water purification input needed

[Darwin Roos]

Which method of water purification (mainly in North America, though I may need it in Taiwan, too) do you think is most effective (considering overall purification and the speed of the purification process):

-chemical (chlorine, etc.)
-filter pump (Hiker Pro, etc.)
-SteriPen

Darwin
[email protected]

[Charles Grier]

I would recommend a Steripen with, say, Micropur tablets as backup. I have used a Steripen Adventurer now for almost four years and have had good service with it. At first, I had problems with it; they require quality batteries and I hadn't read the instructions as well as I should have. But now, with a clean water source, I can have a drink inside two minutes. The Steripen also works well on protozoa, bacteria and virus. Filters won't get viruses and chemicals are not reliable on protozoa cysts.

The Steripen does require that the water be clear to work; the UV is quickly attenuated by murk. I don't use my Steripen here in Arizona where a lot of the water sources are murky to say the least. For most hikes in AZ I use a pre-filter (a coffee filter or bandanna) then a pumped or gravity filter and then chemicals. Even then, a lot of the water smells like reclaimed waste water. But, I have never gotten sick from it.

[EndoftheTrail]

Stating the obvious… it mostly depends on your water source.

If water is clear to fairly clear and contains no foul taste — Steripen.

If water is virus free — filter pump.

If water is protozoa free — chemicals.

If water contains virus but isn't too cold — chemicals.

For "do it all" — then either a purifier pump (First Need) or a combination of chemicals and filter (one that contains a charcoal element). To me, "do it all" means the following five things:

1. kills protozoa
2. kills bacteria
3. neutralizes viruses
4. improves water clarity
5. improves water taste

[Author]

Posts