Talk:Condensate polisher

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Technology

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TechnologyWikipedia:WikiProject TechnologyTemplate:WikiProject TechnologyTechnology articles

Energy

	Energy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Microscopic amounts?

The articles states that "microscopic amounts of mineral or other contamination are removed from the system." The way that this is worded may lead to misinterpretation by the layman. While the particles being filtered from the condensate may be microscopic, the aggregate amount of them almost certainly is not microscopic, especially in the case of a large power plant. A photograph on a manufacturer's website (http://www.reskem.com/images/reskem-condensate-polisher-quad.jpg) shows a large industrial unit that appears to be about as high and long as a large delivery van and probably weighs several tons. The spec sheet (http://www.reskem.com/pdf/reskem-condensatepolishers.pdf) confirms that the apparent dimensions are not an optical illusion, and the stated flow rate of 710 gpm suggests that a large power plant would need something even bigger. The amount of contaminant removed may be small relative to the many tons of coolant being processed, but there is probably more than a "microsocopic" amount of contamination being removed over any reasonable period of operation. Otherwise, I would think that the equipment would not need to be so large. I've changed the wording to "trace amounts of minerals or other contamination" which may better reflect the actual situation in practice, where a tiny "trace" percentage of contamination in a large volume of condensate may equal a non-trivial total amount. If I am wrong, someone who knows more about these things can revert the edit. And if anyone knows how a photo can be added, giving an impression of the scale of these things as well as their appearance, that would be a plus. Piperh (talk) 08:41, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Demineralized water corrosive to carbon steel

Isn't demineralized water corrosive to carbon steel? Or is that only if it hasn't been deaerated? Tara Zieminek (talk) 21:36, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]