Last spring our local community college district installed two identical Evapco cooling towers at one of their campuses. One tower is using a non-chemical "pulsing power" system for water treatment and the other tower is being treated with traditional chemical treatment (phosphonate/polymer inhibitor with oxidizing and non-oxidizing biocides). Inspection of the chiller tubes this fall showed no scaling, bio-fouling or corrosion in either of the associated chillers. The chemically treated tower was operated at approximate 3-3.5 cycles of concentration (based on conductivity). The non-chemical treated tower had equal or higher cycles. But visual inspection alone is inadequate to prove that the system "is working".
Next month we are going to begin an evaluation of these installations that will include corrosion coupons (ASTM D2688-94), independent lab HPC bacteria tests, data logging of system parameters and other tests. It should be interesting to see the results. Full corrosion results will take a year to confirm.
There is a lot of snake oil out there regarding non- chemical treatment. The chemical companies have a vested interest to ensure all the "non-chemical" treatments are considered snake oil. However, some units do work and should be considered by informed purchasers. What is needed is an independent commercial validation similar to the Cooling Tower Institute's efficiency ratings of cooling towers.
Dean