CHASING THE HIGH ORP
Adventures with Ionized Water
by Walter Last
Ionized
water has several health promoting qualities. I have no doubt that the most
important of these is the strong antioxidant or reducing property of alkaline
ionized water. This led me to experiment with my Jupiter Masterpiece
(equivalent to the Technos Ionizer in
Here I want to
share some of my experiences in the hope of helping others to improve the
quality of their ionized water. I must confess that the task turned out to be
much more difficult and frustrating than expected but I am very pleased with
the final outcome.
Lets start with some basics. In chemistry oxidation and
reduction are now commonly defined as gaining or losing electrons. Oxidation is
the loss of an electron from a substance, while in reduction an electron is gained.
Oxidation and reduction occur simultaneously in two substances. Oxygen is the
most familiar electron acceptor or oxidiser. Iron rusts by combining with oxygen.
Thereby the iron donates electrons and is oxidised while the oxygen gains electrons
and is reduced.
The antioxidant
activity can be measured as the Oxidation–Reduction Potential or O.R.P. For
this I used an ORP meter (Milwaukee SM 500), which indicates the presence of
free or loosely bound electrons as a negative ORP up to –1000 mV. An ORP of 0
is neutral while an oxidizing potential can be measured up to +1000 mV. The ORP
scale officially extends from +1200 mV to – 1200 mV. However, with this method
we cannot measure purely organic antioxidants, such as vitamin E as their
electrons are much too tightly bound, although vitamin C is partly ionised and
can be measured to some degree.
To confuse
things, a high negative ORP can also result from a high level of dissolved
hydrogen, and in this case it does not have any antioxidant property. Large
amounts of hydrogen are produced at slow flow rates when the water becomes
strongly alkaline with a pH over 10.0.
The principle of
antioxidant activity is the availability of electrons to neutralize any
so-called free radicals with oxidizing qualities that may damage biological
systems. The electrons present in alkaline ionized water are highly reactive
and react much faster than organic antioxidants to neutralize free radicals.
Furthermore, as
we age our body structures lose elasticity; everything becomes more rigid. On a
biochemical level this increasing rigidity is due to cross-linking of
structural bio-chemicals, which in turn is due to a loss of electrons.
Providing the body with an abundance of highly reactive electrons can be
expected to slow cross-linking reactions and, with this, the aging process.
Finally, all
biochemical energy in our body is produced by transferring electrons from food
molecules onto inhaled oxygen. Having more available electrons may help us to
produce more energy. This may be the reason why some individuals feel more
energetic on ionized water.
From this outline
you can see why I am so interested in a high negative ORP. The
higher the ORP, the stronger the healing qualities. However, this does
not mean that it is advisable for beginners to start with a high ORP. As with
exposure to sunlight it is best to start with low doses and increase gradually,
and even that may from time to time produce some healing reactions as with
temporary inflammations, mucus discharge and skin rashes.
Additional
healing factors for most individuals are the alkalinity of the water and its
low surface tension. Most of us are overacid and benefit from our lymph fluid
becoming more neutral. However, this is only a minor factor in using ionized
water as we can alkalize more quickly and cheaply by taking sodium bicarbonate.
The lower surface tension, on the other hand, improves the absorption and use
of nutrients.
My Observations
In my initial
experiments it appeared that the slower the flow rate the higher the negative
ORP. Therefore I tried to let the water run at the slowest possible rate, about
7 minutes per litre and at the highest ionising setting of 5. This usually gave
an ORP of up to –350 mV and a pH of about 10.7. A flow rate of 5 minutes per liter tended to give somewhat lower ORPs and a pH of about
10.0 to 10.5. However, a slow flow rate combined with a high pH eventually
caused problems with calcium precipitation. My bore water out of the tap has an
ORP of about +250 and a pH of 7.1.
Then I obtained a
TDS meter, which measures total dissolved solids or ionic minerals in parts per
million or ppm. I found that my bore water has about 350 ppm. After some good
rain it would drop towards 300 ppm and also the ORPs were usually lower, say
about -250 mV and sometimes much less, even without any rain.
A friend used
town water supplied from river water, which in turn was rainwater with a low
TDS of about 150 ppm. Initially his ORP readings were only –60 to –120 mV. The
highest ORP was with a very slow flow rate that produced a pH of 11.7. I
suggested using a calcium insert to increase the mineral content of the water
and that increased the ORP to about –200 at a higher flow rate and lower pH.
After ionizing
the TDS value of the reduced water may be higher or lower than the original
water. At lower pH values up to about 9 or 9.5 the TDS tends to increase,
either because minerals are now more concentrated or just more strongly
interacting with the electrodes of the TDS meter. However, with higher pH
values the TDS becomes increasingly lower and continues to drop over time as
large amounts of calcium precipitate.
Coming back to my
experiments, I was surprised to notice that higher flow rates could often
generate higher ORPs with lower pH. With a flow rate of between 1 and 4 minutes
per litre I could sometimes obtain ORPs of over -600 mV at a pH of 8.5 to 9.5.
Once I even had an OPR of over -600 with a fast flow rate and a pH of 7.9. However,
after some time the ORPs dropped back to about –300 mV. (I know now that this
was due to calcification of the alkaline electrodes).
Sometimes I had the highest ORP at a flow
rate of nearly
1 minute per
liter and sometimes at 4 minutes per liter but usually somewhere in-between and close
to 3 minutes per liter. However, this may be different with
different ionizers and different water. Ionizers with more or stronger
electrodes obviously will have higher optimal flow rates, while water with
lower mineral content will probably need lower flow rates.
The following table shows ‘typical’ differences in
ORPs at different flow rates in seconds per liter. These were measured
simultaneously with three different probes to show their varying sensitivities. The first line for each flow rate shows the results about
30 to 60 minutes after ionising and the second line in the same samples the
next day.
Table 1
ORPs at different flow rates
|
FLOW RATE |
pH |
PROBE 2 |
PROBE 3 |
PROBE 4 |
|
380 sec/ltr |
10.3 |
-292 |
-340 |
-212 |
|
|
|
-314 |
-396 |
-247 |
|
290 sec/ltr |
9.9 |
-284 |
-351 |
-201 |
|
|
|
-310 |
-383 |
-238 |
|
180 sec/ltr |
9.5 |
-308 |
-361 |
-230 |
|
|
|
-335 |
-417 |
-259 |
|
110 sec/ltr |
8.9 |
-304 |
-360 |
-230 |
|
|
|
-313 |
-399 |
-249 |
|
66 sec/ltr |
8.1 |
-288 |
-346 |
-211 |
|
|
|
-288 |
-360 |
-222 |
Most values are higher the next day. To see how long
properly stored water keeps its charge I kept a sample for 10 days. I thought by
waiting for 10 days I could more easily calculate the daily rate of decline. To
my surprise it measured over –700 mV.
This inspired me
to measure ORP values on consecutive days in the same batch of ionised water,
which I stored separately in several small bottles. The results are in the
following table:
Table 2
Setting 5, flow rate 3 minutes per liter
|
TIME |
PROBE 2 |
PROBE 3 |
PROBE 4 |
|
30 minutes |
-189 |
-260 |
-296 |
|
2 days |
-495 |
-555 |
-683 |
|
4 days |
-522 |
-675 |
-747 |
|
5 days |
-674 |
-704 |
-746 |
|
6 days |
-663 |
-736 |
-743 |
|
7 days |
-707 |
-732 |
-736 |
This means that
to obtain reliable measurements one should repeat the measurements for several
days. Depending on the sensitivity of the electrodes the highest value may be
reached somewhere between 3 and 7days. Most surprising to me was the close
agreement of all 3 probes on the seventh day. Sometimes a reading can be high
to start with but then it is not very stable and may for several days show
strong fluctuations. (However, see also below my more recent results with the
Modified Vinegar Cleanse).
I assume that the reason for this unexpected
behavior of the probes is the presence of oxygen and other oxidizing species in the
reduced water. These gradually become extinct by reacting with the reducing
chemicals. Electrodes can then give a truer
picture of the number of reactive electrons in the water. While
the amount of oxidising ions can be expected to be very small as compared to
the reducing ions, they have a strong influence on the probes because of the
exponential nature of the electrode sensitivity.
To illustrate tis
point, a certain number of reducing or oxidizing ions may give an ORP reading
of + or –100. A ten times greater amount may read + or –200 and a hundred times
greater number + or – 300. In this example only 1% of oxidizing ions will
reduce the ORP reading from –300 to –200. After several days almost all of the
oxidizing species will have been eliminated and the ORP measurement is now
close to –300.
However, in
reality the exponential effect is even greater. Vinny
Pinto on his Negative Hydrogen site (www.negative-hydrogen-ion.org)
has calculated
that every increase in negative ORP by 59 mV means a tenfold increase in the
number of reactive electrons, while a 118 mV change in the ORP relates to a
hundredfold change in electrons. Extending these calculations somewhat further
we obtain a ten thousandfold and a millionfold change
in electron density when the ORP changes by 236 mV or 354 mV.
To see how the ORP
changes in less strongly reduced water during storage I made two additional
tests. I produced one sample with a flow rate of 2 liters
per minute on the highest ionizing setting of 5 and another one at the same
flow rate at the lowest ionizing setting of 1. The results were as follows:
Table 3
Setting 5, flow rate 2 liters/minute
|
TIME |
PROBE 2 |
PROBE 3 |
PROBE 4 |
|
1 hour |
-151 |
-241 |
-274 |
|
1 day |
-138 |
-280 |
-298 |
|
2 days |
-141 |
-286 |
-285 |
|
3 days |
-090 |
-179 |
-171 |
Table 4
Setting 1, flow rate 2 liters/minute
|
TIME |
PROBE 2 |
PROBE 3 |
PROBE 4 |
|
1 hour |
-031 |
-099 |
-115 |
|
1 day |
-004 |
-094 |
-110 |
|
2 days |
+042 |
+050 |
+085 |
If you compare table 3 with table 2 you will notice that
the first measurements from 30 to 60 minutes after ionizing are very similar.
However, the maximum values obtained after several days of storage show that
the water in table 2 had about 50 million times more available electrons than
the water in table 3, which was produced at a six times faster flow rate.
Even more striking is the comparison with table 4. Here the
number of electrons is so low that the water cannot hold its charge for long.
The reason why the measurements of low-ORP water do not increase much during
storage is the small amount of infiltration of oxidizing species with fast
flows. Therefore in this case the initial measurements are a good indication of
the true value, unlike with slower flows that allow much greater mixing of
ions.
Other factors
that may influence the ORP are the rate of flow between acid and alkaline water
outlets, the time since the electrodes were last cleaned with vinegar and
whether the water is collected at the beginning or near the end of an ionising
cycle. Generally readings may be somewhat higher soon after vinegar cleaning
and near the end of a cycle but this is not consistent.
In order to slow
down the flow-rate of the alkaline water I use a very thin 4 mm alkaline outlet
hose as used for oxygen masks. This then greatly increases the flow-rate of the
acid water. Once I used a wide 8 mm alkaline outlet hose, the same as for the
acid outlet, and the flow of the acid water became very slow. However, it had a
very strong ozone-like smell.
Storing and Using Ionized Water
While most vitamins suffer losses during
cooking, the rate of degradation is much higher in alkaline than in neutral
conditions and even less with an acid pH. Therefore, habitually cooking with
alkaline water can lead to vitamin deficiencies. This was noticed especially in
some regions of
Individuals with weak stomach acid commonly
suffer from mineral deficiencies and often have soft fingernails and poor hair
quality in addition to lack of energy and other problems. Also vitamin B1
requires gastric acid for its absorption. Commonly we produce less stomach acid
as we get older but even many young individuals, such as asthmatics, do not
produce enough stomach acid.
Drinking alkaline water on its own does not
cause a problem because the stomach does not deliberately produce more acid to
neutralize it. Also the mineral density of ionized water is not very high and
it is easily neutralized. A glass of water (200 ml) at a pH of 10.0 changed to pH 6.9 with the addition of 16
drops of lemon juice.
Alkaline water with a lower mineral content would
require even less acid to neutralize. An observed drop in ORP with the addition of
organic matter is not necessarily a disadvantage. I
assume that the reacting electrons just are more tightly bound but will still be available to
us after absorption.
It is different if a large amount of
strongly alkaline water is combined with food, either by cooking in it or when
drinking close to a meal. Then the stomach is required to produce acid to
digest the food but instead the acid is partly neutralized by the alkaline
water. This is not much of a problem at lower pH levels, perhaps up to a pH of
8.5 or for individuals with strong gastric acid but it may be a disadvantage
for others. A safe interval between drinking strongly alkaline water and a meal
is about 30 minutes before and 2 to 3 hours after the meal.
The next question involves storing ionized
water to preserve its negative charge. Some of the influences on its stability
are as follows. A small amount of water exposed to air loses its charge much
faster than a larger volume. I measured, for instance, a charge of -328 in half
a glass of water go to +6 within 7 hours. In about one litre of water from the
same batch the charge was still
Another influence is the temperature. When I
heated a cup of water to boiling temperature for a few minutes it had lost all
of its negative charge after cooling, while the unheated water was still about
-300. However, it is not the temperature as such that causes the fast discharge, but rather the strongly speeded-up reaction of the
negative charge with the oxygen in the air. In a laboratory experiment
it was found that autoclaved water only lost its charge if it was exposed to
air, without any air in the sample it did not discharge.
Initially I believed that refrigerating or
even freezing the ionized water was required to preserve its charge for days or
weeks until I found that exposure to light discharged the water. Now I store
the water in brown glass bottles (200 to 750 ml) filled to the top but not
touching the top, and in addition I keep them in a closed cupboard. The bottle
top needs an airtight seal otherwise the water will discharge much more
quickly. However, the charge in an only partly filled bottle keeps longer under
refrigeration and very much longer in a frozen sample.
As mentioned before, the negative charge of
water produced with a slow flow rate may still rise during storage. However,
this does not mean that it is more desirable to drink stored water rather than
immediately after producing it. Antioxidant properties do not increase during
storage, only active oxygen species are being eliminated and it may actually be
beneficial to ingest some of these.
I also found that the steel outlet pipe of
the ionizer unit reduces the negative charge and even slightly lowers the pH.
The degree of deterioration depends on the strength of the water flow. With a
strong flow (1 minute per litre) the reduction in the charge by the steel pipe
was negligible as compared to a plastic hose.
However, when I inserted a thin plastic hose
into the steel pipe and collected water simultaneously from both outlets at a
very low flow rate, there was a great difference. The water coming out of the
plastic hose had -278, while the ORP of the water running through the steel
pipe was only -170. This shows that we should not store charged water in
contact with blank metal as for instance with an unprotected metal bottle top.
Negative Hydrogen
Scientific articles tend to call ionized
water ‘Electrolyzed Reduced Water’ or ERW for short. The chemical reactions
during water ionization are not well understood. I believe the main reactions
to be as follows.
The negative electrode or cathode donates
electrons while the positive electrode or anode accepts electrons out of the
solution. In the water flowing past the electrodes positive minerals or
cations, such as sodium and calcium, move towards the cathode while negative
anions, such as chloride and fluoride, migrate towards the anode. Electrons
emitted by the cathode are attracted by the positive charges of cations and
react with them to form neutral metal atoms such as sodium or calcium.
These metal atoms are rather unstable and
highly reactive. They immediately react with water molecules to form
hydroxides, such as sodium hydroxide, while the surplus electron is transferred
to the hydrogen ion to produce a neutral hydrogen atom. Hydrogen atoms, in
turn, are also very unstable and react either with other hydrogen atoms to form
hydrogen molecules, or they may accept a second electron from the cathode to
complete their electron shell and become negative hydrogen ions.
Expressed
in simple chemical equations, using table salt as an example, this looks as follows:
Ionic aqueous solution: NaCl Þ Na+ +
Cl-
Sodium ion becomes a neutral atom by
accepting electron from cathode: Na+ + e-
Þ Na
Sodium atom immediately reacts with water to form sodium
hydroxide by
donating an electron to the hydrogen ion, which in turn becomes
a hydrogen atom:
Na (Na+ +
e-) + H2O Þ Na+
Hydrogen atom either combines with another hydrogen atom to form
a hydrogen molecule or it accepts a second electron to form a negative
hydrogen ion:
H + H Þ H2
or H + e- Þ H-
Sodium hydroxide and other common hydroxides are highly soluble except for calcium
hydroxide, which starts precipitating
out of calcium-rich water when the pH goes above 10. Drinking water containing hydroxide is not a problem,
at least up to a pH of 10 or 11, because normally so little is present that a few drops of lemon juice or gastric acid
will neutralize
it.
Negative hydrogen ions are the basis for the negative
potential and antioxidant properties of reduced water. They can become
reasonably stable by attracting the positive hydrogen potentials of water
molecules. A water molecule is a weak dipole with a negative potential at its
oxygen and positive potentials at each of its hydrogen atoms. The negative
hydrogen ion is now in a protective cage surrounded by probably six water
molecules. I
assume that in this form it can pass the intestinal wall and reach the
bloodstream.
Theoretically negative hydrogen ions may
also react with cations to form unstable hydrides, such as sodium hydride.
These, too, may be temporarily stabilised in protective water molecule
cages. Other possibilities are the formation of negatively charged hydrated cation
complexes
and colloids.
All of these
are very unstable and likely to react with any similar unstable oxidizing species present. This may account for the initial strong fluctuations in
the ORP potential. Contrary to theoretical
expectations, measurements have shown that reduced water is higher in dissolved oxygen than the tap
water before ionizing.
This model shows how important it is for
sufficient minerals to be present. Fewer minerals require a slower flow rate
for this process to work. However, at a slower flow rate more water molecules
are being split and more hydroxyl ions as well as hydrogen atoms are being
formed. This causes the reduced water to become more alkaline but does not lead to
more negative hydrogen being formed. The abundance of hydrogen atoms now leads
mainly to the formation of hydrogen molecules, which escape as gas bubbles.
A similar process near the anode leads to
the formation of neutral hydroxyl molecules. These react with each other to
form water and highly reactive oxygen atoms, which then combine to form stable
oxygen molecules in addition to ozone, hydrogen peroxide and possibly other
oxygen species such as hypochlorite.. It is likely that in
addition also some chlorine is
being formed.
Previously negative hydrogen was thought to
be present only in highly heated gases but more recently it has been found that
it is widespread in biological systems, including fresh (organic) fruit and
vegetables. It is also relatively high in mountain streams and rainwater,
especially during thunderstorms. Negative hydrogen is now thought to be the
primary antioxidant of all biological systems. For an interesting site on
negative hydrogen and ionised water see www.negative-hydrogen-ion.org.
Using Oxidized Water
Strongly oxidized water is used by an
increasing number of hospitals in the
The acid water from a through-flow ionizer
is usually not strong enough as a household disinfectant but may be used on parts
of the body that are infected with fungi or other microbes, we may also use it
for oral hygiene.
Some Recommendations
Normally, as a user of reduced water, you do
not need to be too concerned with achieving the absolute maximum antioxidant
potential from your ioniser. I did this mainly to find some general rules for
consistently producing high-quality reduced water. Nevertheless, you should
know the approximate mineral content of your water and preferably have the ORP
checked sometime after set-up and whenever there is a change in operating
conditions.
There are different possibilities for doing
this. Ideally you may have a local distributor of water ionizers who has the
necessary instruments and can help you setting your ionizer up for optimal
efficiency. Alternatively, you may find other ionizer owners in your area and
share the cost of buying an ORP meter, a TDS meter and an electronic pH meter.
You may also contact a local water treatment or testing company.
If you use municipal town water that comes
mainly from river and rainwater, you can expect to have low mineral values and
should consider installing a small tank to supply your ionizer with water. You
may just use a 5 to 10 liter container about 1.8 to 2
m higher than the inlet of your ionizer. The container does not need to have a
bottom outlet as you can siphon the water over the top. Use wide hose
connections (8 mm) without any restricting taps otherwise you may need more
height for a sufficiently strong water flow. You can regulate the flow with an
external hose clamp.
If you do not know the mineral content of your
water but suspect it to be low, you may just add 2 g or half a teaspoon of salt
or better twice this amount of hydrated magnesium chloride per 10 liters of water. Otherwise add enough to get a TDS value of
about 350 to 400 ppm in your water. By adding more minerals than that I did not
get any higher ORPs in my tests, although that may be possible with stronger
electrodes or higher flow rates.
Pure rainwater in
plastic or metal tanks is very low in minerals with about 20 to 50 ppm and not
suited for ionising. However, it is easy to add sufficient minerals to raise
the TDS to over 300 ppm. The cheapest way of doing this is by adding salt at a
rate of about 3 g per 10 liters. Assuming that the
TDS was 50 ppm before, this will raise it to about 350 ppm. If you prefer to
add magnesium chloride instead, you may buy a 25 kg bag of hydrated magnesium
chloride (from a chemical company) and add about 4 g per 10 liters
in addition to 2 g of sodium bicarbonate for a truly ‘unique water’.
Modified Vinegar Cleanse
If you do not
have an ORP meter it is advisable to check the pH of the alkaline water or make
an ORP colour test once a week. Otherwise you may just produce filtered but not
ionised water without realising what is going on. This happened to me when I
had not ORP-tested my water for about 2 weeks. To my surprise the ionized water
had the same ORP and pH as the tap water despite all the indicator lights
working, the flows between acid and alkaline water remaining normal and having
done a vinegar cleanse only a week before.
As I use bore
water high in calcium, I suspected that the cathode (the electrode that
produces the alkaline water) was completely coated with calcium carbonate and
that the normal vinegar cleanse was not sufficient under these conditions. This
turned out to be correct.
If your water is
high in calcium I now recommend the following procedure. Remove the alkaline
outlet hose, tilt the ioniser backwards and use a large syringe to slowly
inject about 20 to 40 ml of white vinegar directly into the alkaline outlet. If
you have difficulty buying a large syringe from a chemist, you may also pour
the vinegar through a small funnel or use a suitable spray bottle.
If you put your
ear close to the alkaline outlet you can easily hear the bubbling inside. After
about 10 minutes the bubbling stops and now you inject 10 to 20 ml of
additional vinegar. After 5 to 10 minutes the bubbling stops again and you
inject more vinegar. In this way you continue until there is no further or only
very little bubbling with additional vinegar. Then do
a 2-minute cleaning cycle before using the ioniser setting.
If it is badly
calcified you may have to inject vinegar more than 20-times. Preferably do this
regularly every 2 weeks to avoid a massive calcium build-up. Occasionally you
may also perform a normal vinegar cleanse by pouring vinegar into the opened
filter. As an alternative method, I have now started injecting 10 to 20 ml of
vinegar just once every other day after producing my ionized water.
Since starting
the new method of vinegar cleanse, my alkaline water consistently measures more
than –600 mV and usually more than –700 mV immediately after producing it and
the ORP is very stable.
ORP Measurements
I use a
Milwaukee ORP meter, the SM 500 with an official working range of +999 to –999
mV, although it indicates up to + or – 1999 mV. Like other ORP meters it has a
probe with a platinum electrode that is sensitive to the flow of electrons and
a calomel electrode as a stable reference electrode.
Initially
ORP testing was very frustrating as the measurements were rather erratic,
partly due to the inherent instability of the ionized water but mainly because
of the instability of the probes. However, eventually I learned to keep the
probes sensitive and accurate. However, when measuring simultaneously with
several probes results still continue to vary widely with weakly ionized water
that is with readings below about –200 mV. All of the described difficulties
apply only to measuring the ORP of alkaline ionized water. In conventional
reducing liquids such as vitamin C solutions there is no problem with ORP
probes.
Most of
the eight probes that I worked with were rather slow and results consistently
too low right from the time of purchase compared to a good probe used simultaneously.
However, more recently I found several ways to improve electrode performance.
For instance after first testing a new probe with the ORP Standard solution,
ionized water then gave a reading of –136. Two other probes showed –556 and
–548 mV in the same sample. After I gently cleaned the platinum wire for a few
seconds with fine sandpaper it immediately read –552 mV.
However
many probes are not stable and need frequent sandpapering to keep them
sensitive and accurate. You can notice this by measurements starting rather low
and creeping up only slowly. To give an example, a probe may start measuring at
–200 and take 10 to 30 minutes to reach a highest value of -500 mV. After
sensitizing the probe and measuring the same sample of ionized water it may
start at –450 and in 1 to 5 minutes reach a stable endpoint of –700 mV.
Another
and often better way to keep your probe sensitive is by frequently immersing it
for 5 to 10 minutes in strongly oxidized acid water of +800 to +1100 mV. If the
water is weaker, you may keep the probe in it for longer. One probe that I presently work with
sometimes gets its best performance only after using sandpapering as well as
immersion in oxidized water before measuring.
It also
helps to immerse a probe for an hour in 3 or 6% hydrogen peroxide or clean the
electrode tip with a cotton swab soaked in 35% hydrogen peroxide. While this
tends to improve electrode performance, it is much less effective than
immersion in acid water with a high positive ORP.
With
batch ionizers it is generally easy to obtain acid water with a high positive
ORP. With through-flow ionizers you may need to restrict the volume of the acid
outflow with a clamp or by similar means and use the highest setting as well as
water with a high mineral content. The high positive ORP is very stable and
keeps for weeks or months in a closed bottle, which does not need to be filled
to the top.
Instead
of keeping probes immersed in ORP storage solution I prefer to store my probes
moist in the supplied airtight plastic cap but not immersed in any liquid.
Another occasional problem with probes is a black fungus growth in warm
weather. You may brush this gently off with a toothbrush or with a cotton swab
dipped in hydrogen peroxide.
Some
probes need very little attention while others need a lot. Frequently
alternating measurements between reducing and oxidizing water seems to be good
for all of them and it also keeps any fungi away. After experimenting for a
while you will get a feel for the needs of your probe.
Color Tests
Colour
tests with pH paper or a liquid pH indicator are relatively cheap and usually
sufficient when working with an ioniser. You may also make a simple colour test
for the reducing power of your ionised water. In addition to using this test
instead of an ORP meter, you may also use it with unusual results to check
whether your OPP meter is still working properly. Buy some Condy’s crystals or
potassium permanganate from a chemist or gardening shop.
Dissolve a tiny amount of the crystals in some water to make a deeply colored purple solution. Fill one of two identical clear glass jars or bottles with water before ionizing and the other with ionised water. With a dropper add sufficient drops of the