Scale and Bacteria Control Comparison Between

BacComber and Chemical Treatment

Chemical BacComber

Descaling and 1. Cannot perform descaling on existing 1. Ability to remove existing scale in
scale present in the cooling system. the cooling system.
fouling
2. Chemical and other deposit will build up 2. No chemical and other deposit
over period of time. could build up due to descaling
effect and absence of chemicals.

Scale control 1. Use chelating agents such as phosphate 1. ULF waves used to form water
to prevent formation of hard calcite cluster to reduce the formation of
principle and scale. calcium carbonate. Scales that
side effect 2. Phosphate promote growth of bacteria may form is non-sticking aragonite
and algae. soft scale instead of the surface
3. Overdose causes calcium phosphate adhering calcite hard scale.
which inhibits heat transfer. Uneven
coverage due to under-dosing can cause
localized corrosion attack

Scale control 1. For effective scaling control, usually TDS 1. Scale control is effective even at
is controlled at below 1000 ppm. high TDS level of up to 3000
effectiveness ppm. However, maximum TDS limit
2. Control of scale at higher TDS level not
recommended. must be within authority sewerage
discharge control limit.

Bacteria 1. Use biocide to control bacteria 1. Uses copper and silver ions to
2. Chemical dosage is based on certain control bacteria and alter the
control DNA to prevent bacteria
assumed cycle of concentration, which is
principle and difficult to control. multiplying. In addition, the ULF
side effect 3. Scale controlling agent such as phosphate treatment controls and enhances
promotes bacteria growth which may be the overall bacteria control
out of control when biocide dosage is effectiveness.
low. 2. Non-corrosive and
4. Most biocides are highly corrosive and environmentally friendly.
will corrode the metal members in the NOTE: The Copper & Silver Ions was the 1 st
cooling system. generation system & was obsoleted many years
back. The latest 3rd generation that has started to
5. Environmentally unfriendly commission in 2011 is ULF+Emitters system.

Bacteria 1. Bacteria control effectiveness varies with 1. Effective and continuous control of
the dosings. bacteria in the water.
control
2. Effectiveness depends on the other 2. Effective in controlling bacteria in
effectiveness chemicals introduced during treatment. biofilm and under the scale and
3. Ineffective in controlling bacteria that are deposits. The descaling effect of
under the chemical deposits, scales and in BacComber system will remove the
the biofilm. bacteria under the scale, deposit,
biofilm and inhibit their growth.
Comparison Between BacComber and Chemical Treatment:
Corrosion, algae, slime control and cost effectiveness

Chemical BacComber
Corrosion control 1. Using corrosion inhibitor such as 1. Using ULF wave to generate water
principle and side phosphate to control corrosion. cluster to reduce the formation of iron
effect 2. Phosphate is nutrient to bacteria and oxide and in addition, promote the
algae. Hence can promote bacteria formation of corrosion protection
and algae growth, microbial magnetite layer instead of non-
induced corrosion. protective hematite when iron oxide is
formed.

Corrosion control 1. Excessive biocide can cause severe 1. Absence of chemicals, hence no
effectiveness corrosion. "created" corrosion problems.
2. Excessive chemical can cause pitting
or under-deposit localized corrosion.

Algae and slime 1. Effective in algae control but subject 1. Effective in algae control but subject
control to environment conditions. to environment conditions.
2. Excessive phosphate will promote 2. Very effective in slime / biofilm
algae growth. control because of descaling effect.
3. Slime and biofilm control
effectiveness vary between dosing.

Water saving 1. Heavy water consumption due to
heavy bleed off to control the
desired cycle of concentration or to
maintain the TDS level.
2. Drained off water cannot be
recycled due to chemical content.
1. Great water saving, because of
ability to maintain higher cycle of
concentration compared with chemical
treatment. Water saving cost can be
more than the treatment cost.
2. Water can be recycled as it does not
contain chemicals. Further saving can
be achieved if recycled.

Energy saving 1. Well treated system can maintain
the energy consumption.
2. Unable to remove the existing scale
and deposit hence cannot further
reduce energy consumption.
1. Very effective in descaling the existing
scales hence further reduce the energy
consumption.
2. Energy cost saving usually more than
treatment cost.
3. For new cooling system, low energy
consumption level can be maintained.

Economy 1. Recurring perpetually 1. One time investment with a payback

time not between 16 to 24 months.

Safety, health 1. Environmentally unfriendly, cost of 1. Very safe, environmentally friendly, no

hazard, handling and storage of chemical is health hazard, no handling and
environment and high. Dangerous to be handled and storage cost.
stored by staff.
ISO 14000
consideration