carbon and sps

[bigdscobra]

Is having carbon in your filtration a good idea for sps????

I removed it from my filtration when i went to the new wet/dry but added two biowheel 125 back to clear up the water. both use carbon in there filters..

Would it be a good idea to fill a bag with carbon and put it into the sump or other meda what works best??

Thanks
Dan

[GaryP]

Dan,

I run carbon at least a couple weeks out of the month. I use a powered carbon filter in my sump and change it every 1-2 weeks.

[falcondob]

Dan,

I run carbon at least a couple weeks out of the month. I use a powered carbon filter in my sump and change it every 1-2 weeks.

Gary, how do you do that? Do you buy pre-made or make your own?
Thanks,
John

[bigdscobra]

make one hmmmm what would it even look like a piece of pvc with a power head???

[bigdscobra]

so fill the pvc with carbon have the maxijet pump water through the pvc than out comes the water that has gone through the carbon in the other side

[GaryP]

Yea, that's the idea. You can get filter floss by the foot at Fintique. You use it as a filter at both ends. Remember that you want a slow flow, so a large pump is not necessary. Just use a slip cap on one end, no fitting are necessary and drill several holes in the cap to provide an outlet. You don't want a lot of back pressure on a small pump like that.

Rinse the carbon well before adding it until no dust is coming from it. I change the carbon every 2-3 weeks. Here's my theory on carbon use. A lot of organic compounds are produced in the tank, some as a result of water decay, some as a result of bio warfare from corals and other critters, and some are just metabolic by-products. These are not compounds that are detected by any test kit. The best you can do is use a total dissolved organic kit to get a rough idea of what's there what that is totally quantitative, not qualitative. A skimmer may remove many of these compounds, but not all. A skimmer is only capable of removing certain types of organic materials, not all. The carbon helps out with the rest. It also provides a very nice media for bacterial growth for waste digestion. Do some reading, there's a ton of info out there on the net that talks about this, even comparative analysis of different brands of carbon, although the tests I saw were somewhat limited in their scope. They only looked at the efficiency of removal of green pigments from macro algae as a way to measure effectiveness. As I recall a brand called Hydrocarbon was judged to be the best in that test. To the best of knowledge its not available locally. CB Pets has a good brand called Tri Carbon that Richard strongly recommends. Its a mixture of 3 different kinds of Carbon. The test also showed that the granular carbon was generally better than the cylindrical type we mostly see here. I don't know of anyone carrying the granular type.

[GaryP]

However, I will say some authors claim that you don't want to have your water "to clean." That's why I usually only run two weeks on, and two weeks off. I alternate using my filter between my two tanks.

I think its very important in my softy/LPS tank that contains a lot of leathers. I can really tell the difference in how my open brains react when I am running carbon. They inflate quite a bit larger and just look healthier. I may go to running carbon full time in that tank. Leathers produce a lot of organic toxins and I have a 24" toadstool in a 75 gal. tank.

I think the key is to change the carbon regularly however you use it. To often I see a bag of carbon sitting in a sump that has obviously been in there for a long time. It does get spent eventually.

You may also want to talk to the guys at CB Pets about their experiments in using carbon as a substrate in a refugium. They have gotten some very positive results. I'm hoping to get them to give a talk on this in the near future.

[falcondob]

Couple of things:

(1) I believe that Wolf Reef carries the granular carbon.

(2) I will be building one of those powered carbon filter tonight. Great idea. I am going to add Gary's description to my build-out thread.

(3) Gary (or anyone from CB Pets online), if you use carbon for a substrate in a fuge, I assume that at some point you must replace it. I thought I read that after "x" period of time it would start leaching back the bad stuff into the water. Is that true?

(4) If the answer to (3) is yes, then you would have to change it and your live substrate would be lost and you would have to start over. That's sounds messy. If the answer to (3) is no, then nevermind...

[Thunderkat]

I was thinking about using activated carbon too as a substrate for my fuge when I get it set up.

People say the reason you are suppose to use live rock is due to its surface area. Why not use activated carbon also but in large quantities (fuge with a few inches thick of it). You get the inital absorbtive benefits and after that its still going to be great as a substrate and allow copious amounts of bacterial growth for cleaning of your water.


Activated carbon is often characterized by its extremely large surface area. In fact, the surface area per gram of material can range from 500 to 1400 square meters, and values as high as 2500 m2/g have been reported.5

The complex internal surface area is usually divided into three components. Channels and pores with diameters less than 2 nm are commonly known as micropores; these micropores generally contain the largest portion of the carbon's surface area. On the other hand, pores with diameters between 2 and 50 nm are known as mesopores, and pores with diameters greater than 50 nm are defined as macropores.3


If that is not good surface area then what is?

I might be totally off on this but I plan on giving this a shot, it will hopefully help my tank cycle quicker when I get it set up again. ^_^

[alexwolf]

Some carbon such as TLF and one other, I cant remember which, claim not to leech back into the water. I wonder if there is a way to test this?

Dan, I have a homeade carbon filter running at the store, you can check it out when you come by tonight. Was very easy to make.

[don-n-sa]

I run the Kent " reef carbon" for four days out of the month.

[Thunderkat]

Some carbon such as TLF and one other, I cant remember which, claim not to leech back into the water. I wonder if there is a way to test this?


I read an article to this and I can't remember where it is otherwise I would link it. The article said it can be with brand new activated carbon that actually from the start leaches phosphates into your water. To test a sample the article said to get a piece of the activated carbon and put it into a small amount of water (enough for your test kit) and let it set for at least 45 minutes, then use the phosphate test kit on the water.

Edit: carbon 1 (http://www.hallman.org/filter/carbon.html)

carbon dose and testing, plus other cool info (http://www.homereef.com/reference/usingcarbon.html)

[bigdscobra]

Alex I will have to check it out tomarro i have to close HEButt tonight...

Thanks Gary for all the help I will be making one of these this weekend hopefully...

[Tim Marvin]

I rarely run carbon anymore. I just do routine water changes.

[bigdscobra]

I may just keep one of the biowheel 125s on my 29g it provides good flow and the carbon, also i use the same on my freshwater tank so i just have to buy one type of filter/carbon.. :blink

[bigdscobra]

Next step is to build a SMALL kalk or calcium reactor for my tanks... :wacko I am currently just adding the b-ionc everyother day..

[GaryP]

(3) Gary (or anyone from CB Pets online), if you use carbon for a substrate in a fuge, I assume that at some point you must replace it. I thought I read that after "x" period of time it would start leaching back the bad stuff into the water. Is that true?

(4) If the answer to (3) is yes, then you would have to change it and your live substrate would be lost and you would have to start over. That's sounds messy. If the answer to (3) is no, then nevermind...

I hope Richard jumps in here. If I misquote Richard I apologize ahead of time.

First, as far as leach back. What I think you are referring to is phosphate leaching back. Only organic phosphates are absorbed by carbon. Phosphates are a fairly rare commodity in any environment and are quickly attacked by bacteria. Some reports seem to indicate that inorganic phosphate resulting from bacterial decay leach out after a few days. This is a little confusing to me because the phosphate part of the molecule is more readily used than the rest of the organic molecule which is more common. However, Richard has told me that his systems using carbon substrates are so effective that he only has to clean the glass on his tanks once a month. This indicates to me that phosphates are effectively controlled. I think the key to this system is not just chemical absorption of the carbon, but biological uptake of nutrients such as phosphate by bacteria and other critters growing in the carbon substrate. Its more of a two pronged attack.

The key to carbon is its surface area. Activated carbon is like a bioball on a mocroscopic level. The entire granule is filled with microscopic pores that bacteria are capable of colonizing. There is something like a million square feet of surface area in a pound of carbon. The way that carbon works as a chemical absorbent is that organic molecules wander into these microscopic pores are are trapped there by weak electrostatic chemical bonds. These pores also act as sites for bacterial colonization and these bacteria use the trapped organic compounds as a food source.

Some writers only recommend changing about 75% of your carbon at a time so that the old carbon can act as a bacterial inoculum to the new carbon. Sort of like seeding a new sand bed with mature sand or something like a bacteria cocktail such as a product like Bio-Spira.

If I recall correctly, Richard said his plan was to replace the carbon substrate in his fuge every two years. His theory, as I recall, is that any substrate, such as a DSB, is pretty well spent after two years.

I'm going to drop Richard a PM and ask him to make sure to comment here.

[MabusIncarnate]

I usually make my powered carbon canisters out of a used plastic jar. The small carbon jars or even a peanutt butter jar. I drill tons of small holes in the bottom and put a bulkhead fitting on the lid. I put a piece of plastic screen in the bottom to keep the carbon in the jar. I fill the jar with carbon then top it off with a fine filter pad. Then just have a small pump blowing into the bulkhead with some pvc fittings.

[TexasTodd]

Dan. "Wet Dry and bio-wheels"? Not really recommended for SPS anymore.

Carbon is good. Buy the expensive stuff. TLF is about the best. Alex, yes there is a way to test this. I'll dig up some test results a friend of mine back in Oregon has done and see if he has updated his data at all.

Same here, I use a batch for 2 days about 2x a month. Too many days in a row on a sps tank and the carbon will start acting like a wet dry and dumping extra Nitrates and PO4 in.

TT

[speakerguy]

If that is not good surface area then what is?

Bacteria are about 1 micrometer in size. That's a lot bigger than 50nm. But they would still colonize it like they would any other granular media of similar size.

[schoeplein]

The amount of phosphate dissolved into the system by adding a new pouch of carbon in negligible to the benefit/gain of having the carbon.

Carbon does not eventually "leech bad stuff into your system".. it simply fails to continue to work as effectively as a fresh pouch. It'll soak up as much as it can, and then just flows letting the water go through as if it weren't even there. You'll know because your tank will be less clear, and possibly gain an odor... a pouch lasts me about a month in my 75g.

Carbon as part of the substrate in a fuge sounds promising. Let me know if you guys find any further information on this.

[GaryP]

What I think he was referring to is the organic phosphates (meta) are decayed by bacterial action in carbon and sometimes release inorganic phosphate (ortho) back to the water. There is not actually a leaching of phosphates from the carbon itself. That's the result of some old technology where they used to wash carbon with phosphoric acid. I talked to a friend of mine that works for US Carbon about this and was told it was no longer done that way.

Most bacteria are actually .5 to 1.0 micrometer (micron) in size. That's why bacterial filters generally have .45 micron pore size.

[Richard]

Thanks for the pm Gary, sorry I forgot to respond sooner. Most of what you said is correct except the part about all sanbeds being spent after 2 years - that must be someone else's theory. I think Shimeck says DSB's probably need to be replaced every few years. After trying them, I'm no longer a fan of DSB's and prefer a shallow (1" - 2") fine sand bed which I don't think would ever need to be replaced.

As Gary said, I'm using a 6" bed of Tri Pelletized carbon in a fuge section of my sump. I do not use macro algae or additional liverock in the fuge - just the carbon. Although it does provide great surface area, the reason I chose to try this was that the manufacturer of Tri Pelletized carbon says that one of the types of carbon in his pellets "is a uniquely structured form of carbon" that is an available carbon source for bacteria. Since I have read articles that a ready supply of available carbon is necessary in favoring denitrifiying and polyphosphate accumulating bacteria, I decided to give the "carbon DSB" a shot. In waste water treatment, acetate is used as a carbon source. This is the same idea, I think, behind dosing vodka, apple juice, etc. to reef aquariums.

I have had it for ~1 1/2 years on my 46 gallon and have never had any detectable nitrate or phosphate and rarely clean the glass. Maybe once every month or two, and then it's mostly just scraping off coralline algae. This tank has no skimmer and gets a 5 - 10 gallon water change every month or two (that's just laziness/lack of time on my part, not by design).
I've had the same thing on my 215 for maybe 4 months or so. Again no detectable nitrate or phosphate and no real algae problem. Although I do have to clean diatoms off the glass every week or so on this tank (how annoying). Although I'm pretty sure the diatoms are being caused by silica being released from all the shell material in the A.R.M. media that I'm using in my Ca Reactor. I'm replacing that this week with just special grade aragonite and I'll see if that gets rid of it. I hate cleaning glass!

I'm not saying the Tri Pelletized carbon "DSB" works but that's the result I'm getting. BTW, the manufacturer of the carbon says he can get the same results aerobically when using his bacteria culture, but I've never tried that. His formula for calculating the amount of carbon to use in his recommended setup is .1667 * number of gallons. Which is approximately what I am using for my carbon "DSB".
I also asked him about the carbon leeching phosphate back into the water and he said yes it will eventually but it won't matter because there will be sufficient bacteria to consume it at that point. He says the carbon should be replaced every 5 years and then just a portion at a time.

If anyone decides to try this on an existing tank with livestock it is VERY important that you DO NOT add that volume of carbon to your tank all at one time. Add no more than 1/2 cup every few days.

[GaryP]

Richard,

Thanks for your input. As always it is very informative.

[schoeplein]

"His formula for calculating the amount of carbon to use in his recommended setup is .1667 * number of gallons. Which is approximately what I am using for my carbon "DSB". "

Is the calculated amount in pounds? .1667~ * 110 = 18.33~26. So 20lbs dropped in my fuge?

I'll let everyone know when I setup this weekend. Currently have about 1lb of carbon for my 75g and it works astonishingly well...

[Richard]

Yes, 20 lbs according to his formula. I guess I'm using about half of what he recommends. I think I used 15 lbs on my 215. My goal was just to get 5 - 6" inches of depth and that's about how much I ended up using.

That's the problem with how he says to use it. Aerobically, in a canister or hang on filter. They just won't hold the amount of carbon he recommends unless you build something yourself. From talking to him it sounds like he makes most of his $ from wastewater treatment and such so I think he is a little out of touch with what we hobbyist are doing. He always seems to think most people are using whisper hang on filters on their reef tanks.

[schoeplein]

Holy jesus that's a lot of carbon.. anyone know any wholesalers? :P

[GaryP]

You can buy it in a 55 gal. drum or 50# bags. There's a shop in SA that was buying the bags and rebagging it and selling it in bulk, mainly for their pond customers. I stopped in there yesterday and was told they were having a hard time getting the bags.

[Richard]

Holy jesus that's a lot of carbon


Yes it is. That is why it is so important not to add all at once if it's an existing tank. You'd probably have some dead critters if you add that much at once.

Gary - I believe the carbon your talking about is a pharmaceutical grade carbon. I don't know if you would get the same results from it. This is the carbon I am using which we sell for $35 per 10 lbs...
http://www.memory-doctor.com/tribase.htm

Here's some instructions/info on setting up a system to use it aerobically. Just keep in mind when that I am trying to use it anaerobically which is the opposite of what the article recommends.
http://saltaquarium.about.com/cs/filtersdiy/a/aa012999.htm

[GaryP]

Here's a pretty good article I found about using carbon in a SW system.

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

[scuba_steveo]

Gary, do you have a link to the site that has the chart with the calcium and dkh levels?

[GaryP]

Steve,

I have it at home. I will post it tonight.