Ozone Question. (Very Technical)

[Ehizzle]

I definately agree with your simple strategy. Altough I cant keep my curiousity at bay.

[anne]

I have no idea how relevant this is, but it makes sense to me to look at ozone from a molecular level, and to think about what "oxidation" really is. College chemistry was a long time ago, so if any chemists out there want to chip in, please help me out here! Here's how I remember things, and I dont promise absolute accuracy, and I'm too lazy to go look it all up now, but I will later....

Here's my train of thought: ozone is O3. Oxygen is stable as O2. When you add the third molecule of oxygen, it is unstable, and "wants" to convert back to O2. This is why ozone dissipates: 2 O3 --> 3 O2. Back to plain 'ol stable atmospheric oxygen. As O3, ozone steals electrons- that is oxidation. On a cellular level, that is very damaging, whether you are a bacteria or a human cell. I believe that one molecule of O3 can only oxidize "once" (ie, perform one reaction where an electron is donated) So the effectiveness of the ozone would seem to me to depend on a number of things, like:

Proximity of oxidizable things to O3
Concentration of O3 compared to concentration of oxidizable stuff
Temperature

So I agree with Dr Spa that I dont see how ppm is relevant. PPM of what? And if every molecule of O3 is either going to dissipate or oxidize something, then there should be no "minimum" concentration of O3 needed to perform oxidation, it just becomes a question of whether very minute levels of oxidation are meaningful to sanitize a tub.

As for the relationship between ozone and chlorine- is there really one? Ozone doesn't need chlorine to work, and chlorine does not need ozone to work......I would guess that there is nothing synergistic about using the two together, its just that the ozone makes the chlorine's job a little easier, right?

[clover]

Anne's logic and theory are both correct.  A Molecule of ozone O³ is going to oxidize one molecule of mineral or nutrient, or it will sanitize a single molecule of bacteria or virus and then it reverts back to O² and is no longer an oxidizer or sanitizer.  It has effectivly done it's job and no longer exists.  But, that is the job of the ozonator to continue to generate and introduce additional molecules of O³

Ozone presence for all practical purposes, can not be measured in a hot tub and chemicals can.  Scientifically, ozone can be measured, yes, but for the practical application of testing the presence of ozone in Hot Tub water is beyond the scope of practicallity.

This leads to the controversy of those who are pro and con to the ozonation purification of Hot Tub water.  If chemical applications can be measured and proven to be present and ozone can not, then no one can really prove the argument that ozone is truely effective, thus the controversy.

There are those of us in this thread that are pro ozone as a sanitizer / oxidizer, and then again there are those of us who are chemical supporters and lay claim that the presence of ozone ALONE can not be proven to be active and present as a sanitizer.  Thus, if only chemicals can be measured and proven to be effective, they then support the concept that chemicals are the ONLY verifyable method of treating and sanitizing Hot tub water.

Ozone does in fact work sanitizing and oxidizing.  How it is applied and the period of time that it is used and present are equally as effective as a chemical, BUT, IT IS NOT MEASUREABLE.

Still yet, the water still looks absolutely great as it is visually clean, clear and, if one were to test for bacteria or viruses, safe and sanitary without bacteria or viruses present in the water.

Something must be good about Ozone to create such controversy from both the knowing and the unkowing on this subject.

[Dr. Spa™ Ret.]

Ozone is measured in milograms most ozonators are 25mg 50mg ect,ect.

 Jacuzzi for instance offers 35mg,50mg, and for there proclean system we offer a 250mg ozonator.  All in all I dont know how many parts per million that is but I do know its effective.  

Huh? What? What does that all mean? A 35mg ozonator? Does this mean that it produces 35mg of ozone an hour? A year? Over it's entire life? Over my entire life (hopefully longer than an ozonator)?

As far as contact with water the longer the contact the better

Only to an extent. "Contact" doesn't guarantee absorbtion into the water, and if it isn't absorbed, it's not doing anything.

Anne's logic and theory are both correct.  A Molecule of ozone O³ is going to oxidize one molecule of mineral or nutrient, or it will sanitize a single molecule of bacteria or virus and then it reverts back to O² and is no longer an oxidizer or sanitizer.  It has effectivly done it's job and no longer exists.  But, that is the job of the ozonator to continue to generate and introduce additional molecules of O³

Ok, I'm going back to where I began. How much ozone do we need to sanitize what needs to be sanitized in the water? How do we measure that we've put in enough ozone, and enough has been absorbed into the water, to do the required sanitizing?

There are those of us in this thread that are pro ozone as a sanitizer / oxidizer, and then again there are those of us who are chemical supporters and lay claim that the presence of ozone ALONE can not be proven to be active and present as a sanitizer.  Thus, if only chemicals can be measured and proven to be effective, they then support the concept that chemicals are the ONLY verifyable method of treating and sanitizing Hot tub water.

That's it? You either believe in ozone, or sellinmg chemicals? Crap, I don't fit into either of those.... What does that make me (DON'T ANSWER THIS BROOK or DREW).  

Still yet, the water still looks absolutely great as it is visually clean, clear and, if one were to test for bacteria or viruses, safe and sanitary without bacteria or viruses present in the water.

Do you believe that clear water is bacteria free water?

[clover]

Do you believe that clear water is bacteria free water?

One does not need to believe that clear water is bacteria free water, you can test for the presence of bacteria.

[clover]

That's it? You either believe in ozone, or sellinmg chemicals? Crap, I don't fit into either of those.... What does that make me (DON'T ANSWER THIS BROOK or DREW).  

Doc, I just checked your web site and sell sell both chemicals and Ozononators.  

What does that make you, a believer or a profiteer.

[Dr. Spa™ Ret.]

Like I said, I don't fit into either.

[Vinny]

There is no doubt that ozone works under the right conditions just as chemicals do. But would you say that 1PPM chlorine will make water safe without testing it, I would feel safer putting 5 PPM chlorine, waiting 20 minutes and test it to see what the chlorine residue reads. At this point in time there is no easy way to test for ozone effectiveness.

That is the problem with anything that needs to be verified - without proper test parameters nothing can be guaranteed as to it's effectiveness.

The only evidence that I have read is Vermonter's account in his tub and basically he advocates chlorine with help from ozone and N2. If I take him for face value on a message board - he owns a lab that can test this stuff - I believe that chlorine (or any chemical sanitizer) is really the way to go.

[clover]

Businessman.

One last question for ya, how many people that have ozonators, and rely on them for sanitation, regularly test for bacteria levels and know how to interpret the results of the tests (the main reason I don't offer a home bacteria test kit, with I do have available to me)?

Doc, I bow to your prowess as a businessman that will profit in either case, and I do not dispute you, nor do I wish to debate you.  You profit on both sides of this discussion, which has no arguable claim over one or the other.

I think we all need to be in a profit making business to afford the basic things we need in life and the other things we desire.  The fact that you are an attorney by education and make your living in this industry must mean that it is more profitable to you.  

Hovever, if my water is presumed to be clean and clear as the eye can see, and I can in fact choose to test for bacteria, does that mean ozone is not a reliable oxidizer / sanitizer?

Admittidly, one can test for bacteria, as well as for chemicals, however the test is meaningless one hour later.

I do not wish to challenge your sincereity, as we both apply knowledge, logic and reasoning, but we do appear to be on opposite ends of the teeter toter, which simply means that we both bring balance to life.

God Bless the voice of reason and understanding. That is of course, assuming one believes in God.

[clover]

Doc, what happened to your post?  Did you modify it, or delete it?

[Dr. Spa™ Ret.]

An attorney? Moi?  

if my water is presumed to be clean and clear as the eye can see, and I can in fact choose to test for bacteria, does that mean ozone is not a reliable oxidizer / sanitizer?

Well now I'm more confused. How does presumption and being able to choose to test for bacteria make water bacteria free?

I think you are misunderstanding me. All I'm asking for is actual evidence that ozone is a  "reliable" sanitizer.. And, that the method in which it's used in a spa is as well. Sure, the marketing and sales pitches are there, but so far, no one has been able to produce any actual evidence. Until I'm swayed to believe, from actual credible evidence, I will continue to ask questions.

If this angers you, I apologize (and suggest getting a grip), if this makes me a bad person, then so be it.

[Reese]

IMO, ozone in a hot-tub may be like Ben-Gay on a sore muscle.  It smells good, and feels like it must be doing something, but in fact... the main benefit is in believing it will make things better. 8-)

[Tman122]

IMO, ozone in a hot-tub may be like Ben-Gay on a sore muscle.  It smells good, and feels like it must be doing something, but in fact... the main benefit is in believing it will make things better. 8-)

Naw....I don't believe this, we know ozone kills bacteria, and a contact camber is designed to make ozone contact bacteria. So we have done our part to make the two come together. Relying on O3 to sanitize your water is a mistake and everyone knows this. But using it to supplement a good sanitation regimen is not a bad thing.

Say you dump in some chlorine to kill x amount of bacertia in your spa, All gets killed except a few little bacteria molecules........but you went away and can't catch those little molecules, heck you don't even know they survived, but your ozone catches them, chases them down, and kills them. Or more likely they stumbled upon one another and fought to the death of them both!

[Vinny]

Tman,

Your analogy of stumbling upon them is probably a correct senario. We're talking small distances here probably in nanometers ( that's 10 to the -9 power) or smaller which is equivilent in that world as the distance of NYC is to Chicago in ours.

There's no question that ozone applied correctly is a powerful oxidizer/sanitizer but is a spa's ozonator applying ozone correctly?

On Doc's site years ago Vermonter posted a response about an effective kill with chlorine. He posted  that the contact time and exposure time in minutes when multiplied together needs to be 2400 (I think this is the figure) in order for scientists to believe a 99.99% effective kill.

How much ozone is in the spa's water? Without knowing this one can't assume that ozone will bump into anything. I think that the ozone's closest proximity to anything is at the injector port. Looking at the injector in my tub there seems to be a brown residue on the exit side of the injector which is "proof" that the injector is doing something.

I'm thinking that as inefficient as a spa's ozonator is based on other industry's use of ozone. The more ozone being produced at the injector the more likely it'll bump into something at the injector. Maybe they meet in the hose leading to the contact chamber or in my case the tub (remembering that we are talking nanometers) but I'm thinking in terms of a vast universe  in terms at a molecular level, it'll be like an asteroid hitting the Eath - it may happen but very infrequently.

[Gomboman]

Have there been any unbiased experiments/studies conducted for spa ozone systems in the past that we can refer to? If so, I would like to read them. I'm surprised this topic is so controversial.