Clean water by electricity, with the minerals left in
ESIL, the electrolysis process inside every Acuario system, removes bacteria, heavy metals and disinfection by-products from drinking water and leaves calcium, magnesium and potassium in the glass. Here is the science behind it: a peer-reviewed paper, thirty years of independent laboratory reports, and what an Acuario machine did in Baja California Sur.
Four steps, no added chemicals
A low-voltage direct current runs through the water in a cell of concentric electrodes. That current does the work a bag of coagulant chemicals normally does, and standard filters carry the waste away.
Charge the water
Low-voltage direct current passes through the electrode cell. There are no moving parts and it uses very little electricity.
Bind the bad
The current changes the charge of dissolved contaminants, so metals, organic compounds and pathogens clump together into a visible floc.
Filter it out
The clumped floc is now large enough for ordinary sediment and carbon filters to capture and remove.
Polish and protect
A coconut-carbon block removes any chlorine or ozone generated in the process. Clean water at the tap.
Why the minerals stay
Contaminants carry a negative charge and are pulled out of the water. Mineral salts such as calcium, magnesium and potassium are positive and are repelled, so they remain in the water. This is the opposite of reverse osmosis, which strips everything and wastes water doing it. Acuario systems do not add or remineralize anything; they keep what was already there.
Published in the Journal of the American Water Works Association
The electrocoagulation process behind ESIL was documented in a peer-reviewed paper in June 2000 (Mills, D., A new process for electrocoagulation, Journal AWWA 92(6), 34 to 43). The samples were analysed by independent laboratories. Selected results:
Lake Ontario water, inoculated
Below the detection limit, a reduction of about log 4.17
Mining-site leachate
99.9% reduction
Landfill leachate
99.99% reduction
Aqueous emulsion, about 30 minutes in a batch cell
99.99% reduction
The paper describes a process with no moving parts, in which bacteria are killed by reactive oxygen intermediates (OH and O radicals) produced during electrolysis rather than by dosing chemicals. The independent laboratories used for the water analysis included Acres Analytical, Zenon Environmental, Niagara Analytical, Integrated Explorations, Mann Testing, Ontario Hydro Technologies, CH2M Hill, Micrylium Laboratories, Walker Laboratories and Atlas Steel.
What it did in real houses
Independent trials on residential water in Ontario, Canada, analysed by third-party laboratories (Maxxam Analytics, Near North Laboratories). Every result below was measured after full treatment.
Trihalomethanes removed
From 0.244 to 0.00562 mg/L at the kitchen tap, already below the proposed future limit of 40 ppb. Chloroform went from 0.236 to 0.00562 mg/L. By the trial report's own comparison, standard carbon filtration at 75% effectiveness would have left about 61 ppb, well above that target.
Less lead; aluminum and nickel to non-detect
Lead 4.2 to 0.86 ppb (79%), copper down 73%, aluminum and nickel to non-detect, while calcium, magnesium, potassium and sodium stayed essentially unchanged.
Hexavalent chromium to non-detect
In a field case reported by ESIL Water Treatment, chromium-6 in well water was reduced to non-detect. In the 1990 laboratory study of a metals-finishing effluent, chromium-6 fell from 1.9 to 0.015 ppm.
Tannic acid removed after six failed treatments
3.4 to 0.4 ppm in a single 45-minute install, after a tannin filter, an iron filter, a softener, chemical feeders and pH adjustment had all failed the homeowner.
Our own machine, tested in Baja California Sur
In May 2026 an independent laboratory (ELI S.A. de C.V., Mexico City) analysed the water at the Paper Tiger fill station in Todos Santos before and after an Acuario system. The treated water complied with NOM-127-SSA1-2021 on every parameter tested.
| Parameter | Before | After | NOM-127 limit |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total coliforms (NMP/100 mL) | 8 | Absent | Absent |
| Fecal coliforms (NMP/100 mL) | Absent | Absent | Absent |
| E. coli (NMP/100 mL) | Absent | Absent | Absent |
| Salmonella spp. (per 25 mL) | Absent | Absent | Absent |
| Nitrites (mg/L) | 1.07 | 0.06 | 0.06 or less |
| Nitrates (mg/L) | 8.5 | 8.0 | 10 or less |
| pH | 7.6 | 7.8 | 6.5 to 8.5 |
| Turbidity (NTU) | 0.10 | 0.20 | 5.0 or less |
| Total dissolved solids (mg/L) | 267 | 265 | Not limited |
| Total hardness (mg/L CaCO3) | 153 | 153 | 500 or less |
| Calcium hardness (mg/L CaCO3) | 99 | 102 | Not limited |
| Magnesium hardness (mg/L CaCO3) | 54 | 51 | Not limited |
| Lead (mg/L) | <0.01 | <0.01 | 0.01 or less |
| Copper (mg/L) | 0.09 | 0.09 | 2.0 or less |
| Iron (mg/L) | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.30 or less |
| Aluminum (mg/L) | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.20 or less |
Free chlorine reads 0.0 mg/L by design: the system removes chlorine, including any generated during ionization, as a final coconut-carbon step. Residual chlorine in the municipal network remains the utility's responsibility. Sampled 9 May 2026, laboratory references 6129-0010 and 6129-0011, standards NOM-127-SSA1-2021 (MOD) and NOM-201-SSA1-2015.
What ESIL has been shown to remove
Across thirty years of independent reports and Acuario's own test in Baja, ESIL has demonstrated removal across four families of contaminant while leaving dissolved minerals in the water. The strongest documented figures are shown; the source is named on each line.
Killed by the by-products of electrolysis, with no chlorine dosing
- E. coli>100,000 to <1 per mLJournal AWWA, 2000
- Heterotrophic bacteria60,000 to <500 cfu/mLJournal AWWA, 2000
- Total and fecal coliformsAbsent after treatmentBaja, 2026
- SalmonellaAbsentBaja, 2026
- Pythium (water mould)High to low levelsSGS Canada, 2017
Laboratory ICP panel and field trials
- Mercuryup to 99.8%Metals panel, 1996
- Leadup to 97.7%Metals panel, 1996
- Zincup to 99.6%Metals panel, 1996
- Cadmium, nickel, copper97 to 99%Metals panel, 1996
- Hexavalent chromium1.9 to 0.015 ppmESI report, 1990
- Aluminum, nickelto non-detectChapleau, 2016
- Molybdenum, iron99.9% or moreJournal AWWA, 2000
Electrochemical breakdown and coagulation
- PCBs3,300 to 0.2 mg/LJournal AWWA, 2000; Webber
- Monochlorobenzene39.4 to 0.0005 ppmWebber
- Hexachlorobenzene11.5 to 0.01 ppmWebber
- Chlorinated furans (2,3,7,8-TCDF)0.5 to <0.03 pptWebber
- Crude oil in seawaterRemovedJournal AWWA, 2000
- Tannic acid (colour, odour)88%Pembroke case
- PharmaceuticalsTested in the Chapleau trialChapleau, 2016
The contaminants conventional treatment creates or misses
- Trihalomethanes (THMs)97.9%Chapleau, 2016
- Chloroform97.6%Chapleau, 2016
- Nitrites94%Baja, 2026
- Turbidity, phosphates, solidsReducedJournal AWWA, 2000
Removal percentages vary with the chemistry of the source water. Virus removal is not claimed. Dissolved minerals (calcium, magnesium, potassium, sodium) are deliberately retained, not removed. This page is a technical reference, not a medical claim.
How ESIL compares with the usual options
| ESIL | Reverse osmosis | Carbon or UV only | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Removes heavy metals | Yes | Yes | Limited |
| Removes THMs and organics | Up to 97.9% | Partial | Falls off at household flow |
| Kills bacteria | Yes, by electrolysis | Partial | UV only |
| Keeps healthy minerals | Yes | No, it strips them | Yes |
| Wastes water | No | Yes, a reject stream | No |
| Added chemicals | None | None | Varies |
| Maintenance | Vinegar rinse, long cell life | Membrane changes | Frequent cartridges |
Where the technology comes from
ESIL is the work of founder Brian Cool, who invested more than 30 million US dollars over two decades to perfect it. That investment is the foundation of thirty years of third-party laboratory testing, engineering-stamped studies and patents granted around the world. The cell and its assembly are covered by US patents 5,108,563 and 5,439,567.
Documents
Sources and references
- Mills, D. (2000). A new process for electrocoagulation. Journal AWWA, 92(6), 34 to 43. Peer-reviewed. Patents US 5,108,563 and 5,439,567.
- ESIL Water Treatment (2015 to 2016). Chapleau (Cree First Nation) home water treatment trial. Independent laboratories: Maxxam Analytics, Near North Laboratories.
- ESIL Water Treatment field case studies: Minden, Ontario (chromium-6); Pembroke, Ontario (tannins); Elmira, Ontario (dairy well); Cambridge, Ontario.
- Neale, M.E. (Chartered Chemist, MRSC). A preliminary investigation into the effect of the proprietary device on an effluent from a metals finishing plant, with special reference to hexavalent chromium (Report ESI-12-90, 1990); A report on the application of the ESIL technology to the treatment of heavy metals (ICP panel, 1996); Reclamation of heavy organic-contaminated water (Report ESI-30A-91, 1991).
- Webber, I. (PhD). The remediation of PCB contaminated soils: destruction of PCBs in water and soil, with dechlorination of PCBs, chlorobenzenes and chlorinated furans.
- SGS Canada (2017). Analysis Report GU17-00561: Pythium spp. reduction in greenhouse irrigation water.
- ELI S.A. de C.V. (May 2026). Acuario Baja, Paper Tiger fill station, Todos Santos. NOM-127-SSA1-2021 (MOD), NOM-201-SSA1-2015, references 6129-0010 and 6129-0011.
Research and testing, in plain words
The short answers, with the source behind each one.
No. Contaminants carry a negative charge and are pulled out of the water; mineral salts such as calcium, magnesium and potassium are positive and stay. In the Baja test, total hardness measured 153 mg/L before treatment and 153 mg/L after. Acuario systems do not add or remineralize anything either: they keep what was already there.
No. ESIL uses a low-voltage direct current; there are no coagulant chemicals and no chlorine dosing. A final coconut-carbon block removes any chlorine or ozone generated during the process, which is why free chlorine reads 0.0 mg/L in the treated water.
Yes. The electrocoagulation process was published in the Journal of the American Water Works Association in June 2000, with samples analysed by independent laboratories, and the cell design is covered by US patents 5,108,563 and 5,439,567.
No. There is no reject stream. The contaminants leave the water as a solid floc that the sediment and carbon filters capture, so every litre that goes in comes out as treated water.
Virus removal is not claimed. The documented results cover bacteria, heavy metals, organic compounds and disinfection by-products such as trihalomethanes.
Yes. In May 2026 the laboratory ELI S.A. de C.V. analysed an Acuario installation in Todos Santos, Baja California Sur, before and after treatment. Coliforms went from 8 NMP/100 mL to absent, nitrites from 1.07 to 0.06 mg/L, and the treated water complied with NOM-127-SSA1-2021 on every parameter tested.
Want this water in your home?
Tell us about your water and where you live, and we will recommend the right Acuario system. We ship to all 32 states of Mexico.