Which of the Berkey elements is better?
 

Super Sterasyls? or the Black Berkey� Purifier Elements ?

not sure if I do one or the other for the best longevity.

Re: Which of the Berkey elements is better?
 

I think Tech Guy did a lot of research on this, but I don't recall the pros and cons of one versus the other. I have Black Berkey filters.

Re: Which of the Berkey elements is better?
 

I knew someone did- but I can't remember who

I think he bought somthing else if I remember right

Re: Which of the Berkey elements is better?
 

IIRC, one of them includes an activated carbon (AC) element, which absorbs a wide variety of nasty organic chemicals. Because of that, the AC needs to be changed out a lot more often. What is it, every 500 gallons? Whereas a straight ceramic (or silver-impregnated) element is good for something like 10,000 gallons. It will filter the critters and particles, but do nothing about the chemicals.

It seems it would make sense to have an AC filter element that is separate from the ceramic, for flexibility.

Re: Which of the Berkey elements is better?
 

Does anyone have the Berkey Light- might opt for that over the Big Berkey..

Oh and, HOW do you know when to replace the filters and WHY is there not a system to tell you when to change'em?

Re: Which of the Berkey elements is better?
 

What is the best filter to remove pharmaceuticals?

Re: Which of the Berkey elements is better?
 

All Good questions...

Im waitin for the elusive Berkeymaster to take us to school.


Ive noticed in the Photos on the various sites that i've been shopping on, that the tank appears to accept up to 4 filters. -- I wonder if you could mix it up and say run 2 black Berkeys and 2 ceramic... thinkin out loud

Re: Which of the Berkey elements is better?
 

I'm getting ready to buy a Berkey light myself. It comes with the two black filters and then you can add on the additional white filters for fluoride/arsenic.

Re: Which of the Berkey elements is better?
 

Yup, bought the aqua rain. Very nice piece of gear. It has much smaller pores in the ceramic than does the berkey.

Re: Which of the Berkey elements is better?
 

Do any of you guys have a recommendation for a shower head filter, to reduce or remove chlorine?

Re: Which of the Berkey elements is better?
 

There is no shower attachment that I have seen that has nearly enough capacity to truly remove all the chlorine. Most of the ones I have seen are all gimmicks without enough charcoal to remove any chlorine.

Re: Which of the Berkey elements is better?
 

Interesting - care to post your deciding factor on that model vs. the Berkey system.

(sry- Im in research mode w/ not a lot of time to do it due to work)

Re: Which of the Berkey elements is better?
 

All that would do is have half your water by volume filtered of VOCs. The ceramic-only filters don't remove chemicals.

There are some relatively inexpensive filters out there that are primarily AC. Look at the Britta filters. They'll talk about how much better your water will taste, but aren't designed to exclude critters smaller than protozoa. Filtering through one of those first, then putting that water through the ceramics won't add much time to the process, since thewater is going through much larger holes.

Re: Which of the Berkey elements is better?
 

i have a unit on my kitchen tap.

This new system is going to be stored away- in the event of...

that's kinda why I'm trying to figure out which type system is going to have filters w/ the best longevity and cut out the most nasties.

Re: Which of the Berkey elements is better?
 

Nope. The stuff that wouldn't go thru the black filters, would stay in solution and pass thru the white filters.

Re: Which of the Berkey elements is better?
 

That's what I said, just not so well.

Re: Which of the Berkey elements is better?
 

This pretty much did it for me, I have verified that this info is indeed correct:

http://www.nitro-pak.com/product_inf...roducts_id=614

A: There is a great deal of confusion regarding "absolute" micron ratings. Just how much of a reduction efficiency should be considered adequate for an "absolute" rating? Is 99.9% (3 log) sufficient, or would 99.9999% (6 log) be more appropriate, since it matches the EPA bacteria requirement? Should a filter be rated by its ability to remove particles of a certain size, or shouldit be challenged with live organisms of a particular size? Should a filter be tested only when it is new, or should the ratings be based on its end-of-life performance? The fact is that there is no industry or government standard for "absolute" filtration performance.

The Marathon� filter elements used in the AquaRain� Gravity Water Filter have been extensively tested against live organisms using expended end-of-life elements. We believe this form of testing to be the most stringent, since it tests the filters in a manner similar to the way they would actually be used under worst case conditions. When testing against the .5-.6 micron organism Klebsiella terrigena, EXPENDED Marathon� elements demonstrated a 6.6 log reduction (they achieved 8.9 log reduction when new). The EPA only requires a 6 log reduction from NEW elements, which AquaRain greatly exceeded under extreme pressures of up to 90 psi, well above normal test pressure. At the very low pressure of 1/2 psi found in our gravity filter, the efficacy would be far greater still. Does this mean that the Marathon� filter elements have an "absolute" rating of only .5-.6 microns? Expended Marathon� filter elements have also been tested against the Health Industry Manufacturing Association's (HIMA) test organism, Brevundimonas diminuta, and achieved a 99.99815% reduction (99.9999% when new). Since this organism is .2-.3 micron, should we claim this as our "absolute" rating? British Berkefeld Filter literature lists the "absolute" rating of their filter at .9 microns and their U.S. dealers claim "absolute" performance at .5 microns. Their own factory literature claims only 99.9% efficiency at the .5 micron level. Is 99.9% sufficient for claiming an "absolute" rating? The bottom line is that the AquaRain Gravity Water Filter System, using Marathon� filter elements, will outperform all other gravity-fed ceramic water filter systems. Since there is no standard for "absolute," YOU will have to decide what level of protection you want for yourself and your family.

Re: Which of the Berkey elements is better?
 

My deciding factor was the aqua rain is stainless steel made in America.

If I had it to do over I would just make one with 2 filter buckets,one an aquarain ceramic and under it in another bucket a black Berkey filter.

http://www.alpharubicon.com/kids/hom...erkeydaire.htm

Re: Which of the Berkey elements is better?
 

Agreed, that was a nice touch as well.

The price is a little lower than the berkey as well.

Re: Which of the Berkey elements is better?
 

hmmmm... its my time to pick one now too..

Re: Which of the Berkey elements is better?
 

I have two shower filters and you can easily smell the difference. In fact, I'll fill the bathtub with the shower on in order to have a chlorine free bath. Here are the filters I have: http://www.newwaveenviro.com/premium...lter-p-66.html.

Re: Which of the Berkey elements is better?
 

After looking through the product info on teh Aqua-Rain that TG shared w/ us, I wound up getting one of those. Apparently 99.9% filtration of nasties wasn't good enough.. :D -- the Marathon filters are way better.

Re: Which of the Berkey elements is better?
 

Has anyone seen these?

http://www.britishimperial.com/

Re: Which of the Berkey elements is better?
 

You have to be careful with British stuff these days; while they might filter out the smallest germ particles, they seem to readily admit socialists and jihadis. :wink: