FACTORY RECALLS & NEED for XRF FIELD INSPECTIONS

(Updated December 14, 2009)

Dear GFX Owner:

I. INTRODUCTION

1.          We would like to thank you for selecting Gravity Film Heat Exchanger (“GFX”) products to conserve energy and help in the fight against Global Warming and Climate Change. At WaterFilm Energy Inc. (“WFE”), we take pride in our products and are committed to your continued satisfaction and peace of mind that every GFX manufactured under a WFE-License, or sold via The GFX Store, is made with copper approved for use with potable water -- unless the customer specifies otherwise.

2.          For potable water applications, every GFX must be made with a copper coil conforming to ASTM B88 Specifications wrapped around a copper drainpipe made to ASTM B306 Specifications, with permanent incise marks as proof. These are among the many types of copper tubing that cannot be used for drinking or cooking that only educated consumers will know to avoid.

3.           But in early September of 2009 troublesome consumer comments were discovered on three websites; a few of which are quoted in footnotes ##[1], [2], [3] & [4]; complaining fake, unsafe GFX’s (“knockoffs”) were sold with fraudulent UL labels, e.g.: “Purchased this and found out the building inspector refused to authorize it. Something to do with the fact the UL certification is not applicable to potable water and since the device does not have ASTMB88 stamped on its copper, it was not considered safe for potable water.” &  “You did purchase a couple of 2” units in which we used copper that was not ASTM B88 but ACR.”

·         Type ACR is unsafe, yet neither Intertek nor Watercycles notified WFE that a recall was issued for these “2” units” (as of 12/12/09).

·         Nor has UL, although such products should have been recalled by now; given WFE’s first Complaint to the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC #H0990104A) was filed September 10, 2009, followed by others dated September 15^th & 18^th 2009 to Intertek & UL.

4.          The footnotes also reveal Home Depot was informed that some knockoffs pose serious health threats because they may contain toxic copper that cannot be certified safe for drinking water by NSF to NSF/ANSI Standard 61. Are they not aware the CPSC relies on X-Ray Fluorescence (XRF) instruments like those described @ www.niton.com to measure toxicity and protect consumers?.

5.          Unlike UL, which has not prosecuted or revoked Renewability Energy’s privilege to use their CULUS Mark, Intertek revoked Watercycles Energy Recovery Inc.’s privilege to used their CETLUS safety-certification mark, effective October 8, 2009 -- but as of December 11, 2009 has not issued recalls or notified consumers whether or not Watercycles shipped units safe for use with potable water -- even after its President admitted importing copper tubing from Mueller Streamline having no permanent NSF-61 Incise Marks or third-party certification marks like Intertek’s Warnock-Hersey Mark. He also admitted using ACR tubing, which cannot be certified for use with drinking water. (See email excerpts in Footnote #4)

II. Consumer Protection Lacking

6.          Based on other comments quoted in the footnotes, consumers will have to take matters in their own hands by demanding that local plumbing inspectors, CPSC, Health Canada, UL, Intertek, IAPMO, NSF-International, and/or ANSI, provide an X-Ray Fluorescence ((XRF) analysis of all copper products in their house that are used for potable water because of the likelihood that incise marks, if legible, are counterfeits.

7.          An XRF analysis using a Thermo Scientific analyzer, for example, allows “nearly instantaneous elemental analysis” to determine whether or not any copper product is toxic --- something UL, Intertek, Home Depot and others should have done to protect consumers; given the glut of toxic building products and toys being imported from Asia & Mexico.

·         According to officials at the Copper Development Association & Canadian Copper and Brass Development Association, counterfeiting incise marks on unsafe copper smuggled into North America is a serious problem. 

8.          In August of 2008, the CPSC released an XRF-Report finding: (a) For plastics and polymers, XRF is effective for testing for lead; (b) XRF has the potential to be effective for testing paints for lead, but standard reference materials and methods need to be developed & (c) Based on these findings and the fast approaching February 10, 2010 deadlines for businesses to conduct third-party certification tests, the CPSC staff and commissioners have begun disseminating and discussing how XRF can be used more broadly.

9.          Products that should be tested or recalled by CPSC, Health Canada, UL, Intertek, IAPMO and/or any manufacturer that sold unsafe copper products such as solar water heaters, indirect water heaters, heat exchangers and knockoffs under the name Power-Pipe (formerly known as GFX), ECOGFX, GFX-Lite, GFX-LC (possibly Thermodrain).

10.       If such knockoffs have CULUS, CETLUS, IAPMO labels like those shown @ gfxtechnology.com/ULP.pdf, or were installed pursuant to this fraudulent FCCI letter dated May 3, 2005, they must be recalled. The latter was written on behalf of Fuel Cells and Components, Inc. (FCCI), its subsidiaries Technapulse, LLC & Star Assembly Group LLC. Their Canadian Rep, Daniel Beauchemin (a former WFE-Rep) is Founder/President of EcoInnovation (a/k/a Inventroment) according to House_Hacker Comment #5 (8/26/09). It disputes Comment #4, posted January 26, 2007 by another former WFE-Rep (Gerald Van Decker); both failing to address key safety issues underlying the following misleading statement by Van Decker: 

·                     “Furthermore, the copper used in the Power-Pipe is 100% approved and 100% safe. Our copper coil is sourced from 2 North American fabricators. Wolverine tube is one of the largest fabricators in North America; in their London, Ontario facility they use some pure recycled content. Our other supplier uses pure mined copper stock. These are the only two fabricators that I know of in the US and Canada. I appreciate that their might be issues with copper tube from overseas where there might not be strict quality control.” [100% approved by which accredited third-party certifier?]

11.       Both VanDecker and Beauchemin also failed to mention other copper-tube manufacturers such a Cerro, Cambridge Lee, Mueller Streamline, CMC Howell -- or Mexican suppliers that are not overseas and been known to dump uncertified and/or toxic copper tubing on consumer markets. Beauchemin also neglected to mention his ECO-GFX’s were made in the U.S. then smuggled into Canada with no third-party or NSF-61 certification, then alleged:

·                     “You did not develop the Powerpipe because of complaints from customers due to pressure drops. EcoInnovation continues to sell, install and manufacture these same Eco-GFX units for the past 5 years and have yet to receive one complaint about pressure drops. These same units have been in service for over 27 years, none of which have had any issues you mention.”  Beauchemin’s 5 & 27 years claims are belied by this 1986 U.S. DoE Report & invoices dated 2007 & 2008 on pp. 5-9 @ https://gfxtechnology.com/STAR.pdf; that show his knockoffs were made in America by Technapulse & Star Assembly Group.

III. UNKNOWN HEALTH THREATS & CONSUMER FRAUDS

12.       To assist UL’s and Intertek’s fraud investigators, a series of photographs of GFX’s made by different manufacturers were compiled and uploaded to gfxtechnology.com/ULP.pdf. This led to a surprising discovery -- more than one unscrupulous manufacturer, including Doucette Industries, Renewability Energy, FCCI/Technapulse/StarAssembly, Watercycles, Vaughn, EcoInnovation, Inventroment and others made knockoffs with substandard and/or toxic copper that must be XRF-tested and/or recalled to protect consumers.

·         An unknown number have counterfeit UL, ETL & IAPMO labels.

13.       Canadian health codes require all copper tubing used with potable water be third-party certified, whereas a GFX sold in the U.S. must be made from NSF-61 certified copper, but need not be third-party certified.

14.       Therefore, product-labels having a “CETLUS” or “CULUS” Mark cannot be affixed to any copper product unless it was made from copper tubing having incise marks to verify both NSF-61 & third-party certifications.

15.       Unless a GFX’s coil & drainpipe have legible color codes and/or permanent incise marks like those described in ASTM B88 §19, ASTM B306 §22 & NSF-61 specifications, or a third-party certification, it’s impossible for consumers, plumbing inspectors and salesmen to tell if it’s safe without an XRF analyzer --- especially since UL has allowed counterfeit labels like those shown @ gfxtechnology.com/UL-File-Conversion.pdf & gfxtechnology.com/Exporting-America.pdf to be affixed to hundreds of knockoffs.

·         If there’s no specified color-coding and/or incise marks or other certification; such product-labels are counterfeits.

16.       When Vaughn, Doucette, FCCI & Watercycles were authorized to be WFE’s manufacturers, we made sure they used copper parts conforming to ASTM B88 & ASTM B360 standards.

17.       But Mueller Streamline also sells large copper coils by the pound – including grades unfit for drinking water -- so it’s cheaper to make GFX-knockoffs with lighter, thin-wall and/or utility-grade copper tubing --- if UL, Intertek, or IAPMO field agents fail to do their job to protect the public against unscrupulous manufacturers. (For two examples, see invoices on pp. 3 & 4 @ https://gfxtechnology.com/STAR.pdf.)

·         They must all be replaced at the manufacturer’s expense.

IV. Frequently Asked Questions About GFX-Knockoffs

12.        What’s the difference between Canadian versions of: ECO-GFX, GFX-LITE, Power-Pipe, GFX-STAR & The Original GFX?

● Unlike a few legitimate gravity film heat exchangers on the market, ECO-GFX, GFX-LITE, Power-Pipe & GFX-STAR embody trade secrets stolen by former GFX Reps in violation of non-disclosure agreements and marketed in violation of rarely enforced laws prohibiting intellectual property (IP) theft, such as: Copyright Infringement, Trademark Infringement, Trade Secret Theft & Passing-Off one well known product for another to deceive consumers.
13.       Have ECO-GFX & GFX-LITE products been sold with fraudulent labels having the registered ETL® Trademark?
● Yes, otherwise Intertek wouldn’t have delisted Watercycles, as noted above -- after inspecting three returned Lo-Copper GFX’s.
14.        Why haven’t Intellectual Property (IP) Thieves been prosecuted?
● Economic-Espionage wouldn’t pay so well absent corrupt prosecutors, code enforcers, government & utility officials, as discussed in these stories: 2000 EDU & 2004 NY Times.   
15.       Why would Home Depot sell GFX knockoffs made by Canadian IP-thieves and market them in violation of the Lanham Act?
● Crime pays when no government agency enforces the law, as Bernard Madoff’s victims discovered.
16.        Why would Canadian Government officials approve a 2006 Report by Charles Zaloum, et al that proved the original GFX design is superior to every Canadian-Knockoff --- then approve a 2007 Report by Zaloum et al that contradicts it?
● Because Canadian & American officials rarely prosecute government employees engaged in Scientific Misconduct.
17.       Why would the 1997 issue of Home Energy Magazine feature a Canadian invention (Drain Gain) and the Original GFX then fail to reference this issue in their April 4, 2008 article entitled: Stop Energy Going Down the Drain, by one of their editors (Jim Gunshinan)?
● Plagiarism, trademark & copyright infringement probably help magazine sales & advertising revenue from foes of Green products.
18.        How could Gunshinan miss the Rocky Mountain Institute’s Home Energy Brief #5, which compares the performance of several types of water heating systems with & without a GFX?
● It seems today’s Home Energy Magazine now has a hidden, not-so-Green agenda.
19.        Does the following referral by Gunshinan suggest a scheme to deceive the public: “Here are some Web sites where you can find out more about DWHR devices that were submitted for testing at the Canadian Centre for Housing Technology: Power Pipe www.renewability.com ECO-GFX www.gfxstar.ca Retherm www.retherm.com”?
● Gunshinan knew or should have known what Zaloum knew no such product called “ECO-GFX” existed in 2006 and that two GFX models were also tested – 4 years after an Original GFX was tested in the Canadian Centre for Housing Technology.
20.        How could Gunshinan and his Publisher (Tom White) fail to notice the Watercycles unit shown in Fig. 12 in NRCan’s 2007 Report is missing from the first figures of Gunshinan’s online version, as well as the printed version entitled: “Drain Water Heat Recovery Devices” by ● Charles Zaloum, Maxine LeFrance, and John Gusdorf (Home Energy Magazine, May/June 2008)?
Zaloum, LeFrance & Gusdorf wrote the 2007 Report; Zaloum, Gusdorf & Anil Parekh wrote said 2006 Report, so they knew Home Energy published fraudulent photos too.
21.     Why would the Oregon Energy Office give higher tax credits for fake GFX’s made with toxic and/or substandard copper and offering lower efficiency than a real GFX?
● Ask the Oregon State Attorney General (503-947-4333) why tax-dollars are being wasted to enrich Canadian IP-thieves.

 

HOME