Slashdot Mirror


"Lifesaver Bottle" Filters Viruses Out of Water

gihan_ripper writes "British inventor Michael Pritchard has developed a small self-contained filter system that instantly cleans water, removing all particles larger than 15nm. He said that he was inspired after seeing the effects of Hurricane Katrina and the Boxing Day tsunami in 2004; people had to wait for many days to get fresh water and many died from drinking contaminated water. The filter is so effective that it can purify dirty river water and even fecal matter. His bottle will shortly be available for sale from Lifesaver Systems at an expected cost of £190 (approx. $385)."

9 of 503 comments (clear)

  1. $385!? by Loosifur · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Fantastic idea, except for the fact that anyone in the path of Katrina who could have afforded a $385 water bottle could have afforded a $90 plane ticket, $35 bus ride, or $27 tank of gas.

    --
    This unbiased moderation brought to you by the Porcine Aviation Group!
    1. Re:$385!? by jabuzz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As I understand it a lot of people could have afforded to get out. However they didn't think it was going to be that bad, it's just another huricane after all, and prefered to stick it out and make sure their stuff was not looted. However once it hit, and it turned out to be bad, getting out became a problem.

    2. Re:$385!? by AvitarX · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But I bet it is easier to get these to people after the fact that to get them as much water as it can produce.

      --
      Wow, sent an e-mail as suggested when clicking on "use classic" banner, and got a fast response that addressed my msg
    3. Re:$385!? by fastest+fascist · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They're called water purification plants, and a centralized solution isn't so great for dealing with massive infrastructure failure.

  2. Re:O rly? by Nimey · · Score: 4, Insightful

    He can't just pull the raw materials and equipment to make these out of his butt, dipshit. Those have a non-zero cost, and for a superfine filter like he's making the cost of production must be non-trivial.

    It it sees widespread production, the cost will go down (economies of scale) and advances in materials science and manufacturing techniques could also get the price down. Eventually.

    --
    Hail Eris, full of mischief...

    E pluribus sanguinem
  3. Re:What about LifeStraw? by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And on that subject, jackasses like this are why it's hard to help anyone:

    However, a spokesman for UK charity WaterAid, which works to supply clean water and sanitation in 17 of the world's poorest countries, condemned the device as overly expensive, and said it was not a real solution.

    The organisation's Paul Hetherington said that while he thought the LifeStraw is an 'amazing-sounding idea,' he did not ultimately think it would help.

    "$3.50 sounds like very little to you and me - but most people in those countries earn less than one dollar a day, with which they have to feed their families," he said.

    He added that he felt the problem is that many people live very far away from their water, often walking a total of 20km or more carrying a weight of 25 kilos.

    "That's what takes it out of them - the long journey," he explained.

    "The LifeStraw isn't going to prevent that long journey, even if it does improve the water they drink.

    "They're not going to have the education, because they're not going to have the time. It's girls in particular who suffer, because it's women and girls who have to collect the water.

    "It only costs a charity like WaterAid £15 per person to provide them with water, sanitation and hygiene education, which, provided there is decent water resource management in the country, will last them a lifetime.

    "At that rate, $3.50 is expensive."

    Of course, if "there is decent water resource management in the country" in the first place, none of this would be necessary. And never mind that if I'd have to make a trek for water anyway, I'd prefer it to be clean when I got there.

    If the LifeStraw at $3.00 will actually hurt women and girls and not solve the rest of society's ills, I can only imagine what Mr. Hetherington would think about a model that cost 100x more.

    --
    Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
  4. Is it safe? by SnarfQuest · · Score: 4, Insightful

    During something like Katrina, there is a lot more crap in the water than just bacteria.

    What does this thing do with gasoline, pesticides, and other chemicals coming out of drowned cars, stores, homes, and factories? If it isn't removing these chemicals, then you can't be sure the processed water is safe to drink. You will probably see a lot of sick people who relied on this product, and got poisoned because of the false sense oc security.

    --
    Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
  5. Re:Nothing new here by jonnythan · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You do realize that 15nm is .015 microns, right?

    This isn't a micron filter. A micron filter has pores a few orders of magnitude too large to filter out viruses.

    This one, however, does filter viruses.

  6. For the last time....the problem was not katrina by tacokill · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It wasn't the hurricane that was the problem. It was the levies. Had the levees not broken, we would not be talking about Katrina today.

    Obviously, they are related because the levees would not have broken without the hurricane. But the point here is that the Hurricane did remarkably little damage on it's own. The levees, on the other hand, were responsible for almost all of the issues you read about today.

    Just another example of the edges starting to fray with respect to our national infrastructure. Without the levee issues, Katrina isn't special. Powerful? yes. Scary? yes. Destructive? Not really, when compared to something like Andrew or Hugo.

    ...and don't even get me started on the emergency response.