Talk:Electrolysed water

Moved

I moved it here and added some more info to flesh it out. I'll continue to add stuff as I come across it.James.folsom 18:57, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Where did you move it from? It should really really be spelt 'electrolysed'. -yzed is almost always just wrong; it comes from a completely different root from the -ise/-ize family of words. --Oolong 21:48, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I've read about this as EO water thus finding this is more rapid with that description as well

electrolyzed is USA way to write electrolysed

No, electrolyzed is a USA mis-spelling of electrolysed. Seriously. It's from the root electrolysis, Greek -lysis - not electrolyzis. The whole -ise vs. -ize quandary (which is not as simple as British vs. American spellings, but that's a story for another time) doesn't apply here (or in the context of analyse, for instance). -yze is always wrong. --Oolong 14:40, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Are you saying that Michael Faraday was wrong? Here's how he wrote it: "For electro-chemically decomposed I shall often use the term electrolyzed." Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London, vol.124, p.79 (1834). ABehrens (talk) 19:02, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Oolong, your heart is in the right place. But -yzed is actually the correct spelling in the United States, whether or not it began as a misspelling. Check any American dictionary. There are a number of Americanized spellings that share this origin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.89.203.116 (talk) 08:28, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Suggest the US spelling, "electrolyzed water", as the page title, with the UK "electrolysed water" pointing here as well. (I believe WP rules call for retaining whatever spelling the page had when it was first created.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.108.184.224 (talk) 04:46, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

does kangen water fit here?

it is very popular with the Japanese (the japancentre in Picadilly,London serves it). technically its Electrolyzed right? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 88.96.235.230 (talk) 21:31, 10 April 2007 (UTC).

New Stupid for Our Times

The chemistry on this subject and the claims made regarding health benefits of this technology are simply stupid. It is like homeopathic water or whatever; completely wrong, but hardly worth the time to document it. Simply changing the pH of bleach will cause the exact same species to be made. Leave this for the creationists and global-warming deniers. I see to-day's LA Times has a front-page unquestioning article about it. Sam Zell at his destructive worst. 23Feb09 saleemsan —Preceding unsigned comment added by Saleemsan (talk • contribs) 06:55, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Nothing new. Historical notes on "Electrolytic Disinfectant"

An editorial in LANCET (August 18, 1906 p.453-54)describes "the bacteriological experiments"... "in connexion with the Hermite process of sewage treatment by electricity which was tried on a small scale at Worthing in 1893."

"Putrid meat or fish offal...is most effectually deodorised when immersed in the electrolysed fluid."

The disinfecting properties are attributed to the chlorine produced by electrolysis, and there is discussion of a practical apparatus that can produce a solution of standard strength and stability. "The solution used contains magnesium chloride and sodium chloride...The solution is made faintly alkaline with caustic soda so as to prevent the formation and escape of free chlorine in the cells."Aiglefier (talk) 16:26, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Basically homemade Clorox, is it not? 207.229.10.238 (talk) 19:10, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes, basically homemade bleach, a.k.a. sodium hypochlorite, but without the added hydroxide, which is a necessary stabilizer for commercial products. (Household bleach must be able to sit in warehouses, supermarkets, and homes for a year or more.) At neutral or acidic pH, it's the less-stable hypochlorous acid, which is just as good a disinfectant, but less caustic and much easier on the skin. What we have here is a lot of marketing hype and nonsense, built around a perfectly ordinary technology that the general public is unaware of. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.108.184.224 (talk) 04:35, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

this article is gibberish. the chemistry is already covered under chloralkali process (unpartitioned cell), and no doubt dozens of other places. this page has been created in support of a scam product (if only because they imply the product is drinkable because "it's only salt". well, so is metallic sodium before electrolysis) and should be removed. electrolysis of brine initially produces sodium hydroxide, then sodium hypochlorite under alkaline conditions, then sodium chlorate. so yes, it's basically household bleach with sodium hydroxide. the claim that hypochlorous acid and sodium hydroxide coexist in solution is absurd. there's no point trying to correct this page because it's stupid, confused, incoherent and pointless. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.175.57.184 (talk) 16:54, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Clarity Issues: "Both of these species"

"Both of these species" ... Having read the article sited, it is clear that what is meant are sodium hydroxide and hypochlorous acid. However, I believe that the use of the word species is too colloquial for an encyclopedia and it would be clearer -- particularly after the technical section before it -- if the two substances were just spelled out in the text. I'm making this change. Toyblocks (talk) 20:34, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

There is chemical species. As far as I know, it is more used when separately discussing the parts of an ionic compound. Somehow I woke up for an infomercial selling an EW device. The sodium ions and hypochlorous ions would be chemical species in sodium hypochlorite, in solution. Gah4 (talk) 09:14, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

species is a perfectly common technical term in chemistry, and if you're not familiar with the word CITED then i can't imagine why you think you should be editing a page on chemistry. this page IS an EW device infomercial, re-edited by people under the impression EW is some kind of breakthrough — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.175.57.184 (talk) 17:09, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

creation

Can we add any more details to this statement: "specially designed reactor which allows the separation of the cathodic and anodic solutions" What kind of design? Nafion films? Eagleapex (talk) 02:59, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

---

The most commonly used membrane in these systems is the DuPont Nafion ion exchange membrane. The membrane restricts the migration of molecules and ions. According to White's Handbook of Chlorination and Alternative Disinfectants:

The membrane allows sodium ions and a very small amount of water to pass through it into the cathode compartment. The membrane does not allow chloride ions and chlorine gas to cross it and enter the cathode compartment. The membrane also prevents hydroxyl ions in the cathode compartment from crossing over to the anode compartment.

Source: http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=9_2idzksARMC&oi=fnd&pg=PR27&dq=white%27s+handbook+of+chlorination+and+alternative+disinfectants&ots=jFKQqxKKXl&sig=OWWTHlUv1vHw3J5coZg7it-ceqQ#v=onepage&q=white's%20handbook%20of%20chlorination%20and%20alternative%20disinfectants&f=false

Moorstag (talk) Moorstag —Preceding undated comment added 01:56, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

Ozone/peroxide?

I came across this article in passing and I have serious misgivings about the chemistry (apparently) involved. Tap water contains very little salt and you're never going to be able to convert 100% of this to bleach by electrolysis (in fact I'd be very surprised if you could convert even half of it). So the amount of bleach you'd be making would be tiny - certainly not enough to sterilize things. It seems more likely that you're generating small amounts of either peroxide or ozone in solution, these are far more effective at disinfection and decompose rapidly, which would explain why 'activated water' can't be stored whereas bleach can. Generating these species electrochemically is difficult but I know Sanyo was looking at this a few years ago with some of tantalum oxide based electrode. Project Osprey (talk) 12:45, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

The device I see advertized has one add salt. Since everyone knows how safe salt water is, they can say safe, and no harsh chemicals. But in the end, it is sodium hypochlorite, just like common household bleach, but lower concentration. But then the usual bleach is diluted for use. I am not sure about the equilibrium between hypochlorite and peroxide. Gah4 (talk) 09:22, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Electrolyte

That now In the sellers market they have bottles of water that use electrolytes for seasoning flavor as oppose for the correct use To help the bodies waste emlination and nutrition Ms Robin Vee Williams (talk) 03:12, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Electrolytes are used for food and drink absorption but they advertise it as a favor additive what's up with all the flause advertizment on our food labels of our supermarket nutria giant need Ms Robin Vee Williams (talk) 03:18, 6 July 2016 (UTC)

Acidic electrolyzed water

Is it the same? Quote from https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2017.00988:

...acidic electrolyzed water (AEW) which has attracted attention in recent years as a promising sanitizing agent in the food, medical, and agricultural industries (Wang et al., 2014). AEW is generated by anodic electrolysis of dilute NaCl solutions and the physicochemical properties include low pH, available chlorine concentration (ACC) and oxidation reduction potential (ORP) (Kim et al., 2000; Xiong et al., 2010; Hao et al., 2012).

Acidic electrolyzed water has been documented to be an effective disinfectant for inactivating foodborne pathogens including Escherichia coli, Vibrio parahaemolyticus, and Listeria monocytogenes (Kim et al., 2000; Wang et al., 2014). The postulated mode of action is reduction of cell wall, nucleus, and outer membrane integrity which leads to the rapid leakage of intracellular DNA and proteins (Zeng et al., 2010, 2011; Ding et al., 2016). Additionally, AEW is an environmental friendly sanitizer and poses minimal risk to human health (Mori et al., 1997; Wang et al., 2014).

SCIdude (talk) 05:51, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

merge with Electrochlorination?

they both seem to be describing the same thing Lovebuny (talk) 10:21, 31 March 2021 (UTC)