Liberty ULV Backpack Fogger, for large areas, why use anything else?

Posted by Shimon Petegorsky on

Recently there was a news article discussing how a large airline was going to be using expensive electrostatic foggers for disinfecting their terminals across the country.

While I was already aware of the limited range of disinfecting sprayers/foggers, I didn't know the specs of this particular model, so I did looked it up. Turns out this particular fogger, costing thousands of dollars, has an effective range if 2-4 feet and takes a full hour to disinfect 18,000 sq ft.

On the other hand, the Liberty ULV Fogger, has an effective range of 20 feet, 5 times that of the electrostatic fogger. This would allow you to disinfect the same size area in 1/5 the time, and those numbers check out based on the feedback we get from our customers, many of whom use the backpack foggers for very large areas.

You may want to make the argument that the fact it is electrostatic provides an advantage. However, like i had mentioned in a previous post, the advantage to being electrostatic, is that it creates a positive charge, which creates a slight attraction to things that are negatively charged. However, most objects are neutral, negating any purported benefit the electrostatic charge would create.

Will their ever be an electrostatic fogger that combines the benefits of an electrostatic charge, with the power of the Liberty ULV Backpack Fogger. In short, no, at least not from an honest company. The reason is that an electrostatic charge is not particularly powerful. If the fogger would have a powerful motor, the force of the motor would overpower and negate any purported benefit of the electrostatic charge.

The claim that an electrostatic fogger is superior to a fogger in that it is more conducive to 360 degree coverage is also dubious. Think of walking through a fog, the fog envelopes everything around it. That is what the Liberty Foggers are designed to do and one of the reasons they are superior to sprayers.

There is a government backed study that tested electrostatic sprayers (linked in another blog post), however, it was not compared to a ULV fogger. The study compared an electrostatic Fogger/ Sprayer to a traditional garden sprayer. The advantages cited in that study, 3d coverage, less runoff etc. would apply as well to a fogger when compared to a sprayer.

FYI  I have noticed many products being advertised on the internet as electrostatic foggers/sprayers, that clearly, to me are not, and some times at astronomical prices. I have seen this not only in 3rd party marketplaces and small websites, but also from otherwise reputable, well known companies. If you do insist on going with an electrostatic sprayer and are pay good money for it, you may want to do some research to insure you are getting what you are paying for.

Share this post

← Older Post Newer Post →

Leave a comment

Please note, comments must be approved before they are published.