Talk:Activated Carbon

I found this video very informational, do you think we should include it or is the sales pitch to much? --Brian 08:37, 25 February 2011 (EST)

Doesn't tell us anything we don't already know quite honestly. :)

--Quatermass 19:12, 25 February 2011 (EST)

More please?

"its use is better understood in the 21st century and it is less used today by experienced aquarists" - what does this mean, exactly? Huw Powell 02:29, 26 February 2011 (EST)

past times

AC was used in the 1970s as mainly algae prevention as it absorbed phosphate which was believed to be the cause. But today we know ammonia is the cause. It was also used to get rid of heavy metals as people then had copper or lead water pipes. These days this is treated by any decent water conditioner.

People left their AC in the tank for weeks, even though it had become used up in less than 4 days. Probably because bacteria had an extra place to grow and so ammonia was therefore reduced and algae dies off.

We now have far more effective material like Poly-filter foam or Seachems excellent Purigen.

We know now how it works you see. --Quatermass 04:41, 26 February 2011 (EST)

Um, no. It was used to adsorb odors and colors - organic molecules. It had nothing to do with algae prevention. But this might be an issue of the differing cultures in different countries - US vs UK vs Dutch etc. And can you people please learn to reply to talk page comments in the same section? There is no need to create a new one. Thanks. Huw Powell 22:28, 27 February 2011 (EST)

http://www.ratemyfishtank.com/articles/106 provides a short talk on the old camp vs the new camp with regards to carbon. I personally stopped using carbon in the FW tank because I dosed ferts fairly regally and kept up with my water changes. I also do not use it in my SW tank . I did however use it to remove odors and tannins. There are other options now-a-days, if they are better options really is still a personal opinion and depends on how dedicated the tank-keeper is. However, AC is a part of the aquarium hobby and it won't be going away.... ever so long as people put 3 goldfish in a 10gal. --Brian 10:09, 28 February 2011 (EST)

Nice link - I;d like to see more of that sort of writing on this wiki, but I guess unless I do it... anyway, AC is, of course, completely unnecessary (except, perhaps, for removing meds, but of course WCs will do that too...), it is used for cosmetic reasons - removing odor and color. I get tired really fast of any discussion that involves "camps" and extreme claims (like "never", or "always"), and also, every "rule" has been severely broken by someone with great success ("my angels bred in a 20 gal tank with three goldfish..."). Huw Powell 23:44, 2 March 2011 (EST)

New data

I was shown this article today: http://www.advancedaquarist.com/2008/2/aafeature1

Note this paragraph:

One interpretation of this trend is that when HC2 amounts above the 75 gm threshold are used, a large excess of HC2 binding sites are available compared to the amount of dye present, and so the dye molecules always "see" binding sites. This hypothesis is buttressed by the fact that 511 mg of dye in total is used in each experiment, and with an average binding capacity of 53 mgs of dye per gram of HC2 (from the calculated xm above), only about 10 grams of HC2, in principle, is required to sop up all of the dye. Of course, since there is a great heterogeneity of binding sites, it would take a long time (recall the Langmuir binding experiments took over 14 days to reach equilibrium) to saturate all of the slow-binding sites. And so, it appears empirically that in the region above 75 grams of HC2, there are enough fast-binding sites to absorb the dye over the course of the 2-3 hour experiment. It is likely that in an aquarium, the fast binding sites are responsible for most of the absorption as well.

and

An interesting observation to emerge from these simulations is that, at least for the 100 gallon water volume/100 gm of HC2 case described by Table 5 and Figure 11, the GAC saturation times vary tremendously depending upon the clean/dirty state of the tank water. Under conditions of aggressive DOC removal (skimming, water changes, GAC use), the GAC charge should last over a month, but under more passive nutrient removal husbandry (no skimming? no frequent water changes?), the GAC charge will be depleted in just a few days.

--Brian 14:19, 9 March 2011 (EST)

Dead link

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

• http://www.mikexstudios.com/archives/2006/12/06/analyzing-the-effectiveness-of-brita%C2%AE-water-filters/
  • In Activated Carbon on 2011-03-22 02:39:28, Socket Error: 'Connection refused'
  • In Activated Carbon on 2011-03-23 01:05:16, 404 Not Found
  • In Activated Carbon on 2011-03-25 01:07:38, 404 Not Found
  • In Activated Carbon on 2011-05-02 01:52:56, 404 Not Found

--PsiPro bot 20:53, 1 May 2011 (CDT)