Quesstions abt carbon (1 Viewer)

[imsuperjp]

I have a few questions abt running carbon.

1) What exactly does running carbon do?
2) Do I need to put some kind of sponge before the carbon?
3) Is there a thing such as using too much carbon?
4) If running carbon 24/7, how often should it be changed?
5) Would it do any benifit running carbon on a small 10G and if so, how much should I use?

Thanks.

 

[cparka23]

1) carbon is covered in small pores that trap particulate matter.
2) you don't need to. you could if you have a lot of sand or detritus blowing around in the tank. not really necessary, but just something that depends on what you feel like.
3) no
4) depends on how much flow you put through it. could be a two weeks to a month?
5) probably not unless you're trying to remove something that liverock won't filter out. some people use carbon if their water becomes cloudy (macro algae sporulation, discolored water, etc). in a small tank, you should probably consider LR and/or water changes as your primary methods of keeping the water clear.

 

[cparka23]

one more thing, some carbon is washed in solutions that may contain phosphate. make sure you get aquarium grade carbon and that it specifically says little/no phosphate. it would also be a good idea to test for phosphates before and after usage. that is, IF you decide to go with carbon for certain occasions.

 

[Cakepro]

Activated carbon works by adsorbing dissolved organics.

http://www.aquahobby.com/articles/e_chemical.php

 

[BrianPlankis]

Since Skimmers also removed dissolved organics through the foam fractionation, would running both a skimmer and carbon be overkill?

Is it easier to keep SPS corals if you use both a skimmer and carbon?

 

[Guest]

I am starting to use carbon in my tank, I believe it help remove toxic produce from corals. I also run skimmer.
Over kill ? IMO In sps tank there is no such thing as over kill when come to skimming or flow. Just don't use too much carbon it might irritate the sps.

 

[cparka23]

yeah, you can never make your water clean enough. there will always be an input of some waste into the water. you do actually skim out the beneficial things along with the waste, but it's a ton easier to simply add phytoplankton, for instance, than it is to keep corals in bad water. it's a debate among some of the more eclectic reef keepers.

for sps, a skimmer is almost a MUST. If you can set up your reef tank w/o one, then you're amazingly dedicated to siphoning or you've been able to construct a perfect miniature version of a real reef. Carbon is a bit over the top to run 24/7, imo. I run it as needed (i.e. if something dies and messes up the water).

I think I've read on some Euro websites about skimmerless reefs. Not sure if they're keeping SPS tho. Sure would be nice to see how everything is set up.

 

[imsuperjp]

what happens if you leave the carbon in for too long?

 

[DRH]

Carbon is very important IMO. It removes toxins that are produced by corals and macro alga. In my VERY mixed reef tank, the only way any corals of any type will even open is if I run carbon. I have a massive carpet anemone that must secrete very nasty stuff. I should actually take pictures of what the tank looks like with and without carbon after running for a couple of days in both states. It is quite SCARY :-o

If you don't change it, there may be some leaching of whatever the carbon has absorbed, but mostly it just turns into sediment that will get populated by nitrifying bacteria etc.

 

[Guest]

Carbon only absorbs certain "toxins" or chemicals. I am curious to what these corals or other live aquarium inhabitants are secreating that carbon would absorb. And if these organisms are secreting the things carbon absorbs the best, then I have a lot of questions.

http://www.drhelm.com/aquarium/carbon.html

And don't make me find academic articles on the situation, those were hard to find in the first place and I no longer have the bookmarks.

My only explanation with running carbon and helping with corals in your sense is that it is some type of material for it to cling too just like debris "clings" to filter floss.

 

[DRH]

I have no data as to what the carbon is absorbing but it is adsorbing something that bothers the corals... basically, all of them. That is all the data I need to validate its use. It is quite obvious but feel free to believe what you want to..... I know when it comes to advice, I pretty much only accept my own without a healthy dose of skepticism

As to it acting like a mechanical filter, that isn't plausible. I use 50 micron felt in the sump that would negate the need for carbon if that were the case.

I'm also relatively sure that carbon absorbs proteins and amino acids. When the carbon chunks are observed after running it for a couple weeks, there is nothing visible that appears to be stuck in it, yet it smells rank. Proteins are probably what is being released by the anemone that irritates the corals. I don't believe it is a release of nematocysts as corals in close proximity would be effected by those carbon or not.

 

[SeanB]

It does absorb chemicals; which is why it is always recommended to remove carbon when medicating a tank.

 

[DRH]

It does absorb chemicals; which is why it is always recommended to remove carbon when medicating a tank.

Yes, but what chemicals are being released by the anemone that are being absorbed? I have no clue what those could be and have never read anything that wasn't conjecture. It would be interesting to see what is in the carbon after using it for a couple weeks. I'd really love that data

 

[djreef]

The chemicals you all would be referring to are known as terpenes or terpenoids. The are chemicals released by Cniderians and some plant species as a 'downstream' defense mechanism. They poison the well, so to speak, by preventing colonization/overrun by competitive organisms. If you e-mail Eric, I'm sure he has a ton of source material that you could check out if you're really that interested. If not then a search on Reef Central using the key words above. As far as carbon/poly filter removing these compounds, I believe the jury is still out on that. My personal theory is that it does.


DJ
= 8--->{I>

 

[DRH]

Thank you... I will check out Eric's writings.