Lifesaver Water

We've never done a water story before, but the story of Lifesaver is so disruptive and shift changing that we can't resist

Using nanotechnology to filter the filthiest of water down to potable water in less than 10 seconds, the Lifesaver does what it says on the bottle.

Using chemicals to sterilise water is not always effective, and you will still be drinking a poisonous cocktail with some dead pathogens in it”

We first found Michael Pritchard  the inventor on TED, Riveting Talks by Remarkable People.

The video is amazing and inspiring.

While you're there, check Barry Scwhartz, Dan Arielly, Daniel Kahnemann and just about anyone.

Comments

[kagiso]

Ultrafiltration / Reverse osmosis in a bottle. This isn't going to change anything at a utility scale, as you would still need all the normal preliminary processes to remove fine solids prior to putting into the UF/RO plant. And even on an industrial scale UF/RO is very expensive due to backwashing to clean the filters as well as frequent filter replacement.

In a third world / battle field environment the lifesaver bottle is going to get clogged up very quickly and need new filters. For the same weight as the lifesaver you could carry enough chlorine tablets to treat many metres cubed of water. For the same cost as a the lifesaver you could carry enough chlorine tablets to treat many hundreds of metres cubed of water.

Soldiers have enough to carry without being weighed down with gimmicks. If they don't like the taste of chlorine, possibly a different job might be appropriate.

[Guru]

Check out the video! Can't imagine that chlorine tablets could do what the Lifesaver did, that water was taken straight from the river Thames, and then put some raw sewage in to spice it up. It was put in the Lifesaver and the clear water was drunk ten seconds later! The lifesaver can treat 6000 litres, which is a lot of Evian. He also showed a jerry can size which could allegedly treat over 15000 litres. I'm no water expert, I'm sure it shows but surely a scale up of the filter technology could make a big dent on water supply. The filter works down to 15 microns, which is enough to remove microbes immediately. Allegedly.

[kagiso]

6000 litres may sound a lot but is only 6m3 or 30 oil drums. You could treat the equivalent amount of Thames water by pouring it through a bed sheet to remove most of the solids and then adding chlorine tablets. If you use two bedsheets and wash them in turn, the cost is down to the chlorine tablets which is negligible compared to the life saver. Especially if, as I strongly suspect, you will need to replace the lifesaver filter by paying Mr Pritchard a significant amount of money.

If he really has a filter that works down to 15 microns, and can treat 15,000 litres, without any pre-treatment or back-washing / cleaning / replacement of the filter; he would have sold his technology for many billions of pounds. He would not be trying to sell small proprietary models into naive markets in the military and third world.

I read HNA because of the very intelligent insight into energy markets, very unfortunate that it is giving credence to snake oil salesmen.

[Guru]

I see the point about how if he was so smart, how come he's not a billionaire, but I'm no water expert. It looked good on a small (human) scale and I'm a big believer in the large impact of lots of little things.
Glad you liked the site, but note I think that risk reduction , at least for 98% of energy users, is an expensive waste of time! That's the whole point of NHO, that lots of what will happen is unknowable and we would be far better off with the que sera, sera school of energy buying.

[christo930]

I would like to know if this filter can remove chemicals from the water. For example, I live near a river in a very large city and I would still be worried about drinking the river water even if I put it through this filter. Would this filter remove industrial contaminants?