boiled water is just not one of the best tasting things. Try out AquaMira, if thats not your thing. Go filter. Then some go all natural, and drink straight from the source. But just be knowledgeable of your sources.
I was considering trying to boil my water, as apposed to using some kind of
expensive filter things. I don’t like the Iodine or Potable Aqua.
I have a GSI pinnacle soloist that came with a 1L bag that doubles as a bucket.
I was thinking I could haul my full bucket back to camp, boil it, strain it for any flotees as it goes into my bottle. I will be using a Beer can stove & windscreen and should have enough fuel to do everything I need. I do plan to bring some Potable Aqua as a back up.
What do you think, I’m I trying to be Too “Old school”?
You will need a lot of fuel to boil water for everyday use (or a lot of time to build fires, which aren't legal along the AT in some states.
Plus, boiled water isn't too refreshing when it's hot out,
Takes a long time to cool in hot weather,
and tastes, well, not too good.
Wolf - 23000
04-26-2010, 02:13
Back in 1990 there was a guy name John the Baptist who when he first started in Georgia was extremely worried about drinking bad water. He first put Iodine tablets in his water, then filtered his water to make it taste better and finally boiled his water. I saw him again in VT he gave up his worries and just dipped his cup in the water and drank.
My point being, almost no one does the whole trail boiling water. It simply is not practical to boil about 3 gallons of water to drink/cook with a day. You would use up a lot of fuel and carry a lot of extra unnecessary water weight.
Wolf
bigcranky
04-26-2010, 07:09
The Katadyn Hiker filter is light, easy to use, and not too too expensive. They can be found on sale for around $60 pretty often.
But for no-fuss, inexpensive treatment, the Aqua Mira drops have worked for me. Love 'em. A $13 package lasts me a year of hiking, paddling, etc.
If you put some coffee in the boiling water it will taste much better.;)
I will second whoever said boiled water tastes bad.
Fiddleback
04-26-2010, 11:23
Boiling water has an off taste...the usual recommendation is to aerate it, pouring it back and forth. Just one more reason why I didn't like boiling water. For me there were two big downsides...waiting for the water to cool so I could 1) pour it into a canteen and/or, 2) not having a wonderfully cold drink in the heat and humidity of an Appalachian summer.
If you don't like chemicals and filters are too pricey, check out a Bota filter bottle. They cost $12-$18 depending where you find 'em and their stats on filter effectiveness are virtually identical to the more common filters. I have two; one weighs 4oz and holds 22oz, the other weighs 5oz and holds 24oz. http://www.botaofboulder.com/
I like the convenience...at anytime I can dip the bottle into a water source and drink. Usually I rely on the Bota while hiking down the trail and use a ClO2 treatment in camp when I'm going through larger amounts of water. Some have criticized the amount of 'squeeze' one has to exert to get a good flow of water but it's not seemed difficult to me.
FB
2 weeks: Aquamira drops, Aquamira Frontier Pro, boil water.
longer use: substitute Sawyer in-line water filter.
I boil water, at night. I reserve some, soaking musli cereal and dried fruit overnight. If no water in camp (I picked up the water after mid-day) I add equivalent of Wyler's lemonade or put a lemondrop in my mouth to improve the taste of the boiled water.
Avoid scorching the cooking pot: it forever taints the taste of boiled water.
If you melt snow, have some water in the bottom to avoid scorching the pot with the snow.
That said, it isn't really necessary to have a rolling boil. Look up WAPI online: 165 F.
One WAPI online webpage has a nice chart of the point the pathogens are killed: http://www.solarsolutions.info/main.html?main=educationalright.html
Finally, learn to indications the water is likely to be safe to drink, then look upstream for dead animals: one dead animal can ruin the watersource, unless cleared and run fresh over time. It is a real risk. Even if filtering, do not take surface water from standing water. Take water below the surface. Like that.
Boiling murky water, like he said, and let it stand. A little alum will settle solids out of water.
Now, you can go just about anywhere except down the water table from a mining operation, some manufacturing plant or drink water anywhere near a pulp mill. I also would not take water from a source near a road.
Snowleopard
04-26-2010, 12:24
I just got one of these:
http://www.sportsmansguide.com/net/cb/cb.aspx?a=455792
I haven't tried it out as of yet; the price isn't all that bad.
It might fit the bill for you. :sun
The Aquamira® Frontier Pro filter just eliminates things bigger than 3 microns. I think that filters out giardia and cryptosporidium but lets some bacteria through. I think it's intended to be used WITH aquamira chemicals -- the filter takes out the giardia and the chemicals take out the bacteria.
Boiling is probably the safest method unless there are poisonous chemicals in the water. As others have said, it tastes flat, takes lots of fuel etc.. Also, as said above, you don't need to bring it to boiling, 70 or 80C for a few minutes probably does it.
Just to stir the pot a bit more, if you want to sterilize the water, you need to boil for about ten minutes to kill everything.
Not true. Everything that is harmful is dead by the time the water reaches 190 degrees, though I always let it get to a rolling boil. Milk is pastureized at even lower temperatures.
On my long walk, I boiled all suspect water -- usually each evening. Once the boiled water sloshes around in your pack for a few miles it taste the same as unboiled water. The sloshing adds back the oxygen the boiling drives out.
I used a wood-burning zip stove as the lightest and least expensive solution for cooking and drinking water. The Zip is heavier than a tin can alcohol stove plus fuel. But throw in the weight of a filter and Zip wins the weight contest easily for those of us who prefer not to be drinking death dealing chemical poisons every day for six months.
I know. "Purists" will disagree. They can't stand a little soot on the outside of their pots.
Weary
"Purists" will disagree. They can't stand a little soot on the outside of their pots.
Weary
I'm as pure as freshly fallen snow and take offense to your post because reducing combustibles by responsible hikers around inaccessible shelters is desirable!
Hey, Weary,
The problem with fixing temperatures to positively kill everything is the dwell time. That's the difference between pasteurizing and high temperature sterilizing. The former holds milk (food) at a lower temperature for a longer time. The latter goes to a higher temperature under pressure for a short time. These industrial processes have to be very well controlled to be guaranteed effective. This just doesn't happen on the trail. For instance, to heat water to a temperature below a rolling boil does not ensure that ALL of the water has reached that temperature, owing to lack of mixing. The magic of a rolling boil is the violent agitation, which mixes all water and ensures a true 212 degree temperature throughout.
I think it's the same with all so-called sterilization or purification methods. No-one on the trail is going to do them well enough to guarantee that all pathogens have been eliminated, killed or disabled. Even when the pathogens are gone, there is the question of chemicals like pesticides, herbicides, agricultural junk and industrial runoff. Carbon filters are supposed to get some of these, but I don't think any single system can be well enough controlled on the trail to be certainly effective. One problem is the the infection pathway is probably more commonly a bypass of the purification route.
Where I am, the problems of greatest concern are probably owing to agricultural activity, as this place is the breadbasket of Canada. So my major concern is pesticides and herbicides, mixed with E coli and related num nums. There have been a few celebrated cases of such contamination of municipal water supplies, and we can be reasonably certain the surface runoff is contaminated in much of the farmland.
Ok, that's the down side. The up side is that most of the water that looks good enough to drink is unlikely to kill you, unless some transparent, odorless, tasteless contaminant is present. The sketchy pools are probably not as bad as they look, and a few insect larvae are unlikely to do more than give you a transient bellyache. And so on. So you can probably get away with a lot on the AT, and no-one will know what caused their minor upsets. All you can say about filtering, etc., is that any of the common systems will probably reduce your exposure somewhat, if you run into a bug or contaminant that is effectively dealt with by that method. But no method is 100%, and some people (well, LW anyway) get away with nothing. His water probably mixes with the alcohol in his belly anyway. Why has no-one suggested just mixing their water with their favorite libation, anyway? It would be amusing to see all the thrus weaving their way down the trail...
Hey, Weary,
The problem with fixing temperatures to positively kill everything is the dwell time. That's the difference between pasteurizing and high temperature sterilizing. The former holds milk (food) at a lower temperature for a longer time. The latter goes to a higher temperature under pressure for a short time. These industrial processes have to be very well controlled to be guaranteed effective. This just doesn't happen on the trail. For instance, to heat water to a temperature below a rolling boil does not ensure that ALL of the water has reached that temperature, owing to lack of mixing. The magic of a rolling boil is the violent agitation, which mixes all water and ensures a true 212 degree temperature throughout.
I think it's the same with all so-called sterilization or purification methods. No-one on the trail is going to do them well enough to guarantee that all pathogens have been eliminated, killed or disabled. Even when the pathogens are gone, there is the question of chemicals like pesticides, herbicides, agricultural junk and industrial runoff. Carbon filters are supposed to get some of these, but I don't think any single system can be well enough controlled on the trail to be certainly effective. One problem is the the infection pathway is probably more commonly a bypass of the purification route.
Where I am, the problems of greatest concern are probably owing to agricultural activity, as this place is the breadbasket of Canada. So my major concern is pesticides and herbicides, mixed with E coli and related num nums. There have been a few celebrated cases of such contamination of municipal water supplies, and we can be reasonably certain the surface runoff is contaminated in much of the farmland.
Ok, that's the down side. The up side is that most of the water that looks good enough to drink is unlikely to kill you, unless some transparent, odorless, tasteless contaminant is present. The sketchy pools are probably not as bad as they look, and a few insect larvae are unlikely to do more than give you a transient bellyache. And so on. So you can probably get away with a lot on the AT, and no-one will know what caused their minor upsets. All you can say about filtering, etc., is that any of the common systems will probably reduce your exposure somewhat, if you run into a bug or contaminant that is effectively dealt with by that method. But no method is 100%, and some people (well, LW anyway) get away with nothing. His water probably mixes with the alcohol in his belly anyway. Why has no-one suggested just mixing their water with their favorite libation, anyway? It would be amusing to see all the thrus weaving their way down the trail...
Well, as I said, my practice is a rolling boil. Mostly because I'm a conservative in health matters, especially when I'm suspicious about water quality. But moderate bubbles in the bottom of a pot, probably provides as much, or more water protection as the typical filter, or chemical, in the hands of a typical thru hiker.
The fact is that no filter or chemical will remove all theoretically dangerous things from trailside water. Boiling will remove all except toxic chemicals -- which incidentally, many hikers add to their water in the belief it will keep them well. My practice is to drink, untreated, out of ridgeline springs. And to boil water lower down where cows, goats, pigs, and people may be lurking.
If I sense toxic chemicals may be about, I look for the nearest municipal water supply, and pray for the best, before I drink.
Weary
It kinda funny, all I've said about drinking water.
I won't drink city water. I buy bottled water, and only the labels I know the water source.
I would buy juice, or, open a can of water-packed fruit rather than drink city water.
le loupe
04-26-2010, 22:56
Well, as I said, my practice is a rolling boil. Mostly because I'm a conservative in health matters, especially when I'm suspicious about water quality. But moderate bubbles in the bottom of a pot, probably provides as much, or more water protection as the typical filter, or chemical, in the hands of a typical thru hiker.
Weary
apparently, in an autoclave at 250 degrees, sterilizaton takes 15 minutes and will kill everything but prions.
boiling, again for atleast 15 minutes, can deal with some agents but is ineffective against prions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prion) and many bacterial and fungal spores (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spore).
So aside from a ridiculously long time, requiring a tremendous amount of fuel, it really doesnt work. "rolling boil" or otherwise.
I had an autoclave, as part of a college part-time job as the weekend special diet cook at Children's Orthopedic Hospital, Seattle, WA, and yes, I had to pass a test for a food-handler's certificate Public Health in San Francisco, CA does not enforce.
That is why I posted a link, to show at what time and temperature pathogens are killed.
Siestita
04-27-2010, 03:55
My trips are short, rarely more than two weeks. I have used chemicals, usually iodine but occasionally chorine dioxide (Aqua Mira drops), for years with good results. Besides being heavy, filters appear to me to be destined, by design, to eventually clog at inconvenient times in out-of-the-way places.
Remember folks, the OP is looking for an inexpensive purification method. Weary's wood burning methods are sound. During the mid-1980s my father ("Grandpa Paul" from Ohio) section hiked the entire AT over the course of two years, averaging about 8 miles per day of travel. He was retired and could have easily afforded to buy iodine tablets which were very popular at the time. Instead, being "old school" Dad boiled much of his water at night, over wood fires. Then, as now, most shelters had fire rings present. A white gas stove provided Dad's backup cooking/boiling method during wet weather or fire bans. During the day he used a little Polar Pure iodine crystal vial/bottle to purify water encountered along the trail. One of those inexpensive vials kept going for him for the entire trail! A long distance hiker less dedicated to nightly fire building, but on a tight budget, could probably hike the whole trail carrying and simultaneously using two of those small , dark colored Polar Pure iodine crystal vials. At any given time each vial holds enough concentrated solution to purify one liter. Using those, like handling Aqua Mira drops, requires a little patience. It's a bit like playing with a toy chemistry set.
apparently, in an autoclave at 250 degrees, sterilizaton takes 15 minutes and will kill everything but prions.
boiling, again for atleast 15 minutes, can deal with some agents but is ineffective against prions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prion) and many bacterial and fungal spores (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spore).
So aside from a ridiculously long time, requiring a tremendous amount of fuel, it really doesnt work. "rolling boil" or otherwise.
Well, let's put it this way. As someone once said about democracy, boiling works far better than any other system.
There's no perfect water treatment. Nor do we need one. Most natural springs found on high ridges have safe drinking water. No treatment removes all potential toxins. Boiling at 212 degrees, or even just heating to pasteurization temperatures will give you a 99.99 percent chance of not getting sick from your drinking water. That's better than even most bottled water can achieve.
Weary
aarenlainey
05-27-2010, 02:26
Well you only need to boil water if you have well water or water of questionable sanitation. Tap water is fine though we do use the nursery water - it has the needed fluoride in it which regular bottled water does not have.
If I was going to boil all my water, I'd do a double treatment with hypochlorite. I'd also use a wood stove. The only thing I don't like about your plan is that it means carrying a full day of water every morning since you're planning on treating your water in camp.
If I boil water, it is for food or hot drink. If for "drinking water" then I add Wyler's lemonade to improve the flavor of the boiled water.
On other occasions, I would have a lemon drop candy in my mouth while drinking boiled water.
I never had success with cooling and shaking, or repeatedly pouring back-and-forth, to re-aerate the water to bring back a naturally fresh flavor to the water.
Bianchi Veloce
05-27-2010, 10:04
I was considering trying to boil my water, as apposed to using some kind of
expensive filter things. I don’t like the Iodine or Potable Aqua.
I have a GSI pinnacle soloist that came with a 1L bag that doubles as a bucket.
I was thinking I could haul my full bucket back to camp, boil it, strain it for any flotees as it goes into my bottle. I will be using a Beer can stove & windscreen and should have enough fuel to do everything I need. I do plan to bring some Potable Aqua as a back up.
What do you think, I’m I trying to be Too “Old school”?
Where will you be hiking?
Many water sources are safe to drink as is. I carry Aqua Mira as a back up for the cost and weight if I suspect the water source as being unsafe -i.e. a shared trail with horses.
modiyooch
05-27-2010, 11:03
3. Be selective where you collect water and don't treat it
This is my game plan. I carry a filter for emergency only. I rarely use it.
think0075
05-27-2010, 11:57
filters are a waste of time just as much as boiling water. if it looks sketchy use three drops of bleach to a liter otherwise just fill up and drink up. If you use your judgement most of the sources especially up north you don't have to treat at all thats the best tasting water.
Many water sources are safe to drink as is.
A thru-hiker kept telling me that too. He said he's pretty sure he only caught giardia twice on the AT.
AS Sgt Rock said..water treatment is like religion. Ya can't argue it and people will do what they want anyway.
boiling water is not practical for a thru hiker or a long section hiker.
Panzer
Jack Tarlin
05-27-2010, 16:02
I dunno my miles out here tho a reporter recently asked.
But it's a bunch.
And I've never, repeat NEVER seen anyone boiling their drinking water on the Appalachian Trail, and I'm sure I'd have remembered if I'd seen it.
In short......it don't happen.
If I was going to boil all my water, I'd do a double treatment with hypochlorite. I'd also use a wood stove. The only thing I don't like about your plan is that it means carrying a full day of water every morning since you're planning on treating your water in camp.
I can't think of any reason for adding hypochlorite, either before or after boiling. Boiling is the ultimate treatment against germs and viruses. Neither boiling nor chemicals remove most of the harmful chemicals that may be present.
Boiled water doesn't taste great just off the fire. But I find that after a few hours of slopping around in a container in my pack, the taste of unboiled water returns so it's hard to tell its been treated.
As for Jack's comment. except for 4 or 5 military surplus iodine tablets that I carried for "emergencies" boiling was the only water treatment I used during the six months I spent walking between Georgia and Katahdin in 1993. I tended to boil a two liter nalgene bottle of water each evening using my wood-burning Zip stove. That became my "emergency" supply the next day when going through farm country or other areas that I thought looked suspect. I drank untreated water coming from springs along the high ridges.
Weary
I can't think of any reason for adding hypochlorite, either before or after boiling.
To reduce boiling time, or rather, to catch whatever inadvertent inadequate boiling doesn't catch. Did I mention that it weighs and costs very little?
greatwillies
06-10-2010, 01:41
Well boiled water is clean and fresh, and bacterialess also. Thats why I always drink boiled water. That can give you the best quality of purity and you will never have to face the problems related to the water.
boiling water is a purification method of last resort. wastes fuel unless you cook on a campfire
boiling water is a purification method of last resort. wastes fuel unless you cook on a campfire
Boiling -- and near boiling for that matter -- kills every tiny creature known to harm humans that lives in water.
The safety it provides in areas where water is suspect is why I use a wood-burning zip stove and strongly recommend it's use for long distance hiking. The fuel is free and readily available. The Zip fire is easy to start and maintain and the protection it provides from water borne disease is virtually absolute. Neither filters, nor even the most virulent chemicals, come close to providing abolute protection.
Not that any protection is needed from water from most high level springs. But for the paranoid among us, nothing surpasses a Zip Stove.
Best of all a Zip is the lightest combination cooking, water protection, mechanical device around. If you add a filter and fuel weight, a Zip is lighter than the tiniest beer can stove, once you add in fuel, fuel bottle, and an efficient filter.
Water treatment chemicals, combined with beer can/alcohol device, are lighter, but are also the least effective water treatment, espcially as used by most hikers. Very few religiously wait the hours needed for complete treatment before drinking on a hot day.
Weary
Noah Genda
07-20-2010, 09:39
Filters rule - I use the First Need filter - pumps quick, and water is as cold and refreshing as the source itself...spend the extra money...
Trailbender
08-22-2010, 16:37
Or just carry one ounce of bleach in a dropper bottle.
Or just carry one ounce of bleach in a dropper bottle.
Bleach is what I consider a psychological water treatment. A drop or two of bleach makes some hikers feel safer, but does nothing realistically in terms of water safety, at least as used by most hikers.
If you use enough bleach and let it remain in the water for several hours a few of the lesser potential water contaminants are partially rendered harmless.
Bleach is pretty harmless -- especially as used by most hikers -- against the the more serious water-carried organisms. But carry it if you want. If you choose your water source with some common sense it is unlikely to do you any harm even without treatment.
Weary
Bleach is what I consider a psychological water treatment. A drop or two of bleach makes some hikers feel safer, but does nothing realistically in terms of water safety, at least as used by most hikers.
If you use enough bleach and let it remain in the water for several hours a few of the lesser potential water contaminants are partially rendered harmless.
Bleach is pretty harmless -- especially as used by most hikers -- against the the more serious water-carried organisms. But carry it if you want. If you choose your water source with some common sense it is unlikely to do you any harm even without treatment.
Weary
You know bleach is merely a way of delivering chlorine? So I'll just say bleach instead of chlorine.
Bleach is not effective if you don't use enough. Any treatment is ineffective when you use it insufficiently.
Public water utilities around the world have been using bleach for the last 60 years.
Bleach works quickly. Some utilities add it as the last step before the water goes into distribution pipes.
FEMA, EPA and WHO are among the organizations that recommend using bleach for treating drinking water.
Please share your references showing that bleach is ineffective.
White Russian has the right idea.
Now, there's nothing wrong with boiling your drinking water - that's how you make "sterile" water anywhere in the world. But it is time-and-fuel-consuming, and THAT'S the drawback.
.
Besides boiled water tastes like Sh#@ when you drink it, even once it's cooled.
Besides boiled water tastes like Sh#@ when you drink it, even once it's cooled.
It tastes bad, because the boiling removed the dissolved oxygen and other atmospheric gases. I've found that after sloshing around in my pack for an hour or so, the missing oxygen and other dissolved gases return, along with the taste.
Weary
Weary, I do see that bleach concentrations have to be high to protect against giardia cysts, at least within 10 minutes. Personally, I filter before I bleach, but almost all of the water I drink has been treated for about an hour before I drink it. I can't advise only using bleach when there are other chemical treatments and a homemade filter can weigh just a few ounces.
If you'd really care to delve into the bleach treatment topic, let's start a new thread and I'll keep looking up data and throw in a calculation or two.
Used properly, bleach kills most bacteria. It's use is pretty marginal against CRYPTOSPORIDIUM AND GIARDIA, especially giardia cysts, which is the pollutant of most concern to backpackers.
I need to double check, but I thought I just read that the crypto problem was more about method and with the water at 25C and waiting 1 hour, there's no concern. I'll double check though. Tomorrow. I need to hit the sack.
Giardia can be treated completely with bleach according to a report or two, but it does require a lot. I need to crunch the numbers, but I think it's something like 20 drops per liter. I also need to reference another book and crunch some numbers to see if that concentration will cause it to react adversely regarding ammonium.
Trailbender
08-23-2010, 09:51
Bleach is what I consider a psychological water treatment. A drop or two of bleach makes some hikers feel safer, but does nothing realistically in terms of water safety, at least as used by most hikers.
If you use enough bleach and let it remain in the water for several hours a few of the lesser potential water contaminants are partially rendered harmless.
Bleach is pretty harmless -- especially as used by most hikers -- against the the more serious water-carried organisms. But carry it if you want. If you choose your water source with some common sense it is unlikely to do you any harm even without treatment.
Weary
Bleach destroys bacteria and viruses. The military and Red Cross both recommend it for water treatment in disasters. I used it on my entire through hike and never got sick. I found out later a guy got Giardia from a source I got my water from. So either I am naturally resistant to Giardia, or bleach works. I knew several hikers who used it also with no problems.
Filtering water is about the most boring thing I've ever done. Even when I use bleach I end up chugging before the 10 - 30 minutes is up.
Bleach destroys bacteria and viruses. The military and Red Cross both recommend it for water treatment in disasters. I used it on my entire through hike and never got sick. I found out later a guy got Giardia from a source I got my water from. So either I am naturally resistant to Giardia, or bleach works. I knew several hikers who used it also with no problems.
I've known scores of hikers who never treated their water and had never gotten sick. We all did for decades until filter manufacturers and drug companies scared most hikers into buying their products.
I've been drinking untreated water year round ever since moving from the city five decades ago. Neither I, nor my wife and three kids, have ever gotten sick from anything attributable to water quality.
While hiking I try to use common sense. I drink water untreated from springs and cold streams high in the hills. I carry a wood burning zip stove and boil water when hiking through crowded valleys and farm lands.
On day hikes I carry water from my untreated well.
Weary
I found out later a guy got Giardia from a source I got my water from.
No real way of knowing this, unless the water was tested and the strain of bacteria checked against that which infected the other hiker. Otherwise, just speculation and rumor.
Giardia is all around us and it is only suspected where one might have contracted it. My first guess would be a privy and/or poor hygiene. Water sources are quite low on my personal list of suspects. Do yourselves a favor and be more concerned with bathroom habits of yourself and your fellow hikers than with the relatively unlikely chance of drinking some contaminated water.
Use discretion, limit the water sources you sample, use filters or treatment if you like and you may reduce your risk somewhat. Maintain good hygiene and sanitary habits and you WILL greatly reduce your risk.
This is my theory, and I'm sticking to it!!!
So either I am naturally resistant to Giardia, or bleach works.
Bleach will definitely kill giardia, the concern is about it killing all of the giardia. Maybe you killed enough giardia to increase your odds of being able to drink the contaminated water without getting sick. I'm more than happy to carry an ounce of bleach if it significantly reduces the chances of getting giardasis.
Bleach destroys bacteria and viruses. The military and Red Cross both recommend it for water treatment in disasters. I used it on my entire through hike and never got sick. I found out later a guy got Giardia from a source I got my water from. So either I am naturally resistant to Giardia, or bleach works. I knew several hikers who used it also with no problems.
bleach certainly kills bacteria and some viruses. It even kills the parasite that causes Giardiasis, which technically is a protozoa. And which incidentally, at critical stages of its life, is quite resistant to being killed by bleach.
Bleach is recommended in disasters because it is readily available and better than nothing.
Giardiasis, the disease caused by the parasite, is spread by numerous animals including beavers, sheep, domestic dogs, and humans through their feces. (poop)
Unless you are drinking from water sources easily contaminated by poop, no treatment is likely to protect you. Boiling drinking water is my preferred treatment. And incidentally, relates to the question raised by the OP.
Those worried about the unpleasant side effects of giardiasis, should avoid being lapped in the face by friendly dogs, and refrain from eating proffered gorp and other food carried by hikers who think soap is incompatible with the wilderness.
Experts are divided on whether treating drinking water helps. They mostly agree that other sources are a more likely cause of the disease.
Weary
For what it's worth I dug this out of the Complete Walker IV-pg 239
"The Thermal Death Point (TDP ] is the temperature at which an organism can survive for five minutes .In Purification of Wilderness Waters, author David Cooney gives TDP for Giardia of 147 F (64 C ) .Other protozoans have TDPs from 147-169 F ( 64-76 C ) .Sustaining a temperature of 170 F for a minute or two kills them all "
For what it's worth I dug this out of the Complete Walker IV-pg 239
"The Thermal Death Point (TDP ] is the temperature at which an organism can survive for five minutes .In Purification of Wilderness Waters, author David Cooney gives TDP for Giardia of 147 F (64 C ) .Other protozoans have TDPs from 147-169 F ( 64-76 C ) .Sustaining a temperature of 170 F for a minute or two kills them all "
Most interesting. Del Doc, the retired research physician, who hiked the trail three or four times, said about the same thing -- to a chorus of naysayers when I reported it on White Blaze.
I had cited his claim in response to those who said killing bugs with less than 5 minutes of boiling couldn't happen.
Weary
Trailbender
08-24-2010, 12:06
Most interesting. Del Doc, the retired research physician, who hiked the trail three or four times, said about the same thing -- to a chorus of naysayers when I reported it on White Blaze.
I had cited his claim in response to those who said killing bugs with less than 5 minutes of boiling couldn't happen.
Weary
Yeah, the boiling time is a myth. Once it hits a boil, it is safe to drink.
At risk of starting yet another war, I prefer using a Steripen with Aqua-Mira as a back up, or boiling. I have only seen one hiker in recent years using boiling as a primary and he readily accepted my offer of water treated with a Steripen. I have nothing against other treatments for clean water I just use what works for me.
HYOH
Yeah, the boiling time is a myth. Once it hits a boil, it is safe to drink.
The reports I read the other day mentioned 70C. That's all well and good, but are you going to measure that on the trail?
Doc Mike
08-25-2010, 08:08
Boiling is 100C enough said
Doc Mike
Not Sunshine
08-25-2010, 08:26
only if it's below 40F in the morning; and then only in the morning.
The reports I read the other day mentioned 70C. That's all well and good, but are you going to measure that on the trail?
Toss a $7.00 instant read thermometer in your pack . I serously doubt if the thermometer w/ case weighs more than 1-2 ounces .
Over the course of several gallons the fuel weight that you would save by not have to bringi the water to a 212F boil should offset the weight of the thermometer
The reports I read the other day mentioned 70C. That's all well and good, but are you going to measure that on the trail?
Well, there are a variety of stages when heating water. I once measured the temperature of the various stages with a kitchen thermometer. My rule is to figure the water is warm enough when I see tiny bubbles streaming off the bottom.
But do the measurements yourself so you will know exactly what 70C hot water looks like on a stove. I go a bit above the minimum, just in case.
Weary
Trailbender
08-25-2010, 11:42
Toss a $7.00 instant read thermometer in your pack . I serously doubt if the thermometer w/ case weighs more than 1-2 ounces .
Over the course of several gallons the fuel weight that you would save by not have to bringi the water to a 212F boil should offset the weight of the thermometer
2 ounces is a lot for dead packweight. I just watch the water, and when I see bubbles, it is good to go. If I am boiling water, it is because I ran out of water treatment. In that case, I am building a fire and boiling in quantity, so fuel is a moot point. I would never use my stove for water purification purposes. It is a huge waste of fuel, and takes too long.
2 ounces is a lot for dead packweight. I just watch the water, and when I see bubbles, it is good to go. If I am boiling water, it is because I ran out of water treatment. In that case, I am building a fire and boiling in quantity, so fuel is a moot point. I would never use my stove for water purification purposes. It is a huge waste of fuel, and takes too long.
Bubbles begin long before water reaches the boiling stage. Not that it matters much. Most water along the trail is safe to drink with no treatment. But one advantage to carrying a wood-burning Zip STove is that it doubles as an easy way to disinfect suspect water supplies without having to worry about carrying fuel
Weary
Trailbender
08-25-2010, 16:03
Bubbles begin long before water reaches the boiling stage. Not that it matters much. Most water along the trail is safe to drink with no treatment. But one advantage to carrying a wood-burning Zip STove is that it doubles as an easy way to disinfect suspect water supplies without having to worry about carrying fuel
Weary
Same deal with a campfire. I build my fires small and efficient, and when I boiled water for lunch, it took a couple handfuls of pencil thickness twigs.
The water is safe to drink when I see small bubbles rising from the bottom to the surface. I should have specified that, actually.
http://archicad-talk.graphisoft.com/files/thumbs/t_beating_a_dead_horse_679.jpg
that being said,
#1:
If you use enough bleach and let it remain in the water for several hours a few of the lesser potential water contaminants are partially rendered harmless.
Weary, bleach, or chlorine, is only effective at the most for 15-20 minutes. You can sit and watch it for an hour if you want to but you might as well watch water boil... At least that way there will be pretty bubbles.
#2, I personally love spring water and if I find one, I immediately dump out my filtered water and camel up straight out of the spring. However, those of you who are telling him oh don't worry just get your water off the ridgeline are forgetting a crucial bit of information. Check around the source first. Are there tracks? I'm sure there will be. Critters don't turn down spring water either. And critters have been known to poop where they drink. I promise. You run a better risk with springs than drinking straight out of a third order stream but you can still get the shizznits from them.
Weary, bleach, or chlorine, is only effective at the most for 15-20 minutes.
That's incorrect.
....The water is safe to drink when I see small bubbles rising from the bottom to the surface. I should have specified that, actually.
Sorry to prolong this debate. But many make the same mistake. Small bubbles rise from the bottom of a pot long before the water is hot enough to kill giardia cysts. What is needed is a steady stream of small bubbles
Hikers concerned about such things should buy an instant reading thermometer and experiment at home to see for themselves what the bubbles look like when temperatures reach the level needed kill the cysts. The water does not need a full rolling boil. But to eliminate harmful giardia it's my memory that more than a few small bubbles are needed before all risk is eliminated.
You don't need to carry a thermometer on the trail. But it is a good idea, I think, to see for yourself before you hike, the temperature needed to ensure the results hikers are concerned about.
Weary
That's incorrect.
Sorry but it's not. I used it in grant-supported research for years. I've literally done the research.
Sorry but it's not. I used it in grant-supported research for years. I've literally done the research.
Effect of Chlorine on Giardia lamblia Cyst Viability.
That report says time past 20 minutes still works.
So does Backcountry Water Treatment to Prevent Giardiasis.
Trailbender
08-25-2010, 21:00
Sorry to prolong this debate. But many make the same mistake. Small bubbles rise from the bottom of a pot long before the water is hot enough to kill giardia cysts. What is needed is a steady stream of small bubbles
Hikers concerned about such things should buy an instant reading thermometer and experiment at home to see for themselves what the bubbles look like when temperatures reach the level needed kill the cysts. The water does not need a full rolling boil. But to eliminate harmful giardia it's my memory that more than a few small bubbles are needed before all risk is eliminated.
You don't need to carry a thermometer on the trail. But it is a good idea, I think, to see for yourself before you hike, the temperature needed to ensure the results hikers are concerned about.
Weary
Yeah, the steady bubble thing, I guess a boil means different things to people, when it is boiling like that, I consider it safe, on a campfire, usually it gets big bubbles and boils fairly vigorously. I boiled treated water to eat with, though, because sometimes I just wanted it hot enough for the meal and didn't feel like waiting for a boil, so I made sure it was treated first.
Trailbender
08-25-2010, 21:09
Sorry to prolong this debate. But many make the same mistake. Small bubbles rise from the bottom of a pot long before the water is hot enough to kill giardia cysts. What is needed is a steady stream of small bubbles
Hikers concerned about such things should buy an instant reading thermometer and experiment at home to see for themselves what the bubbles look like when temperatures reach the level needed kill the cysts. The water does not need a full rolling boil. But to eliminate harmful giardia it's my memory that more than a few small bubbles are needed before all risk is eliminated.
You don't need to carry a thermometer on the trail. But it is a good idea, I think, to see for yourself before you hike, the temperature needed to ensure the results hikers are concerned about.
Weary
I couldn't edit so I wanted to reply more to this. If I was wrong, then I appreciate being set right about something this important. Don't hesitate to speak what you know on issues, you might end up preventing someone from getting sick or worse.
I do wait for a good boil before I drink the water.
So does Backcountry Water Treatment to Prevent Giardiasis.
So I guess my toil at the swine lagoons was a waste then.
I got this from another forum and was wondering if you all could confirm/deny the wisdom of this purification method:
This is a bit late in the thread to be bringing this up, but I just wanted to mention water purification again. Discomancer already touched on using chlorine (which is pretty much what municipal water systems use), but Aquamira and the like are a bit expensive.
Shock, the granulated pool cleaner, works exceptionally well and safely too. It's active ingredient is also chlorine (Calcium Hypochloride) and unlike iodine (a broad spectrum antibiotic that tears up the beneficial bacteria in your digestive tract) there are no aftereffects. A .05g scoop with treat a full liter of water in 20 minutes, killing giardia. Carrying a one ounce nalgene jar of Shock will last through hundreds of treatments, and if you don't like the slight chlorine taint to the water, adding 2 oz. (an eyedropper full) of Hydrogen Peroxide will neutralize any remaining chlorine, leaving you with awesome tasting, safe, backcountry drinking water.