Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 14 to 26 of 80

Thread: PHI Cells

  1. #14
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Lubbock Texas
    Posts
    778
    Post Likes
    Jim sounds like you are calling for World peace or something. I agree with what you are saying but its just not going to happen in most cases. It sounds good and all, but being in the field for over 20 years tells me to have total control of your environment in your work or living space is a pipe dream. To many variables effect each other. You can follow the code book to a tee, then get a customer with bad allergies or even chemical allergies , the first person they come to after the doctors visits is the HVAC contractor to make the environment tighter ,dryer,humidity free, and particulate free in there minds. All options, all technologies have to be evaluated to see if they will be cost effective in each individual situation, including our product line.
    Time to go home and eat a steak off the grill. Been doing the CIAQ stuff all day I need a break.

  2. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    710
    Post Likes
    World peace might be a bit much. I was hoping that we could all hold hands around the campfire and sing koombaya.

    My point was there is a lot more to IAQ than one product. And your point is well taken. Once the consumer calls the contractor it is up to the contractor to be knowledgeable and a problem solver. Those that get it will prosper. Those that don't will not.

    Of course you could liven things up by reposting the article I wrote on RGF last year. Must be in the archives somewhere.

  3. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Columbus, Ohio/ Bagram, Afghanistan
    Posts
    54
    Post Likes
    Thread Starter
    All right guys, here's the bottom line. You will never, EVER get everyone to agree on any one thing.

    If any one of you can show me a product that performs to 100% of it's manufacturer's claims 100% of the time, with 0% ill effects to 100% of the people who use it in any given condition or circumstance I will fall in line and back that product. Until that time, for me the product that I will endorse is the PHI Cell. I've worked with it enough to see that it at least does MOST of what is claimed in the situations that I've put it in. Granted this is from RGF, but the claim is that they replicate as closely as they can an IAQ to mirror outdoor air. The major hurdle is the absence of sunlight, lightning and anything else that are natural oxidizers. All stats or shop talk aside, I've worked with this product in some extreme conditions and was impressed with the results.

  4. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    710
    Post Likes
    Ar
    You are right we may never persuade you that the PHI cell is not a great product - but it is not about you. It IS about the many people who read this thread and may get the wrong impression.

    You might want to read this article entitled "Alchemy, Indoor Air and the Black Box." www.texairfilters.com/news/3.htm. The article appeared in this month's edition of Air Media magazine. RGF was one of the inspirations for the article.

  5. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    44
    Post Likes

    PHI cell

    Do you Ecoquest distributors know what PHI cell is? It's a marketing term for the process of Photocatalytic oxidation or PCO. It's using chemicals in white paint as an oxidizer of VOC's when reacted with UV light. However, Ecoquest is using a full length lamp - a UVV wavelength lamp. It's an ozone lamp. But, let's not focus on that. I want to focus on the fact that PHI (really PCO ) is best utilized with a UVA or UVB wavelength lamp not the full length spectrum lamp used by Ecoquest. So first Ecoquest lamps are using a less effective spectrum of light and a light that creates ozone.

    NOT to mention that there is no such spectrum of light called UVX. It doesn't exist. It's another marketing term.

    I just don't understand why companies have to take advantage of consumers and put a bad rap on the actual science based companies out there.

  6. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    335
    Post Likes
    Breatheeasy,

    I just found out I have COPD. It was caused by a combination of things, teflon burn in my lungs 5 yrs ago, 16yrs of smokin butts, 5yrs, smoking drugs etc. Anyway I found out because I lent out all my units for a couple months and was having problems with my stomache and coughing...well the stomache was an ulcer(unrelated) and the lungs was COPD. So anyway. I was cautious about using the unit, despite how much I believe in RCI and it's less oxidation lil bro PHI, anyway, yesterday was the first time in my life I couldn't breath outside. There was an IAQ warning. I am keeping the ozone down but the ammount coming out of the cell isn't bothering me. I even went to someones apartment and was having problems so the RCI was helping a lot, to the point that I spent the day with it, I couldn't do anything else. Anyway I wanted to appologize about trashing you for what you have said about out door ozone mixing with chemicals, It seems more the chemicals than the ozone cuz the ozone was up on the unit for a bit and wasn't bothering me, but outside was bad. We have lots of testimonials to COPD patients but now I am one of em and hopefully I will have the same results. I quit smoking and am going back in a month. so I will let you know if there is an improvement. Then I will try to go without RCI and see what the chart for improvement looks like. I know those aren't good controls but it has got me curious.

  7. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    335
    Post Likes
    Kieth, I am an EQ dealer. Ther reason RCI out performs PHI is the ammount of surface exposure, as far as the competition goes according to EQ is that one, PCO is more effective in the presence of ozone. Secondly the UVX is UVA, UVB, And UVC. They don't drown eachother out so you are getting everything that you would with a PCO and then some. Plus it isn't just TiO2 on the matrix. It is also copper, silver, and rhodium which speed up the processes and make it more effective. There is so lil ozone that the cell isn't considered an ozone device...maybe it is you who needs to do some more research. We are unveiling three new RCI products shortly....they are phasing out all ozone based units.

    AR4- email me, my add is in my profile.

    I also want to point out as you(the majority) have said that IAQ doesn't have one solution, yet you still use HEPA everything. You could potentially worsen someones health by enstilling a false confidence in something that doesn't do anything for microbes or even what it says it does. Ours may not get the particles as well but if used together in a "green" house ther would be nothing to interact with and would essentially be the perfect system. I understand everyones health concerns but we aren't going to hurt someone seriously in 3 days of a lil ozone(.o1-.02ppm from the cell since the generator can be turned off for just RCI) exposure. So if it bothers them they wont buy it. But that doesn't mean it shouldn't be sold. Since an air handler can only tell you the volume of air it pulls per hour it is proven that you can't get every cubic cm of air through the box per hour yet many of you claim 4 air changes or whatever per hour when in fact it is only volume and in a year wont complete even one true complete change. It is misrepresented greatly but you all have jobs so apparently they have uses and can help, as can our product when used correctly. Ecoquest has been great to me and if anythinI have let them down. However the one thing I will fault them on is their lack of available info. You ever notice that RGF guys are as passionate as EQ guys? Why is that? RGF isn't mlm but you use that as an excuse to ostricize and discredit EQ dealers. They are passionate because even after selling for a short time you see the potential and it is undeniable when it helps you yourself. I bet every one of you has some toxic chemicals in your house that you use to clean with and whatever but you use them still cuz they get the job done and done well. Despite your testing BE, which was just as incomplete as the Uof C report there are many people with dust and particle issues that have found relief with these units after buying austin air Hepa systems and not having good results. Nothing is good for everywhere but RCI and PHI do have their uses where nothing else has worked! Oh and how do you remove submicron particles that don't even move with the air with a filter? Ionization is the only way in that case...guess you better ban the HEPA...see sounds sily.

  8. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    44
    Post Likes

    health Canada

    Interesting that you say it's not an ozone generator when in fact Health Cananda states that it is and that Ecoquest is unable to sell their products in Canada or get CSA Approval.

    http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ahc-asc/media...99_62bk_e.html

    A full spectrum lamp produces much more ozone than just a UVA or UVB or UVC spectrum lamp. What's your guidelines on replacing the PHI cell?

    Why if Ecoquest claims they have the perfect product would be phasing out the ozone lamps?

  9. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    335
    Post Likes
    Really Kieth, that is why we have 5,000 canadian dealers. The low oxidation RCI cell is entella certified and sold in Canada as a non producing device despite the bulb still produces ozone. Once again, research! Canada is our biggest expansion over the last couple years...well actually Austraillia is but Canada was second. They did however throw us out in 99 but it has since been taken care of with RCI...enough with the outdated material!

    In 1999 RCI didn't even exist and we only sold Alpines ozone generators. This is the problem. People like you who don't read the dates on things...like the FTC issue too. We have shown enough proof to be able to legaly claim everything banned in the suit except that it heals anything cuz it doesn't but if it gets rid of what is irritating you then you get better. The web is a dangerous place for people like you who don't factor in the context of when it was written, especially when we are debating a technology that is only 5 yrs old and you are posting 10 yr old articles. How is any of that relevant? It isn't, you are just trying to make EQ look bad and that is sad. If you actually researched the company you would feel otherwise I promise. They are a Christian company and unlike most "Christian companys" they actually conduct themselves like one. Though they still make mistakes, after all we are all human, I think.

    Every 3 yrs the light and cell need to be replace. I think it is about $115 total replacement (fresh air 6" and upkeep. 9" PHI replacement is $100 I think and the RGF 14 inch I think is $118 I get RGF products cheaper than RGF distributer because of the deal EQ made with them and I am an associate mgr with EQ. I haven't been a dealer for 3 yrs so I haven't ordered any replacements yet. They were cheap enough though.

  10. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    335
    Post Likes
    Kev, correction though RCI and PHI are photocatalytic oxidation type technology it is known as Photo Plasma and differes from PCO in that at 100nm the UV burns the air creating the ozone and the other PCO processes break down the newly generated ozone along with the moisture to create a greater number of oxidisers. I know some would disagree with me but that is how I understand it. Like the formaldehyde issue. Everyone argues that PCO's create it but studies show ours destroys it.

    Most PCO's use a 254nm bacteriacidal bulb. ours is 100nm-300nm with a 25,000hr active life. The light may last longer but wont work as well.

  11. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    710
    Post Likes
    Moldi
    I was sorry to learn that you have been diagnosed with COPD. You know my opinions on anything that generates ozone around people with respiratory illnesses, so I won't give you any advice. You know the risks as well as anyone. Just take care.

    We never claimed that our tests on the RCI/PHI technology were comprehensive. Our goal was to determine 3 things: Is this technology effective at removing particles? Does it produce ozone? Does it produce the desired positive results with indoor air chemistry?

    The answers were: It is not very effective at removing particles. It does produce significant quantities of ozone. It wreaks havoc with indoor air chemistry producing unintended and undesirable results.

  12. #25
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    44
    Post Likes
    breathe easy are you with txairfilters? If so good to meet you, I'm in fort worth as well. Maybe we can meet in person one day. Sanuvox liked the article posted on your website inspired by RGF.

  13. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    44
    Post Likes

    McGill Study

    I have a third party study performed by a University with no funding from the manufacturer.

    It's a study by McGill University and published in the Lancet Journal. However, it is not a study of UV on the air stream, it is a study of UV on coil surfaces. Some very small side effect is air purification to a point. You cannot rely on a UV light treating an object to be a good source of Air Purification (two scientific principles at work here). In addition, the study was done with the UV lights placed on the upstream side of the coil, not the downstream where there is moisture and water.

    I have many studies actually I can share. I also have every test and results of the 9 companies tested by the EPA and Homeland Security specifically on using UV to purify the air stream. I can post those later.

    Here's the McGill Study.
    Last edited by Keith Jordan; 08-05-2007 at 12:15 AM. Reason: mis-spelling

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •