Water filters: green buying guide Adapted from the 2/2012 Consumer Reports magazine. http://easss.com/water/filters A flood of new filters--everything from simple carafes to permanently mounted systems--can make removing impurities from your drinking water almost as easy as turning on the tap. Some models that connect to the plumbing are now easier to install. And more filters now feature electronic indicators that signal when it's time for replacement. More than just water that tastes good might be at stake. Dangerous contaminants such as lead, chloroform, arsenic, nitrate, nitrite, radon, and E. coli bacteria are common in tap water. Bottled water, often advertised as a "pure" and "natural" alternative to tap water, is generally safe. But it's actually less regulated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) than municipal water supplies. Bottled-water makers aren't required to disclose where their water comes from, how it was treated, or what contaminants it might contain. Disclosure is purely voluntary (except in California). And the bottled stuff is subject to a less stringent safety standard than tap water. In fact, purified tap water is the source of 49 percent of bottled water produced in the U.S., according to industry data. Many consumers could cut out the middleman (and produce far less plastic waste) by investing in a water filter and reusable water bottle to tote when they're on the go. Fortunately, Consumer Reports tests on dozens of the latest water filters found quite a few models suitable for removing many such contaminants. Watch video: Getting the Right Water Filter. First find out what's in your water One way to find out what type of filter you need is to check your Consumer Confidence Report, or CCR. The EPA requires utilities to provide a CCR to their customers every year. You may also find the CCR printed in your newspaper or posted on your local government website. Consumer Reports reviewed CCRs from the 13 largest U.S. cities and found that few claimed to have no federal water-quality violations. Though none of the other water systems were consistently unhealthful, all had some samples containing significant quantities of contaminants. In New York City, for example, some samples had lead levels several times the federal limit. Note that a CCR might indicate safe levels of a contaminant when your water actually has experienced potentially harmful spikes. Also, a CCR tells you about the water in your municipality, but not necessarily about what's coming out of your particular tap. Only testing your home supply can do that. Even if the water coming out of the treatment plant is clean, contaminants could get into water after it leaves the facility. That’s because millions of miles of distribution pipe are nearing their end of life. And household plumbing remains a main cause of lead contamination in homes built before 1986. Homeowners with a well on their property face even greater uncertainty, because such water isn't surveyed or reported on in CCRs. To find the names of state-certified testing labs, call the EPA's Safe Drinking Water Hotline (800-426-4791), or go to the EPA hotline that is online. Or you can contact your local health authority, which might offer low-cost or free test kits, or check out www.epa.gov/safewater/labs. Ultimately, you might find that you don't need a water filter. It's important to know what contaminants are in your water that so you can match the filter to the problem. Claims about contaminant removal vary from product to product, so read the fine print. Also, consider how much water you consume vs. how much effort and disruption to your daily routine you're willing to tolerate. Generally, the more contaminants you need to remove, the more complicated the filter, though there are trade-offs. Green recommendations If you get one of the top-rated water filters recommended by Consumer Reports, you can get odor-free, clearer, better-tasting water, with fewer dangerous contaminants. Fortunately, there are a lot of good choices. Not surprisingly, more water-filter manufacturers are touting their products' power to remove impurities, not just improve taste and appearance. In recent tests, Consumer Reports spiked water with lead and chloroform (a surrogate for organic compounds like atrazine and benzene, and for bad taste) to test five different types of filters: carafe, faucet-mounted, countertop, undersink, and reverse-osmosis models. Many filters did the job, but some removed less of each contaminant than promised, and even the best can be overwhelmed by sudden surges in contaminants. Undersink and reverse-osmosis models outperformed faucet mounts and carafes, but required professional installation and can be quite expensive. Be sure to consider the total cost when choosing a filter. Some have very expensive cartridge refills. Also note: Many refrigerators now have water dispensers with built-in filtration. Though they're fine at improving taste, in past tests some systems were so-so at removing impurities. Plus replacement cartridges are costly. By installing a recommended undersink filter to the refrigerator's water supply line, you can bypass the appliance's filter and you may get cleaner, more economical results. Carafes Among the carafes tested, the top-rated Lotus Tersano LWT-100 at $229 and the Best Buy Clear20 CWS100A at $15 both removed lead and chloroform effectively without sacrificing cartridge life or flow rate. Two ZeroWater models were also recommended although they scored lower and their chloroform removal scores were not available. They are: ZeroWater ZD-013 (8-cup) at $35 and the ZP- 010 (10-cup) at $38. Remember that you must replace the filters on carafe models, which is an added cost. If you’re thinking of a carafe type filter, you should know that manufacturers of carafes don’t have to disclose whether their products contain Bisphenol A, which some studies have linked to reproductive abnormalities and a heightened risk of breast and prostate cancers, diabetes, and heart disease. All the carafes in our tests are BPA-free, according to their manufacturers. But manufacturers should be required to list the type of plastic used in their carafes and should not use polycarbonate, which leaches BPA. Faucet-mounted filters The Culligan FM-15A at $15 and the Brita Base On Tap OPFF-100 at $19 both were judged Best Buys, but their flow rates were only fair, meaning it took longer for the water to flow through the filter. The Culligan FM-25 at $20 and the Pur FM 3700B at $30 also did a good job and were recommended. Countertop filters The Shaklee BestWater MTS2000 #82300 at $260 was a Best Buy among countertop models, and the Amway eSpring 10-0188 also was high-rated, but it is priced at about $600. It treats the water with ultra-violet light technology. Undersink filters Four models were recommended among this type. They are: Multi-Pure MP750SB at $400 rated highest in the group; the Aqua-Pure by Cuno AP-DWS1000 at $565; the Ecowater EPS 1000 at $390; and the American Plumber WLCS-1000 at $251, which was judged only fair on flow rate. Reverse osmosis Three models were judged Best Buys among this type. They are: the Whirlpool WHER25 (Lowe’s) at $146; the Kenmore Elite 38556 at $255; and the similar Kenmore 38156 at $153. The Kenmore’s both were judged only fair on flow rate, however. Other recommended models in this group were more expensive. They are: the Kinetico K5 Drinking Water Station at $1800, which, unlike most other filters, removes fluoride; the Coway P-07QL at $640; the Ecowater ERO-375 at $675; and the Culligan Aqua-Cleer at $1,000.
It is important to choose a proper web hosting plan while planning to start a website. You can host your content on the website through various types of hosting like shared, VPS, dedicated and cloud. Shared hosting is like living in an apartment where you share a common space with your neighbors. You cannot customize anything but you share maintenance cost and responsibility with your neighbors. Shared hosting is very cheap and the most commonly used method of hosting, and is used for customers who have chosen trial or low-cost hosting packages. You can opt for a Shared hosting if you fall in any of the following categories: Having limited low budget. Expecting a low initial rate of visitors say 200 per day. Limited number of email accounts is enough. Planning to host and maintain only small number of web sites. Advantages of Shared Hosting It a good option if you have a limited number of blogs and smaller websites as it is easy to maintain. It has an economical advantage. Technical maintenance of the server is not required, therefore you do not need a special skill set to handle your website. You can demand for extra storage space. All kinds of software, including virtualized software can be installed. Disadvantages of Shared hosting Limited number of resources. Your website performance may be affected by other websites hosted on the shared server. You might have to face long term problems with scalability and backup. There is a possibility to face security issues for sharing a common server. You might have to configure firewall settings for certain applications. You will have a limited customer support only. Virtual Private Server (VPS) Hosting is like living in a simplex or half-plex where you can customize everything to your own tastes. However, you still need to maintain your own area. Companies that deal with resource heavy applications and secured data most often use VPS. Technically, VPS servers are actually still “shared” environments (in as much as there will still be more than one user running on the same physical machine) but the technology used to assign resources and keep users separate is much more sophisticated. Allocating resources per-user makes for a much more stable and predictable environment. Expansion of your business beyond shared hosting level. Expectation for a significant increase in traffic over the next few months. Plans to work with confidential secured data in your business. Intention to increase headcount which in turn requires a greater email capacity. Plan to host multiple sites, blogs or different applications very soon. Advantages of VPS Hosting You will have a huge space and bandwidth which enables you to do what you like. You can upgrade or downgrade your subscription at any time. You can configure anything you wish on the server as you own it. Run your own batch files to create multiple services inside the server using shell access. You can avail an extensive and dedicated 24/7 Customer Support which will help you have better security levels. You can have easy scalability and backup in this method. User partitioning enables you to custom firewall configurations. Disadvantages of VPS Hosting You need a dedicated system administrator to take care of your server. It is usually costly so you should be careful with cheap offers. You must be particular with certain applications as they might have issues running in a virtualized environment. Shared hosting and VPS hosting have a lot of differences as listed below: Resources: Shared hosting will have access to a limited number of resources only while the VPS hosting allows private disk spaces, having greater resource availability. Security: Shared hosting is comparatively less secure than VPS hosting. Platform: Shared hosting provides a basic level of file system and compartmentalization. You can move from Shared hosting to VPS hosting in any of the following cases: You want to be more serious in your business web hosting.Your website is consuming all your processors. Your website is gobbling your CPU and RAM resources. You feel the need for complete control. You need more email accounts or hosting more websites. You are looking for better performance and stability. You feel that you are ready to rise above the rest. You want to expand the existing performance level. You want to customize the appearance and settings.
Athletes’ anguish over state-sponsored doping regime revealed in secret letters 2/04/2016 http://goo.gl/AQb4Io World-record holder Wang Junxia's testimony emerges 21 years later, says coach forced his team to dope up regularly 2/04/2016 http://goo.gl/VEZouy World beating Chinese athlete Wang Junxia admits to doping 2/04/2016 http://goo.gl/8ZZpB8 Medalists forced to take drugs 2/04/2016 http://goo.gl/xnd2Jf Two of Ma's runners test positive 7/25/2001 http://goo.gl/2rpPBe China's decision to appoint Ma Junren as its deputy head coach for the world championships appeared even more ill-conceived than it did originally when it was announced yesterday that two of the female runners he trains have failed drugs tests. Liquing Song and Lili Yin are among three Chinese athletes who have been banned for two years by the International Amateur Athletic Federation after testing positive for the banned body-building drug testosterone more than a year ago. Yunfeng Lui, a male race walker, has also been suspended.