carbon

[duke62]

what are the pros and cons on running carbon.

 

[prattreef]

IMO there are no cons, only pros Carbon easily, effectively and cheaply removes a whole host of undesirable substances from the water column-- including dissolved organics, yellowing substances that block light penetration and chemicals produced by corals for warfare. If it also removes some trace elements ( the only con I ever hear, and not a very well proven claim) so be it. This is easily remedied via supplementation or water changes and well worth the "risk" if you can even call it that.
I run carbon 24/7 on all my reefs and have done so for nearly 15years, I have no intention of changing this practice in the forseeable future.

One word of caution--- if you have not been running carbon and want to start be careful of light shock to your corals as the clarity will improve drastically and rapidly and thus the light penetration will increase as well.

 

[duke62]

well this has been on my mind since someone told me "carbon kills corals" i thought he had facts but i googled it and i saw nothing that backs up what he said so id thought to ask you guys.i put my carbon in a mesh bag around 3 ounces.

 

[duke62]

this is the closest i came to a negative
http://ezinearticles.com/?Activated-Carbon-In-The-Reef-Aquarium&id=1122698

 

[cowfish]

The only problem with carbon is that it gets "used up" very quickly. In a matter od days in most tanks. The carbon has a limited capacity to absorb; once that capacity has been reached the carbon just sits there. I do run carbon on my reef tank, but it is not as useful as having a good protein skimmer, refugium and doing regular water changes.

I have a freshwater planted species tank (leopard ctenopmoa) that's been running for 8 years with the same fish and the water is crystal clear... haven't used carbon on that tank in 6 years.

 

[BKLYN REEF]

I run carbon usually for 3-4 days a month and then take it out. I was wondering what brand of carbon everyone prefers? I was using the Kent Reef Carbon but thinking of trying something else.

 

[KathyC]

I totally agree with everything that Randy said in his post.

Brooklyn - I use Marineland Black Diamond Activated Carbon (they claim it is phosphate free)

The only problem with carbon is that it gets "used up" very quickly. In a matter od days in most tanks. The carbon has a limited capacity to absorb; once that capacity has been reached the carbon just sits there.

Cowfish - I'd heard a while back about how much surface area carbon actually has and just spent a while trying to back it up with facts..here's what I found out..

Activated carbon

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(Redirected from Activated charcoal)
Jump to: navigation, search

Activated carbon


Activated carbon, also called activated charcoal or activated coal, is a form of carbon that has been processed to make it extremely porous and thus to have a very large surface area available for adsorption or chemical reactions. [1] The word activated in the name is sometimes substituted by active. Due to its high degree of microporosity, just one gram of activated carbon has a surface area of approximately 500 m?, as determined typically by nitrogen gas adsorption. Sufficient activation for useful applications may come solely from the high surface area, though further chemical treatment often enhances the adsorbing properties of the material. Activated carbon is usually derived from charcoal.

...that 1 gram of carbon they mention = 500 square feet of surface area!!
Considering we add substantially more than 1 gram to our tanks, it seems like a no brainer to me to continue running it in my tank 24/7. After the researching I did, I may add less to my tank and change it more frequently though

 

[Mr.First]

How are people running Carbon. Can it lay in the flow in a sump, or does it need to be in a reactor?

 

[KathyC]

A reactor would be more effective, but submerged in a high flow area is ok too. On my 120 I have it in a reactor daisy chained to my GFO reactor, but it's in mesh bag in my other tanks

 

[meschaefer]

I use carbon for 3-4 days once a month. I am also under the impression that it is used up very quickly.

 

[prattreef]

More info on carbon use in reef aquariums than you will ever want to know

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2008/1/aafeature1/

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2008/2/aafeature1/

FYI using the methodology outlined above, Dr. Feldman estimates that " in a 200 gallon tank using 150 gm of GAC, the GAC will be 90% saturated in about 32 days." ( Pers. Communication) which kind of puts to rest the used up quickly argument.

BTW, the Author Dr. Ken Feldman is one our featured speakers at the upcoming frag swap.

 

[KathyC]

Wow Randy, not only great info in there but having Dr. Feldman as a Swap speaker is great news!!

I thought these points were quite interesting..

However, one early conclusion can be drawn from these data: using less that 75 gm of GAC (< 2.5 inches) in a Phosban reactor is not an effective way to utilize GAC for impurity removal.

For the three dyes that do seem to be susceptible to significant adsorption by GAC (Acid Yellow 76, and Fluorescein/Basic Blue 3 combined), the rate constants k for dye removal are approximately twice as large with Black Diamond as they are with Hydrocarbon2. Correspondingly, the derived t90 values with Black Diamond are about half of those with Hydrocarbon2. These data lead to the clear conclusion that Black Diamond removes these dyes more rapidly than Hydrocarbon2, and by inference, DOC in general. Whether the factor-of-two difference with the dyes translates to a similar ratio with authentic DOC removal in a marine tank is unknown, but it seems likely that the large advantage enjoyed by Black Diamond for dye removal will lead to enhanced rates of organic clearance for the aquarist.

For example, a system with 150 gallons of total water volume that is adequately skimmed (or subjected to other effective nutrient removal, [DOC] ≤ 1 ppm) would be characterized by the aqua line on the left-hand graph in Figure 12. By interpolating from that line (or, more quantitatively, by using the expression of Eq. (31)), an aquarist can conclude that a 100 gram charge of HC2, for example, should be replaced in approximately 29 days, whereas a 200 gram portion of HC2 would last approximately 52 days before it became saturated with DOC's. In a similar manner, an aquarist running an unskimmed (i.e., [DOC] at approximately 7.5 ppm) 75 gallon tank could use the magenta line in the right-hand graph of Figure 12 (or Eq. (33)) to estimate that a 100 gm HC2 charge will become saturated with DOC's in approximately 4.8 days, and a 200 gm portion of HC2 would last about 9 days. Clearly, very nutrient rich tanks will require better means of DOC export than only GAC-based removal!

 

[tosiek]

You will never utilize the carbon in the same way by putting it in a bag and throwing it into your sump unless your turning and shifting the carbon every few days. Adequate flow through the grains is what makes it work. People that usually say they don;t need carbon and that it does nothing in your tank usually use the bag in the sump trick in a lower flow area.

Reactor of some sort is your best bet, use the correct amount for your tank from adescent Po4 free carbon brand and change it out every 2-3 weeks. It doesn;t hurt, costs pennies, and makes stuff happy in your tank.

 

[masterswimmer]

I have never run my system without carbon. I run it 24/7. I wholeheartedly support the entire argument presented by Randy.

I also believe you cannot gain the full benefit of carbon by placing it in a mesh bag and throwing it in a high flow area of your sump. It must be used in a fluidized reactor to utilize it to its fullest potential.

swimmer

 

[duke62]

Can You Put Carbon In A Filter Like This And Use It As A Type Of Reactor.just Carbon No Type Of Media

 

[duke62]

http://www.thatpetplace.com/pet/prod/211369/product.web
LETS TRY THIS

 

[KathyC]

Can You Put Carbon In A Filter Like This And Use It As A Type Of Reactor.just Carbon No Type Of Media

You can but it would be more economical in a Phosban reactor

 

[duke62]

Yeah I Have This In Garage Maybe Ill Use It Till I Get Another Phosban.i Sold My Extra One I Knew I Should Have Saved It.

 

[masterswimmer]

The only problem using the eheim is the ease of maintenance. Phosban Reactors take about 15 minutes (for me) to change out media. The eheim will be much more inconvenient, IMO. The eheim won't allow you to see how vigorously or slowly your media is tumbling.

However, since you have the eheim already, it's at least worth a shot.

swimmer

 

[duke62]

YEAH ILL GIVE IT A SHOT TILL I BUY A BRAND NEW PHOSBAN.NO ONE WILL BUY IT ANYWAY ITS BEEN IN NON REEF THREAD FOR 2 WEEKS :lol2: THE REASON IM GOING TO NEED A NEW PHOSBAN IS BECAUSE ITS GOING TO HAVE TO SIT ON THE OUTSIDE OF TANK NO MORE ROOM IN MY FUGE.THE USED ONES I HAVE BOUGHT ALL HAVE SLOW LEAKS NEAR TOP.