Activated Carbon: Yea or nay? Why?

[thebanker]

Exactly, it cuts down on that "marine smell"

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

There's a lot of things in this hobby that can be side stepped if you know what your doing. This tank ran smoothly without carbon for nine years with only a DSB, skimming, and regular water changes. Whether it's necessary or not, I don't know, but nobody will will ever convince me otherwise. I've done just fine without it.

I don't dispute that, but your original statement was rather different, saying water changes accomplished the same as GAC, while this one says that the combination of several things makes a fine tank without GAC.

Those are very different conclusions, and even so, the latter may apply to the specific creatures you kept rather than the general case.

[thebanker]

Would it be safe to say that with enough water changes, one can somewhat reduce the need for activated carbon?

Of course, there's no activated carbon in nature, but there's also MASSIVE water volume to work with.

[pmcadams]

Originally Posted by cloak

There's a lot of things in this hobby that can be side stepped if you know what your doing.... I've done just fine without it.

I agree that you may not need it, but I disagree that the reason other people use it is because they don't know what they are doing. There are benefits to running activated carbon. It does 'polish' the water and though corals may grow without it, they may grow better with it.

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

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Would it be safe to say that with enough water changes, one can somewhat reduce the need for activated carbon?

Yes, but only marginally so. If you have a toxin in the water, and once a month you remove 25% of it, that seems not very effective.

IMO, there are other practices that are way more useful in competition with GAC. Skimming is a big one, as is GFO and various polymer products, like Purigen.

[Adam76]

I run it 24/7

[runyonh]

I run it 24/7 in a homemade canister filter

[bgibb42]

I don't understand the debate. The use of carbon offers many advantages, but not many disadvantages that really stick out (or none at all), is readily available, inexpensive, and easy to use. Am I missing something? It seems like such an easy way to improve water quality; and if no harm comes from it, is a no brainer IMHO.

Just my two cents, worth exactly what you paid for it...

[undrtkr_00]

I did not run carbon for the first year or so in my tank. Then I started to have a number of corals, both stonies and softies, closing up and looking stressed even though my parameters (including nitrate and phosphate) were testing out fine. I started running carbon and, over a few weeks, things started to look much happier. I suspect the issue was a buildup of allelopathic toxins over time. Now I run carbon 24/7 and it seems to keep things happy.

[thebanker]

Originally Posted by Randy Holmes-Farley

Would it be safe to say that with enough water changes, one can somewhat reduce the need for activated carbon?

Yes, but only marginally so. If you have a toxin in the water, and once a month you remove 25% of it, that seems not very effective.

IMO, there are other practices that are way more useful in competition with GAC. Skimming is a big one, as is GFO and various polymer products, like Purigen.

What does purigen that is superior to activated carbon? I've used both, and I haven't noticed that one is better than the other. The guy at my LFS said Purigen leaves beneficial compounds that activated carbon removes, and yet again failed to tell me EXACTLY WHAT beneficial molecules the activated carbon removes.

Also, i just got back from picking up water from my LFS on a lunch break, and the guy there told me that running activated carbon is a newbie mistake on reef tanks, and most guys don't use it. Really? Because this survey says otherwise.

[Dave Harms]

I run it all the time along with GFO. For sure keeps my water clearer.

[cloak]

Originally Posted by pmcadams

I agree that you may not need it, but I disagree that the reason other people use it is because they don't know what they are doing. There are benefits to running activated carbon. It does 'polish' the water and though corals may grow without it, they may grow better with it.

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

They may grow better, yes, but then again, they may not. Over the years as a hobbyist, you'll end up finding out what you need and what you don't. If you can get the same results not running things like carbon, GFO, using a refuge, etc, why run them? That's a no brainer for me. Lets say two 50 gallon tanks are set up right next to each other and they both look AMAZING, same lighting, same skimmer. The one on the left has got all the bells and whistles going. Carbon, GFO, a refuge, a skimmer, a reactor, water changes, etc. The one on the right is pretty simple. It just has a skimmer, calcium dosed manually, and regular water changes are performed. None of that other stuff. If it's up to me, I want to know what the guy on the right is doing to get that tank to look the way it does. See what I mean?

[GQuinn]

I use a bag of it in my sump and replace it every 2-3 weeks.

Gary

[forrealb50]

Originally Posted by DThompson

Use it all the time. I place it in a bag in the sump.

+1 but it's in my HOB fuge.

[GoingPostal]

I used it non stop for the first few years in the hobby, all nano tanks, all hang on back. Never really noticed a difference for better or worse. Slacked off for the past couple years, I would throw a bag on a tank if it had been a while or something seemed unhappy.

I had been battling a brown algea and film algea since upgrading my latest nano, tons of water changes with no improvement, cut back on lights, feedings, etc. Threw a hob filter with some carbon on it about two weeks ago and it has cleared up completely. I will probably remove it in a couple weeks and see if the tank stays clear or if it needs to be run nonstop but this is the first time I've seen such a huge improvement due to carbon. Must be pulling something nasty out.

[Znut Reefer]

24/7. It does makes the water clearer. And I feel it pulls out toxins. Also seems to help the sps happy and colorful.

[thebanker]

@GoingPostal: That's the best signature ever!

Most people don't realize that large pieces of coral, which have been painted brown and attached to the skull by common wood screws, can make a child look like a deer.
*Jack Handey

[thebanker]

Slight digression: Is there any experimental scientific evidence of using purigen vs. activated carbon that can substantiate the SeaChem's claims?

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

No, there's not that I've ever seen. Purigen likely removes a slightly different (but strongly overlapping) subset of organic compounds, but there's no evidence that it is better or worse than GAC. Using both together may be beneficial too.

[thebanker]

Ok, makes sense. Well, we have no real solid arguments from the anti-carbon crew. So far I haven't read anything that points to the benefits of going without carbon besides a few anecdotes of systems "working just fine" without it.

[Nanz]

The reason AC(Activated Carbon) works for some and not for others is due to the environment that is surrounding the tank. For example.. If your tank is near your laundry room it will contain phosphates and other organics that are dispersed into the air. If you use air fresheners that may also pullute your tank indirectly which carbon helps remove from the water. AC removes trihalomethanes (THM), pesticides, industrial solvents (halogenated hydrocarbons), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Heavy metals such as Organic Arsenic, Organic Chromium Complexes, Mercury Inorganic and Organic Mercury Complexes.

I run carbon and gfo 24/7

[john rochon]

carbon,just for the clear fact that your water will be clearer and light penetration will be better for one.
it helps on mixed coral tanks for sure.
were always adding food so between the carbon and a skimmer your water will benefit.
also, things spawn,die,etc when your usually not home. carbon will help buy you some time with water quality till you spot the issue.
water changes, ahhhhh how many times have I heard that statement when in fact ALOT of us miss water changes or do not do them regularly. GAC will lend a hand there as well

[Eric Williams]

I run both AC and purigen 24/7 in reactors. Seems to work great for my tank.
I have seen more benefits from running them than adverse affects.

[cloak]

Originally Posted by Randy Holmes-Farley

There's a lot of things in this hobby that can be side stepped if you know what your doing. This tank ran smoothly without carbon for nine years with only a DSB, skimming, and regular water changes. Whether it's necessary or not, I don't know, but nobody will will ever convince me otherwise. I've done just fine without it.

I don't dispute that, but your original statement was rather different, saying water changes accomplished the same as GAC, while this one says that the combination of several things makes a fine tank without GAC.

Those are very different conclusions, and even so, the latter may apply to the specific creatures you kept rather than the general case.

Assuming GAC is removing the smell, the yellowing, the organics, etc, taking this "dirty" water out of the tank and then replacing it with freshly made saltwater is pretty much the same thing I guess. That bucket of freshly made saltwater is as pure as it gets though. I know what I'm getting through water changes. No worries about what it might leach, what "good" stuff it might remove along with the bad, no HLLE speculation, nothing. To be honest with you, I really don't think anybody knows for certain how long carbon lasts. Just as an example, let's say you replace your carbon every 2 weeks. Well, after five days in the smelly yellow tank water it has exhausted itself, it's done. If you weren't seeing anything out of the ordinary when it was time to change it out 14 days later, you have pretty much been going without carbon for the last 9 days. This type of thing happens all the time. Lets face it, GAC could fall off the face of the earth and we still get by. Water changes, no so much.

Happy reefing.

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I don't disagree with the sentiment, I just think that the amount of organic matter exported by water changes is typically not as much as a reasonable amount of GAC, changed at reasonable times, accomplishes. Most folks who do not use GAC notice a clearing of the water when initiating it, regardless of them already doing water changes.