No Carbon?

[outlawpc]

Somewhere I read that you should not use activated carbon in a Discus tank. I am going to assume they meant in the filtration system.

Is this true? Why?

It had mentioned that it was OK to use in an RO unit or filtering water through carbon which will be used for water changes.

Is this true? Why?

What effect if any, does activated carbon have on Discus?

[Carol_Roberts]

Carbon used for a short time to remove meds is fine. Carbon kept in a tank for long periods may start releasing impurities back into the tank. Others have theorized it might remove something essential from the water.

anyway I don't use it and don't miss it.

[Anna Piranha]

And then there was some conjecture about carbon being associated with Hole in the Head disease. I read that on this site, I think, but the bottom line was that there isn't hard-core evidence to make the correlation. It seemed as though the evidence was primarily anecdotal. Good enough for me. I also don't use it and don't miss it ;)

[Tristanyyz]

Eheim canister filters comes with a carbon pad, which is good to use for the first two weeks of a new filter set-up, in order to get rid of any contaminents in the canister...then remove and disguard.
M

[Tad]

outlawpc,
I agree with Carol that the use of Carbon to remove medications is one of the few good things that it can be used for...especially when you are running a series of medications to deal with a multi faceted problem....Carbon from what I recall is used to give clarity to the water..but the basic approach to discus keeping is WC and more WCs..thus clarity is not a problem....Long term use of Carbon to remove impuritys is like a time bomb...at some point it will super saturate the carbon and then dump the impuritys back into the tank....knowing when such a super saturation will occur is just guess work and not worth the potential problems....Also I have read that Carbon may contribute to HITH....In my opinion Carbon has some distinct uses but in the whole approach to keeping discus I would limit it to only removal of medications and nothing more....

JMO,
Tad

[outlawpc]

Your comments clarify what I read in the book "The Proper Care of Discus" written by Bernd Degen. In which he made a one sentence statement about carbon to filter water for water changes, but not in the tank.

Having had fish on and off for the last 25 or 30 years, I was a little supprised at his off the cuff comment on carbon by Degen. In all these years activated carbon and salt were things you kept handy (if not used on a regular basis).

I welcome additional comments on this question.

[CARY_GLdiscus]

YEP YEP YEP!
Tad And Carol are Right!

Carbon only works for 24Hrs after that its worthless.


Also Anna Is Right to! it takes out the bad and the good.

hth
Cary Gld!

[O]

Carol, Cary & Tad, please allow me to disagree with all stated above. There's absolutely no scientific data to support those statements. If that was the case you could make similar claims about peat and other organic materials we use, which can be turned into activated carbon under extreme pressure and heat. Here some info that may help:

http://www.marineland.com/articles/16ActivatedCarb.asp
http://www.marineland.com/articles/17RevisActCarb.asp

HTH,
Oleg

[CARY_GLdiscus]

Sorry My friend,


But I would never Believe a article from a company that trys to sell the product!

Again its a waste of time and Money IMPE and Many other Discus Breeders around the world.

hth
Cary Gld!

[O]

I do agree however, that with daily WC, regular use of carbon becomes unacessary. As a regular chemical filtration it is mainly used to remove odors, disolved organic material, and unwanted gases(e.g. chlorine)which are controled in a discus tank through regular WC.

O.

[O]

Cary, you beat me to it. :D I should learn to type a bit faster.

O.

[CARY_GLdiscus]

LOL!

Really am Slow ;D


What Contaminants Do Activated Carbon Filters Remove From Water?
Activated carbon (AC) filtration is most effective in removing organic contaminants from water. Organic substances are composed of two basic elements, carbon and hydrogen. Because organic chemicals are often responsible for taste, odor, and color problems, AC filtration can generally be used to improve aesthetically objectional water. AC filtration will also remove chlorine. AC filtration is recognized by the Water Quality Association as an acceptable method to maintain certain drinking water contaminants within the limits of the EPA National Drinking Water Standards (Table 1).

Table 1. Water contaminants that
can be reduced to acceptable standards
by activated carbon filtration.
(Water Quality Association, 1989)
---------------------------------------
Primary Drinking Water Standards
Contaminant       *MCL, mg/L
---------------------------------------
Inorganic Contaminants
Organic Arsenic Complexes   0.05
Organic Chromium Complexes   0.05
Mercury (Hg+2) Inorganic   0.05
Organic Mercury Complexes   0.002

Organic Contaminants
Benzene         0.005
Endrin         0.0002
Lindane         0.004
Methoxychlor         0.1
1,2-dichloroethane      0.005
1,1-dichloroethylene      0.007
1,1,1-trichloroethane      0.200
Total Trihalomethanes (TTHMs)   0.10
Toxaphene         0.005
Trichloroethylene      0.005
2,4-D            0.1
2,4,5-TP (Silvex)      0.01
Para-dichlorobenzene      0.075

---------------------------------------
Secondary Drinking Water Standards
Contaminant         **SMCL
---------------------------------------
Color          15 color units
Foaming Agents (MBAS)    0.5 mg/L
Odor          3 threshold
           odor number
---------------------------------------
*Maximum Contaminant Level
**Secondary Maximum Contaminant Level

AC filtration does remove some organic chemicals that can be harmful if present in quantities above the EPA Health Advisory Level (HAL). Included in this category are trihalomethanes (THM), pesticides, industrial solvents (halogenated hydrocarbons), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs).

THMs are a byproduct of the chlorination process that most public drinking water systems use for disinfection. Chloroform is the primary THM of concern. EPA does not allow public systems to have more than 100 parts per billion (ppb) of THMs in their treated water. Some municipal systems have had difficulty in meeting this standard.

The Safe Drinking Water Act mandates EPA to strictly regulate contaminants in community drinking water systems. As a result, organic chemical contamination of municipal drinking water is not likely to be a health problem. Contamination is more likely to go undetected and untreated in unregulated private water systems. AC filtration is a viable alternative to protect private drinking water systems from organic chemical contamination.

Radon gas can also be removed from water by AC filtration, but actual removal rates of radon for different types of AC filtration equipment have not been established.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Water Contaminants Not Removed by AC Filtration
Similar to other types of water treatment, AC filtration is effective for some contaminants and not effective for others. AC filtration does not remove microbes, sodium, nitrates, fluoride, and hardness. Lead and other heavy metals are removed only by a very specific type of AC filter. Unless the manufacturer states that its product will remove heavy metals, the consumer should assume that the AC filter is not effective in removing them. Refer to the other circulars in the Treatment Systems for Household Water Supplies series for information on systems that do remove the contaminants listed above.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Water Testing
Regular water testing is recommended to reduce the risk of consuming contaminated water. Many contaminants are not detected by the senses. Even if contamination can be detected by color, smell, or taste, only a laboratory test can tell you the quantity of contaminant actually present. Testing should always be done by a reputable or certified laboratory. Prior to sending in your water sample, determine what you want your water tested for. Contact the laboratory to find out how to take a proper water sample. Remember, there are thousands of substances that can contaminate your water, and they all have slightly different chemical behavior. Proper sampling and handling for one type of contaminant may cause erroneous results for other types of contaminants.

Once you have the laboratory results in hand, make sure you understand the numbers. If you don't fully understand the results, don't assume anything. The testing laboratory will be able to answer any questions you may have regarding your test results. Understanding the laboratory results will help you select the best and most economical water treatment system. Sometimes just a single piece of equipment, such as an AC filter, is all that is necessary to treat the problem. Other times you may need completely different equipment or possibly a combination of equipment. It all depends on the type and amount of contaminants present in your water.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Activated Carbon Filtration Process
AC works by attracting and holding certain chemicals as water passes through it. AC is a highly porous material; therefore, it has an extremely high surface area for contaminant adsorption. The equivalent surface area of 1 pound of AC ranges from 60 to 150 acres.

AC is made of tiny clusters of carbon atoms stacked upon one another. The carbon source is a variety of materials, such as peanut shells or coal. The raw carbon source is slowly heated in the absence of air to produce a high carbon material. The carbon is activated by passing oxidizing gases through the material at extremely high temperatures. The activation process produces the pores that result in such high adsorptive properties.

The adsorption process depends on the following factors: 1) physical properties of the AC, such as pore size distribution and surface area; 2) the chemical nature of the carbon source, or the amount of oxygen and hydrogen associated with it; 3) chemical composition and concentration of the contaminant; 4) the temperature and pH of the water; and 5) the flow rate or time exposure of water to AC.

Physical Properties
Forces of physical attraction or adsorption of contaminants to the pore walls is the most important AC filtration process. The amount and distribution of pores play key roles in determining how well contaminants are filtered. The best filtration occurs when pores are barely large enough to admit the contaminant molecule (Figure 1). Because contaminants come in all different sizes, they are attracted differently depending on pore size of the filter. In general AC filters are most effective in removing contaminants that have relatively large molecules (most organic chemicals). Type of raw carbon material and its method of activation will affect types of contaminants that are adsorbed. This is largely due to the influence that raw material and activation have on pore size and distribution.

Figure 1. Molecular screening in the micropores of an activated carbon filter. (after G. L. Culp and R. L. Culp)


Chemical Properties
Processes other than physical attraction also affect AC filtration. The filter surface may actually interact chemically with organic molecules. Also electrical forces between the AC surface and some contaminants may result in adsorption or ion exchange. Adsorption, then, is also affected by the chemical nature of the adsorbing surface. The chemical properties of the adsorbing surface are determined to a large extent by the activation process. AC materials formed from different activation processes will have chemical properties that make them more or less attractive to various contaminants. For example chloroform is adsorbed best by AC that has the least amount of oxygen associated with the pore surfaces. The consumer can't possibly determine the chemical nature of an AC filter. However, this does point out the fact that different types of AC filters will have varying levels of effectiveness in treating different chemicals. The manufacturer should be consulted to determine if their filter will adequately treat the consumer's specific water problem.

Contaminant Properties
Large organic molecules are most effectively adsorbed by AC. A general rule of thumb is that similar materials tend to associate. Organic molecules and activated carbon are similar materials; therefore there is a stronger tendency for most organic chemicals to associate with the activated carbon in the filter rather than staying dissolved in a dissimilar material like water. Generally, the least soluble organic molecules are most strongly adsorbed. Often the smaller organic molecules are held the tightest, because they fit into the smaller pores.

Concentration of organic contaminants can affect the adsorption process. A given AC filter may be more effective than another type of AC filter at low contaminant concentrations, but may be less effective than the other filter at high concentrations. This type of behavior has been observed with chloroform removal. The filter manufacturer should be consulted to determine how the filter will perform for specific chemicals at different levels of contamination.

Water Temperature and pH
Adsorption usually increases as pH and temperature decrease. Chemical reactions and forms of chemicals are closely related to pH and temperature. When pH and temperature are lowered many organic chemicals are in a more adsorbable form.

Exposure Time
The process of adsorption is also influenced by the length of time that the AC is in contact with the contaminant in the water. Increasing contact time allows greater amounts of contaminant to be removed from the water. Contact is improved by increasing the amount of AC in the filter and reducing the flow rate of water through the filter.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Activated Carbon Filtration Equipment
AC filters can be placed in the three following categories: 1) pour-through; 2) faucet-mounted; and 3) high-volume (Figure 2).

Figure 2. The three types of activated carbon filtration units are: A) pour-through; B) faucet-mounted; and C) high-volume.


Pour-through AC filters are the simplest. They work like a drip coffee maker. Water is poured in the top and filters by gravity through the filter to the bottom. They are quite slow and handle only small volumes of water.

Faucet-mounted AC filters are small units attached on the end of a standard kitchen faucet. They are convenient to use, but because of their size require frequent change. Some units have bypass valves, so that just water for cooking and drinking is filtered.

High-volume AC filters contain much more AC than either the pour-through or faucet-mounted models. High-volume units are designed to be installed in-line, generally under the sink. They are installed on the cold water line, and some units are installed with a bypass to separate cooking and drinking water from other uses. Under exceptional circumstances all water may need to be treated by AC filtration. A high-volume unit may be installed at the point of entry to the house if all water needs to be treated.

Results of Activated Carbon Filter Testing
In recent years several independent laboratories have tested AC filtration equipment for effectiveness in contaminant removal. Organizations involved in AC testing are the Gulf South Research Institute, National Sanitation Foundation, Canadian Bureau of Health, Consumer Reports and Rodale Press Product Testing Department.

Based on the testing results of these organizations, general recommendations can be made regarding AC filtration. High-volume AC units should be used if removal of health threatening contaminants is your concern. Pour-through and faucet-mounted units do not provide the contact time for significant removal of contaminants. If you are only concerned with taste, odor, or color, pour-through and faucet-mounted units will probably do the job. However, they will still require changing much more often than high-volume AC filters.

Efficiency of contaminant removal and equipment operation vary even among the high volume AC units (Table 2). The most efficient unit is not always the most expensive one.

Table 2. A comparison of activated carbon filtration
units. (Consumer Reports, 1990)
-----------------------------------------------------
          Cartridge Chloroform
Brand and Model      Price $    Cost $ Removal %
-----------------------------------------------------
High-Volume Filters
Ametek CCF-201       158    20(2) 100
Ecowater Water Master    250    33(2) 100
Amway E-9230       276    69    100
Hurley II       375    --    100
Filtrate CF 10        85    8    90
Cuno AquaPure AP-CRF    155    15    90
Kinetico MAC       275    32    90
Culligan SuperGard THM    349    37    90
Teledyne Instapure IF-10 50    12    80
Omni UC-2        99    20(2) 80
NSA Bacteriostatic 50C    179    --    80

(The following two models were downrated because
they clogged after filtering only 300 gallons.)
Bionaire H20 BT850    199    100    100
Everpure H200        298    90    100

Faucet-Mount Filters
Cuno Purity PPO1105    30    6    60
Teledyne Instapure F-2C    24    5    45
Pollenex WP90K        22    5    30

Pour-Through Filters   
Brita           30    8    50
Innova           7    5    45
Glacier Pure        13    5    40
-----------------------------------------------------

Eventually the AC filter loses its ability to remove contaminants, because it becomes clogged with material. In the case of taste and odor, the time to change the filter is easy to detect. However, in the case of other contaminants, it is more difficult to determine when the filter is no longer performing at an adequate level. Most manufacturers recommend a filter change after a certain volume of water has passed through the filter. Some AC units actually meter the water and automatically shut down after a specific quantity of water has passed through the filter. A general rule of thumb for high-volume AC filters is to change the filter after six months of use or 1000 gallons of filtered water. Tests done by Rodale Press Product Testing Department indicated that filtering performance was reduced dramatically after 75 percent of the manufacturer's recommended life time. These results suggest that filters should be changed more often than suggested by the manufacturer. Some AC filters are claimed to last for five years, because they are rechargeable with hot water (145 degrees F). The heat is supposed to release adsorbed organic chemicals. Little information is available on the prolonged effectiveness of rechargeable AC units. General recommendations are somewhat useful quidelines, but there is no guarantee that they apply to any specific situation. Remember, the only certain way of knowing whether contaminant levels are acceptable or not is by having your water tested.

A sediment filter installed ahead of any AC filter will prolong the life of the AC unit. Sediment can easily clog the pores of an AC filter within a short period of time. A good sediment filter can be purchased for only a fraction of the price of most high volume AC filters.

The Bacteria Issue
AC filters can be a breeding ground for microorganisms. The organic chemicals that are adsorbed to the AC are a source of food for various types of bacteria. Pathogenic bacteria are those that cause human diseases such as typhoid, cholera, and dysentery. Public water systems must treat for disease causing bacteria; therefore, the likelihood of disease causing bacteria being introduced to an AC filter from public drinking water is remote. AC filtration should only be used on water that has been tested and found to be bacteria free or effectively treated for pathogenic bacteria.

Other types of non-pathogenic bacteria that do not cause diseases have been regularly found in AC filters. There are times when high amounts of bacteria (non-pathogenic) are found in water filtered through an AC unit. Research by R. L. Caldron and E. W. Mood (1987) shows little risk to healthy people that consume high amounts of non-pathogenic bacteria. We regularly take in millions of bacteria every day from other sources. However, there is some concern for certain segments of the population, such as the very young or old and people weakened by illness. Some types of non-pathogenic bacteria can cause illness in those whose natural defenses are weak. Flushing out bacteria that have built up in the filter can be accomplished by running water through an AC filter for about 30 seconds prior to use. Water filtered after the initial flushing will have much lower levels of bacteria and ingestion of a high concentration of bacteria will have been avoided. The flushing procedure is most important in the morning or any other time of the day when the filter has not been used for several hours.

Some compounds of silver have been used as disinfectants. Silver has been added to certain AC filters as a solution to the bacteria problem. Unfortunately, product testing has not shown silver impregnated AC to be much more effective in controlling bacteria than normal AC filters. Only in the first month of operation did there appear to be any advantage to using an AC filter that contained silver.

EPA requires registration of all types of water treatment equipment that contain an active ingredient for the purpose of inhibiting the growth of microorganisms. Registration does not guarantee that the product is effective. It only guarantees that the active ingredient will not leach from the filter at levels that would be a health hazard.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Further Information
For further information contact your local county Extension Office or State Health Department. Additional information can be found in other publications in this series: Treatment Systems for Household Water Supplies

AE1030---Iron and Manganese Removal (1992)
AE1031---Softening (1992)
AE1032---Distillation (1992)
AE1045---Identification and Correction (1992)
AE1046---Chlorination (1992)
AE1047---Reverse Osmosis (1992)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

References
__________. 1989. Recognized treatment techniques for meeting the National Primary Drinking Water Regulations with the application of point-of-use systems. Water Quality Association, Lisle, Il.

__________. 1989. Recognized treatment techniques for meeting the National Secondary Drinking Water Regulations with the application of point-of-use systems.

__________. 1990. Fit to drink? Consumer Reports. pp. 27-43, January.

Caldron, R. L., and E. W. Mood. 1987. Bacteria colonizing point-of-use, granular activated carbon filters and their relationship to human health. Research Project CR-811904-01-0, Health Effects Research Lab., U.S. EPA, Cincinnati, OH. Reprinted by the Water Quality Association, Lisle, IL.

Culp, G. L. and R. L. Culp. 1974. New concepts in water purification. Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., New York.

Ishizake, C., I. Marti, and M. Ruiz. 1983. Effect of surface characteristics of activated carbon on the adsorption of chloroform from aqueous solution. In M. J. McGuire and I. H. Suffet (ed.), pp. 95-106. Treatment of water by granular activated carbon. Advances in Chemistry Series. American Chemical Society, Washington, D.C.

Rodale Press Product Testing Department Staff. 1985. Water treatment handbook - A homeowners quide to safer drinking water. Rodale Press Inc., Emmaus, PA.

Taraba, J. L., L. M. Heaton, and T. W. Ilvento. 1990. Using activated carbon filters to treat home drinking water, IP-6. University of Kentucky Cooperative Extension Service, Lexington, KY.

Temple, Barker, and Sloan Inc. Staff. 1983. Point-of-use treatment for compliance with drinking water standards. Reprinted by the Water Quality Association, Lisle, IL.

Funding for this publication was by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Extension Service, under project number 90-EWQI-19252.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AE-1029, February 1992


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NDSU Extension Service, North Dakota State University of Agriculture and Applied Science, and U.S. Department of Agriculture cooperating. Sharon D. Anderson, Director, Fargo, North Dakota. Distributed in furtherance of the Acts of Congress of May 8 and June 30, 1914. We offer our programs and facilities to all persons regardless of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, disability, age, Vietnam era veterans status, or sexual orientation; and are an equal opportunity employer.
This publication will be made available in alternative formats for people with disabilities upon request 701/231-7881.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

North Dakota State University
NDSU Extension Service

[CARY_GLdiscus]

SORRY BUT THE DARN LINK WOULD NOT WORK FOR ME :(

[Carol_Roberts]

For those of you who don't want to read the whole thing here is the important part ;D

Eventually the AC filter loses its ability to remove contaminants, because it becomes clogged with material. In the case of taste and odor, the time to change the filter is easy to detect. However, in the case of other contaminants, it is more difficult to determine when the filter is no longer performing at an adequate level. Most manufacturers recommend a filter change after a certain volume of water has passed through the filter.

The Bacteria Issue
AC filters can be a breeding ground for microorganisms. The organic chemicals that are adsorbed to the AC are a source of food for various types of bacteria. Pathogenic bacteria are those that cause human diseases such as typhoid, cholera, and dysentery. . . AC filtration should only be used on water that has been tested and found to be bacteria free or effectively treated for pathogenic bacteria.

[O]

Thanks Cary, that's great info!

O :thumbsup:

[outlawpc]

Thanks Cary for the detailed info.
Thanks Carol for attempting to boil the info down.

Based on the input so far, here is my take on this. . .

There is evidence if AC carbon is used for a prolonged period of time that it could have a negative effect. Use of a prefilter would lengthen its life.

However, the use of AC for a limited period of time (possibly a couple weeks. . . this would be dependent on how much AC is being used and how much water is filtered thru it) would be beneficial. That exact benefit depending upon the type of AC.

Although some threads to this topic have indicated that they do not use AC and do not miss it. . . based on what Cary has posted, it would seem that this approach is ignoring the real benefits AC can provide based on the factors previously stated (IMHO).

What has yet to be addressed is the use of a carbon filter in an RO unit. If one is used (and must be used with certain membranes) does one keep track of x-amount of gallons processed thru the RO unit? Keeping in mind that about 4 gallons are waste water for each good gallon. In other words, out of 1000 gallons processed thru the AC filter a user actually saves/uses 200 gallons.

Comments???

[DarkDiscus]

A non-scientific and purely practical approach to this question is this: For 15 years I used power filters with carbon and mechanical filter pads on all of my aquariums. I did w/c of 25-50% once a week (these were not discus tanks) and cleaned the filters and changed media once a month. My fish all thrived and I always had tons of success breeding whatever fish I worked with. No problems.

I got into discus over a year and a half ago and embraced the 100% biological filtration concept with heavy daily water changes. I only have on non-discus tank left and I pulled the carbon from that tank. I still do a large weekly w/c and guess what? No difference. The fish are healthy and happy.

My point. Just like the others said - carbon is good for med removal and that's about it.

John

[MrCloudz]

Hello everyone I am new to the board and keeping discus, but not to fish keeping. I stopped using carbon about a year ago in all my tanks. I use alot of emperors. On my 55g BB discus tank I use a emperor and a penguin 330, but that was too much and too hard to feed the fish. So I replaced the 330 with a spong filter. In the emperor I use 4 of the gray filter cages 2 with pondmaster filterpads cut to size and the other 2 packed with polyfill. This cuts down on the cost of running emperors by alot. With that being said how do discus people feel about vortex diatom filters? I only have 3 discus in the 55g and I purchased them from my LFS. I have had the discus for a week and a half (cycled the emperor on another tank). I have already used the diatom on the discus tank twice incase the fish brought any "gifts" form the LFS.

[RandalB]

Ahh, The use of Carbon Blocks in RO units.

The Typical RO unit has a 9 3/4" (Called a 10") carbon block in it. On the average they have a dechlorination capacity from 5000-15000 Gallons of water with .4 PPM Chlorine content. Again, This varies by manufacturer. They are made of Coal or Coconut hull.

They are designed primarily for dechlorination which is necessary to protect the TFC RO membrane. TFC membranes are easily damaged and quickly destroyed by free chlorine in feed water.

Fortunately for you Jim, There's an RO guy not far from you. In our tapwater (Jim's from the Chicago area) a 10" carbon Block will last up to 6 months depending on how much RO water is being produced (Our Chlorine maxes out at .4 PPM but is usually .2 or so) . I produce a minimum of 40 Gallons of RO water per day and my Carbons last 6 months no problem. I recommend the changing of Prefilter Carbons in all my RO units every 6 months.

I also was using AC in my Penguin 170's and Magnum 350's. I've discontinued it. Even in the planted tanks (1x W/C week) there is no difference. IMO it's a waste of Money in any tank unless you need to remove medications.

As far as Chicago Water goes, there's nothing in it that requires special filtration before using it to grow out discus. I use a squirt of Dechlor and go right into the tank from the faucet. I have pairs spawning in our water and Juvies showing excellent growth. I also know local breeders that don't even bother with the Dechlor.

HTH
RandalB

PS: Nice Info Cary!

[CARY_GLdiscus]

Hey,
This is a great Topic! I thank Everyone whos part of it!


Good Job Everyone ;D

[Ardan]

I hope nobody minds, but I think I will put a sticky on this.

Great info and good discussion. 8)

[outlawpc]

Boy, you are not kidding that I'm lucky to have an RO guy near-by Randal :)

On your comment re: the RO carbon filter/unit. . .

In earlier threads mention was made of how the growth of "bad" microbes and/or the release of impurities was the main reason they would not use AC.

However, as you explained in an RO unit a charcoal canister must be used to protect the membrane. Granted the apparent life of the cannister might/is greater then in a power filter or canister. . . however, based on (again the other posts) would/could the RO be a source of concern???

Now. . . back to the use of AC in filters. . . statements to the effect that no difference is seen can hardly be clasified as scientific (although it is one of the tests of the scientific method). Other than using carbon over a prolonged time or any other filter media which certainly will create problems. . . using carbon may have long range benefits that are not obvious. It would be interesting to see the results of a controled experiment between discus raised with AC and without.

But, I will agree this has been an interesting topic, although I am not convinced that the use of carbon within certain parameters is not beneficial.

[RandalB]

Jim,
What source of concern on the RO unit? I'm not understanding your question, please elaborate.

RandalB

[O]

I think, while we are having this discussion we need to dispel certain myths(IMO) about active carbon.

First, I don't think it can cause HIHT. To do that it will have to somehow change the chemistry of the water and interfere with nutrient absorption by the fish. Which from everything we've discussed so far, is not plausible. We know that HITH is caused primarily by vitamin deficiency. Since there are no vitamins in the soluble form in the water, they cannot be removed by carbon. Plus all the info is stating that carbon does not remove trace elements and generally does not change water chemistry.

Second, it is hard for me to believe that carbon releases every chemical filtered through it after full saturation. This just does no make sense chemically. At least to me with basic knowledge of chemistry. It is more likely that at full saturation carbon media just becomes useless. Perhaps someone here can explain this and bring this issue to light.

I’m not advocating the use of carbon, just want to the bottom of those two issues

Just my 2 cents.
O.

[Tad]

I agree this is a very interesting topic.... ;D

I think the KISS approach to Carbon is the best approach for me personally.....

Basically Discus keepers are religious Water changers and even if there was benefit from using Carbon it would be of little use when your always changing high percentages of their liquid enviorment....

When it comes to the relationship of disease and oversaturation dumping of Carbon..I can agree with "O" that there is not alot of research...but on the other hand there isnt research that says in a profound manner that Carbon will not cause these problems...Im not a chemist but just a hobbyist who feels that if I can remove or not use ,"potential problems" that is what is best for me....

In my case I do not use carbon except to remove medications and that is just my opinion...call me a fatalist ;D...but that is the way I KISS ;)


JMO,
Tad

Hopefully some others will post more scientific data to support or refute the use of Carbon. Im just lazy searching the internet LOL!!!!

[Nightowl]

Hello all, I remember 3 years ago going to a local sales meeting sponsored by Hagen and the fellow there from the company said"..we laugh at all you Americans that use carbon in your filters...but don't tell your customers that,etc." Carbon in a canister filter...how annoying!! They were pushing the-04 Fluval series at the time.
I think there is a place for carbon...people w/ smaller tanks that don't change a lot of water, etc... the carbon helps stabilize the ph short term. No need for it w/ discus though. We have many tanks in the store I work at and we use no carbon at all, for ANY of the fish. They don't seem to mind!!! later, J.T. :vanish:

[outlawpc]

Randal:

My question regarding RO units related to the carbon filter that we agree must be used to protect the membrane.

Previous comments about NOT using AC in the filtration process because of a variety of reasons, including that the carbon once saturated (if that is the correct term) will introduce bad things back into the water.

Is it possible that the same could be said about the carbon used in an RO unit?

. . . however, let me state IMHO, I tend to agree with the post that once AC is saturated it does not give off harmful elements. His/her statement just seems to make sense.

I disagree that the hugh amount of WC makes no sense to use carbon. Filtering water, is filtering water. . . the fact that frequent water changes are made does not subtract from the possiblity that filtering would not have some positive effect.

. . . and while I'm on a roll. . . the thread regarding the Hagen sales rep. . . back a few years ago when I was in Germany on business at a trade show, the subject of what idiots Americans were for buying BMWs was a discussion that came up. . . they just laughed and laughed. . . stupid Americans!!!

What can I say??? (. . . or am not going to say, for fear of starting an international incident :) Some people are just idiots. . .

A proud BMW owner. . . and I guess "stupid American," who also uses carbon 8)

[Smokey]

Howdy - just a quick note: Activated Carbon is an ADSORBANT material. After it has become "FULL" , IT HAS BEEN PROVEN - that the substances adsorbed can/will ""LEACH"' from the ac.
This means, IMPO/understanding - adsorbed substances may flow back into the tanks water.
It is also widley know that the benfical bacteria will try to colonize on the ac. AC being a suitable environment. Aolng with other strains of bacteria. and Since ac can not be "cleaned"; are we setting up an environment which "could ' be detremental .

I agree AC is a wonderful material, if used correctly and for the correct purpose; which it is capible off.
I do not let my mechiial foam filters become saturated with debre. Fortunately, cleaning the mechanical foams is as easy as a Saturday night bath.

Going back th the ""KISS"" principal - keeping the water clean and fresh is simple ; although it does require the owners time.

Smokey

[RandalB]

Ahh Now I get you..

All,
The release or not release from the carbon block in the RO unit makes no difference. The membrane will reject almost anything that comes down the pipe and it will flush out with the waste water.

The main problem with Carbon Blocks in RO units is the growth of Bacteria in them over time. That's why it's recommended to replace them every 6 months if they need it or not. The RO membrane will still keep the bacteria out of the product water, but it can become fouled by bacterial action and damaged over time. This is why it's necessary to flush the membrane regularly and replace the carbon blocks at the proper intervals.

Jim,
Please be advised that there are hundreds of products on the market to help keep fish healthy and happy. Most are not by any means necessary and are just as easily avoided and rendered unnecessary by regular Water changes. UV sterilizers, Ozone units, Wet/Dry filters, Fluidized bed filters, Algea scrubbers, the list goes on and on. These things were all developed to Keep salt water as clean as possible because changing water in a salt water tank is so expensive. Freshwater is cheap and changing water here in Chi-town is easy. Don't get me wrong, You can spend your money on whatever you want and I'll be happy to get you all the GAC you want at wholesale cost if that's what you feel is necessary for sucess in your new discus tank. It's just that you don't really need it to keep your future fish healthy and happy. IMO, technology is not necessarily the secret to success with discus.

HTH,
RandalB

[outlawpc]

As always Randal, you are a true diplomat :)

Sometimes you just have to spend some green-backs to feel right about fish keeping ;D . . . not that it is always necessary. . . just makes one feel they are doing their best!

. . . but I do think we might learn something from the saltwater part of the hobby. . . but then I've always found it hard to keep things simple and always looking to go that extra mile.

Guess that's why I drive the Beemer ;) LOL

[RandalB]

Jim,
I agree completely about being able to learn from the salt water end of the hobby. Some great improvements have come from there. Mechanical media only in the filters is one of them. The only reason a lot of the above equipment was developed was to reduce the amount of W/C's necessary for marine fish. If people had good salt water coming from a tap, you'd better believe they'd be doing big W/C's too. You just can't do a 50% daily W/C in your reef tank unless you are rolling in the $$ and it's a big PITA besides.

Don't feel bad or embarassed about wanting the high tech goodies. I was in your shoes not long ago and bought a UV sterilizer and other stuff thinking it would make my discus keeping easier. It's just that as I stopped using them, I found the discus were just as healthy and happy. You've seen my fishroom setup, pretty minimalist. On the other hand, the tank I'm planning for the front room (Geneva series 54 corner Bowfront) will be a high tech planted tank complete with UV, Computer controlled C02 injection,a wet dry filter and a substrate. I know that setup is more difficult so I will be making sure to have every edge I can get. Sometimes a gadget or two gives the necessary piece of mind that makes this insane hobby fun.

If you do the rest of your discus research this well before you buy you won't have any problems raising a nice bunch of discus IMO.

Definately an interesting thread, I for one am proud to be involved. Keep it coming all,
RandalB

[outlawpc]

Thanks Randal and everyone who has added to this discussion. I second the motion to keep this going. If those of you out there who have an opinion or experience that you would like to share on this subject, your comments are greatly appreciated.

Randal already knows that I am a born researcher. When Bernd Degen in his book "The Proper Care of Discus" stated in one sentence to filter new water with carbon, but not in the tank. . . it got the old mind thinking. Why would he make such a statement? He did not go on to explain further. BTW this is a great little book that does not go into a lot of detail, but gives a good overall view of keeping and raising Discus.

For any of us who have been in the "water-keeping" hobby (something else I recently learned. . . we don't keep fish, we keep water), things change. What is accepted as fact can and does change. Looking back at my library of tropical and saltwater fish, it has become obvious as to how great those changes have been. Many of the changes are due to technology that has been brought into the hobby and maybe as many from the experiences of "water-keepers."

One can be sure that where we are today is not the final word. Simplydiscus and other sites are a tool to share information, ask questions, and learn from each other. This tool will surely add to the changes that this hobby/science will undergo in the future.

No, I am not embarrased to ask questions, or to explore new ways or revisit old ways on enjoying this pastime. And no, I am not offended by other opinions and comments. If one is to learn and search for knowledge, these human feelings would just hinder the learning process. To find answers one must ask questions. To blindly accept what is given as fact in this hobby or in any other part of life is in my VHO a mistake.

"I know less today then I knew yesterday. . . and less then the day before." Guess I'm getting smarter ;)

[CARY_GLdiscus]

Very well said O,

My hat is off To you! Thanks for being part of this Fine board and bringing Your Knowledge to the tabel :thumbsup:

Best ishes!
Cary Gld!

[O]

Cary, No Thank you!

This board have been an invaluable source of information & support for me, and i'm glad to be able to contirbute.

Best,
Oleg

[Smokey]

I second the motion!.

This board and many others like it, are an invaluable source of others methods and expierence.

We are not the first ... hopefully ... not the last.

Randal - you understanding and foresight has proven invaluable.

Cary - your baby blues are doing great. Thank you.

Jim - when I first started out [ pre computer/internet time] I relied on published information. I read every thing I could get my hands on. The marine setups "DID" suggest some new techinques _ [eg. algae scruppers]. With a bit of research and independant thing I was able to understand what is necessary for the health of "FISH".

Heathy water; excellant foods; sutible environments.

Yes - it can be very simple ... or very complicated.

It is up to every individual to make a choice.

Smokey

[Alan]

Other than its (carbon) "limited budget" use for saltwater tanks and after being enlightened by the posts on this discussion, I believe that encouraging the regular use of carbon, other than neutralizing medication/chemicals introduced into a fish tank, is for commercial purposes only. :-X ;D

First, I read somewhere that carbon needs surface area in order to be effective. Once it has adsorbed or absorbed, or whatever term have you, other chemicals, then it has no use. Time to replace it.

Secondly, this has been confirmed by at least two LFS owners I've spoken with. They "encourage" the use of carbon and to replace carbon regularly.

You decide. :)

[Smokey]

Howdy Alan; The correct word is " adsorb ". If you look the word up, in a dictionary, it explains the difference, between a'b'sorb and a'd'sorb.

Carbon is an ADSORBANT material ...and can not be cleaned/regenerated.[practially].

Also, carbon can contaminate the water, by "leaching" chemicals back into the water. So, if used, carbon should be replaced regularly.

Carbon has a unique ability to "clean" water. Use it wisely.

Smokey

[bennett]

just read through this post and have a question...i have an emporer 280 w/ factory filter cartridges in it now...would you guys suggest replacing both of the filters w/ sponges? ie) eliminate all carbon filtration?...tank has been up and running for 6-8 weeks w/ fish now. let me know what you think...

[Smokey]

Bennett ;
In reply to your question:
First - you said the tanks has been up and running for 6-8weeks, correct[?].

Be cautious - the tank may not be fully cycled 100%.[?]

Second - you ask if you should replace the factory filter cartiages with sponges.

The new sponges/foams will need time to become colonized with the "good" bacteria. If you remove the colonized filter cartiages - you may upset the "established" bio-cycle. Be care-ful.

and YES, I feel the more biosurface area available, the safer the tank can be. One nice benifit of haveing more than one bio-foam - A person can clean one foam and still have adequate bio-bacteria, in the second foam, to maintane safe water.[ biologically speaking.].

Third - you want to know if you should remove all carbon filteration.

This is a two fold answer.
The present use carbon may be helpful in maitaining "safe" water; while the tank is cycling. [?]. and IMP thinking- the use of carbon, in a discus tank, is costly, offers little benifit, and unless replaced often - is uneffective. { not a spelling error}.

Regular w/c's, impo. are still the best and most effective way of maintaning a health discus aquarium.

HTH.

Smokey

Carbon is not necessary, in a healthy, well maintianed, balanced discus tank. MPE.

[O]

I agree with Smokey using carbon in the Discus tank is not necessary. After 6-8 week you probably need to replace the cartridges anyway. I'd suggest doing it one at time over a period of several weeks to allow "good" bacterial to develop. What is your WC schedule?

O.

[Carol_Roberts]

I think he has a biowheel with "good" bacteria on that brand filter.

Pull out the gray cartridges of carbon and replace with sponges today. You can cut the blue fabric off the pad, rinse in dechlorinated water and stick back in the filter over a new sponge for that section too.

I think that brand filter was designed for the interior to trap food and feces on the blue pad, send the disolved waste through the gray container of carbon and onto the bio wheel.

I personally don't like a bunch of leftover food and feces setting in the filter box. I like to trap it on the prefilter and rinse it down the drain ;D

[Alan]

Bennett, Carol is correct. The Emperor 280 is designed to have the "good" bacteria thrive on the bio-wheel. It only has one wheel though but it really doesn't matter because you're not going to clean the bio-wheel at this point. You're not even supposed to replace the wheel unless the bearings become faulty. Just monitor your ammonia/nitrite/nitrate levels to be on the safe side because Smokey has a good point, i.e. your filter may not have completed the ammonia cycle, yet.

[justathome]

Quick question to RandalB..
you mentioned that becteria can build up in the carbon after a certain amount of time when used as a pre-filter with an R/O, is this despite Chlorine comming into contact with the Carbon all the time???

[RobsDiscus]

Something I see missing here. Unfortunately I cannot substantiate with links etc, just what I've learned from some Aquarist Extremists...

As has been said:
AC only holds so much then releases some of its ‘bad’ absorbed chemicals back into the tank. IMVHO this is fact and alone suggests against the use of AC.

What has not been said:
When you wash the carbon before putting it in the filters (as you should be) you will see all the black stuff (carbon dust so to say) wash off. No matter how much you wash still more carbon dust comes off into the tank from the filter after you have installed it. This carbon dust if examined under a microscope would appear as tiny 'lightning bolts' of carbon. It is my understanding these tiny particles will block up the sensory organs of Discus and other fish. E.g. Lateral lines. If you are pre-staging your water with enough time for Chlorine to get out of the water why do you need the carbon anyway? I'm slowly making changes to my tanks to provide only mechanical and biological filtration - no more chemical filtration based on properly pre-staging water.

If you do not pre-stage your water (again IMVHO bad) then I WOULD suggest the proper use of carbon assuming you are making sure you change it regularly. The thought here being you need to have carbon if not allowing chemicals to precipitate out of a staging tank naturally.

So, I post what I've been told, read etc.. hoping there are some “Aquarist Extremists” on the forums that know the truth, or not, to the validity of my statement?

[RobsDiscus]

Thank you for the reply.

Getting clarity on these topics seems tuff at best as I just looked up two articles that state different things regarding the carbon release... If you have kept fish for this long you have tons more experience then me and I appreciate your input! I do hope others input as well.


As you can see from my quick Google results the info can be misleading at best...

The following article's talks about the re-release from AC.

http://fish-tank-filters.com/

Some simple fish tank filters will generally have activated carbon and filter wool. The filter wool traps large debris and particles which thereby activates smaller impurities. However these type of filters must be changed frequently at regular intervals. This is very important due to the activated carbon filters which can re-release their absorbed materials in large if left to saturate.

http://www.hallman.org/filter/gac.html

The Sorption Process: How Activated Carbon Works.
Activated carbon removes organic compounds from aquaria by adsorption and absorption principles. Both processes involve the transfer of the adsorbate (pollutant) from the liquid phase (water) to the solid phase (carbon). Adsorption is the primary sorption mode relying on electrostatic Van der Walls forces. This attractive “force” forms relatively weak bonds between the carbon and adsorbate. In theory activated carbon could release or desorb what it removed at some point. But practical experience with aquarium filtration and laboratory experiments show desorption rarely occurs or causes any type of “toxic release”. Bacteria readily colonize the outer surface of the activated carbon and consume some of the sorbed organics. The bacterial action reactivates a small portion of the carbon and perhaps prevents desorption.

[Graham]

G

[Batt4Christ]

Carbon does not easily release what it has captured. I'll post a link after I have enough posts to do so...


Something I see missing here. Unfortunately I cannot substantiate with links etc, just what I've learned from some Aquarist Extremists...

As has been said:
AC only holds so much then releases some of its ‘bad’ absorbed chemicals back into the tank. IMVHO this is fact and alone suggests against the use of AC.

[/FONT][/COLOR]