Testing for Microbial Contamination - A Brief History
Such testing procedures are inaccessible to the majority of fuel handlers and users on the grounds of complexity, cost and timescales. Only sophisticated laboratories can test fuel in this way and with each culture test costing hundreds of pounds, it is neither feasible nor economically viable to test fuel throughout a network of fuel stations on a regular basis. Neither would it be viable for a truck operator or boat owner to test suspect fuel.
'User trials' of PureFuel Conditioners (perhaps to measure consequential improvements in filter life or fuel consumption) have been thwarted by this problem because the fuel quality could not be tested prior to the 'trial'. If the fuel was actually uncontaminated, "nothing happens". If, later, contaminated fuel is passed through, still - apparently - "nothing happens". It is therefore easy to see why one could reach the conclusion that "they don't work" if the initial fuel supply was actually clean. PureFuel Conditioners are, however, so effective at curbing microbial contamination that to use one and see differences in performance metrics such as filter life, engine power/emissions/consumption is proof positive that the fuel supply was contaminated.
For the reasons of accuracy described above, the medical profession does not use CFUs. More pertinently, NATO fuel specifications do not use CFUs for the same reasons. NATO
specifications (and medical tests) are based on cell counts. The same requirement of a separate culture test for yeast, fungi and 400+ microbes applies but with the added time/cost of manually
counting individual cells in a fuel sample under a microscope - the result is given in cells-per-µl (or ml).
ATP testing has been used for detecting microbial activity in a variety of fluids for many years - widely in the medical profession. Effectively, it provides a cell count - and does so for ALL types of microbial activity in a single test. ATP testing was not possible for fuel testing, due to significant technical obstacles, until 2009. The result of cATP tests is given in picogrammes per millilitre (pg/ml) and pg/ml of cATP can be readily converted to cells/µl
(or cells/ml).
ATP testing is the ideal test for measuring microbial contamination and, by extension, it is also the fastest, most accurate AND least expensive method for measuring the performance of PureFuel Conditioners.
'User trials' of PureFuel Conditioners (perhaps to measure consequential improvements in filter life or fuel consumption) have been thwarted by this problem because the fuel quality could not be tested prior to the 'trial'. If the fuel was actually uncontaminated, "nothing happens". If, later, contaminated fuel is passed through, still - apparently - "nothing happens". It is therefore easy to see why one could reach the conclusion that "they don't work" if the initial fuel supply was actually clean. PureFuel Conditioners are, however, so effective at curbing microbial contamination that to use one and see differences in performance metrics such as filter life, engine power/emissions/consumption is proof positive that the fuel supply was contaminated.
For the reasons of accuracy described above, the medical profession does not use CFUs. More pertinently, NATO fuel specifications do not use CFUs for the same reasons. NATO
specifications (and medical tests) are based on cell counts. The same requirement of a separate culture test for yeast, fungi and 400+ microbes applies but with the added time/cost of manually
counting individual cells in a fuel sample under a microscope - the result is given in cells-per-µl (or ml).
ATP testing has been used for detecting microbial activity in a variety of fluids for many years - widely in the medical profession. Effectively, it provides a cell count - and does so for ALL types of microbial activity in a single test. ATP testing was not possible for fuel testing, due to significant technical obstacles, until 2009. The result of cATP tests is given in picogrammes per millilitre (pg/ml) and pg/ml of cATP can be readily converted to cells/µl
(or cells/ml).
ATP testing is the ideal test for measuring microbial contamination and, by extension, it is also the fastest, most accurate AND least expensive method for measuring the performance of PureFuel Conditioners.
A frequently asked question about PureFuel Conditioners is "How can their effectiveness be measured"?
The central performance claim for PureFuel Conditioners is: they curb microbial contamination. Consequently, it is therefore necessary to test a fuel sample before and after passing through a PureFuel Conditioner.
There have been many trials of PureFuel Conditioner performance
measuring microbial activity before and after, using Colony Forming Units (CFUs) as a unit of measure. Without exception, PureFuel Conditioners reduce the CFU result.
However, there are a number of shortcomings concerning measurement in CFUs:
• 1 CFU can contain anything between a single cell and millions
of cells.
• Each type of microbe (yeast, fungi, any of over 400 bacteria) requires a separate culture test - each of these tests is expensive and can take up to five days to conduct.
• To measure bacteria CFUs requires that each bacteria type is identified before testing.
• Agitating the sample can dramatically alter the result (because a large CFU can be broken down to many smaller CFUs).
• In light of the agitation issue, conducting multiple tests (at least three) on the same sample to take an average CFU result is
best practice.