Most case studies in this industry are advertisements with a customer’s logo on them. They open with an outbreak, close with a testimonial, and somewhere in the middle a number appears with no method behind it and no way to check it.
We have tried to write a different kind of page. A case study here sets out what was deployed, over what period, what it replaced, what it cost, and what the operator gave up as well as what they gained. Where a figure comes from our own records we say so. Where something cannot be evidenced, it is not on the page — including some things we would very much like to be able to say.
About claims on this page
EcoloxTech generators produce a hypochlorous acid solution on site. They are regulated by the EPA as devices, are not registered disinfectants, and we make no efficacy claims for them or for the solution they produce. Nothing on this page claims that any product prevented an outbreak, killed an organism or achieved a contact time. The only EcoloxTech product that carries disinfection claims is HOCl-AS200 (EPA Reg. No. 101112-1), used according to its accepted label. The figures below are cost and deployment figures from our own records, and they are presented as exactly that.
Published
| Study | Sector | What it covers |
|---|---|---|
| Norwegian Cruise Line | Cruise & marine | Fleetwide onsite generation from 2020, the logistics argument for a closed system, the documented cost model on a 4,266-guest reference ship, and the trade you make in exchange. |
In preparation
These are sectors where we have deployments and are working through what can be published. A case study only goes up when the operator is comfortable being named and the numbers can be stood behind, so this list will fill in slowly rather than all at once.
| Sector | What the study will cover |
|---|---|
| Food processing | Wash water, surfaces and the ppm question — 60 for water under FCN 1811, 200 for surfaces under 21 CFR 178.1010 — in a plant running both. |
| Seafood | Ice and chilled water as the largest treated volumes on site, and what changes when the treated water is in bulk contact with the product. |
| Healthcare | Environmental services in occupied buildings, and where a registered product is required rather than a generated solution. |
| Schools and districts | Cost per litre deciding cleaning frequency rather than cost, and the custodial reality behind the schedule. |
| Agriculture and produce | Agricultural water under the Produce Safety Rule, and the two separately-budgeted problems one system can address. |
| Hospitality | Housekeeping, food and beverage, and recreational water in one building. |
| Restoration | Mobile generation on a job site with no reliable supply chain. |
If you operate in one of these sectors and would find a written case useful before we publish one, the sanitation audit produces the same analysis for your own site, in writing, at no cost.
How we write these
- Cost figures come from our own records and are labelled as our data, not as an independent study.
- No efficacy claims. Generators are devices. Where a page needs a disinfection claim, that claim comes from the HOCl-AS200 label and nowhere else.
- Assumptions are shown, not buried. Where a fleet or site figure is scaled from a reference installation, the basis of the scaling is on the page so you can disagree with it.
- The trade-offs are included. Every deployment gives something up. A page that does not say what those were is not a case study, it is a brochure.
- Operators are named only with their agreement. Where we cannot name an operator we will say that too, rather than implying one.
Related
For the underlying economics rather than a specific deployment, see ROI and savings. For the sector programmes, see industries. For the published literature, see the research library.