Carbon - Yes or No?

[Aquattro]

Denny says some people don't need carbon. Is that true? Why? Or his he just making stuff up again?

Edit to Add: This is assuming good carbon, not the extremely rare contaminated carbon that might pop up once a decade :)

[JetJumper]

needed ... no
recommended.... yes

[Aquattro]

Denny says needed in some, not recommended in others. Large populated softies and over crowded SPS, yes, others, no.
Denny, feel free to clarify if I'm not reading properly :)

[Delphinus]

To me there's no question. If you want a tank to last you a long time, run carbon. Sorry Denny, on that one I can't agree. :)

Here's a good article about it.. http://joejaworski.wordpress.com/2008/05/09/does-a-reef-tank-need-carbon/

[jorjef]

The color of the water I'm taking out during water changes tells me I'm suffering a bit on water clarity but not enough to worry when I look at the tank. I have run Rox in the past and still have quit a bit but quit using as I'm not sure if continued use would strip too much from the water or not. I have a heavily stocked LPS tank (coral wise not fish)

As usual in this hobby one persons results varies to everyone else but I haven't seen any negative effects since I quit using carbon.

[reefwars]

your reading correctly buddy:)


this should be a poll btw;)


carbon is good to have on standby in an emergency yes , i wouldnt say its needed for any setup to work, but in a tank loaded with softies or sps i would run it, where as in a tank more similiar to mine its not needed.

to be honest i dont trust carbn to use continuosly and none of my set ups use it , alot of people dont use carbon and alot do so its not that its bad for your system(except that one time remember???) just may not be something that you have to run.

if i had a choce over gfo or carbon which is what i was referring to anyways or even a mix of the two i would go full gfo 9 times out of 10 lol

come on theres got to be a buch of people who dont use carbon so its a fact that its not needed , and then theres the times carbon saved people during crashes so [eople need to decide for them selves if its what they want to run or not.

me im a no on carbon:mrgreen:

[sphelps]

I've never run carbon religiously, once in a while sure but it's not required, my tanks have always done just fine without it.

I think some tanks will benefit more from it, like really mixed reefs that have lots of soft corals and SPS or tanks with high bio-loads, agressive feeding or undersized skimmers. Also if you're really anal about ULN then it might help you sleep better.

[Delphinus]

come on theres got to be a buch of people who dont use carbon so its a fact that its not needed


This line of reasoning is flawed. The real question is how long do those tanks last, that are setup without carbon use? If the goal is simply to eek a tank out for a few months to a year and then move on, then sure, maybe you can get away without carbon use, but that doesn't mean that there wouldn't have been a benefit had carbon been in there also.

I know there is some speculation between a link of excessive carbon use and HLLE but as far as I'm aware there has not yet been any causative link established, just speculation. And frankly, HLLE isn't that well understood anyhow. To me the definitive pros outweigh any speculative cons.

Read the article I linked, it has some informative insights regarding accumulation of organics over time that can't be skimmed out. Doesn't it make sense that "old tank syndrome" has a cause that could be conceivably related to that? What about allelopathy? It's not just softies tanks that are susceptible to this. Carbon can alleviate the effects of this.

What's the adversion to using carbon?

[lastlight]

If the goal is simply to eek a tank out for a few months to a year and then move on

Geez that hit close to home! I'm actually not running carbon on my current tank for a while and will then try some after a few months to see if I notice any difference.

[Delphinus]

That's the thing, you probably won't notice a difference like that, at least not beyond the short term benefits of water clarity maybe. I'm talking about the kind of difference you notice after 5 years and "gee, this tank just doesn't sustain corals the way it used to. And all my parameters are fine so what gives?" ... I guess if it's a rare thing to push a reef tank beyond 5 years than I guess it's totally plausible to see so many questioning it.

Besides on a tank that size, doing a 100% water change to reboot the tank is something totally realistic too. This changes the playing field somewhat. So maybe yeah, in some cases, carbon isn't "necessary." But I still think there is benefit to its use in this case as well.

[reefwars]

This line of reasoning is flawed. The real question is how long do those tanks last, that are setup without carbon use? ?


your one of a small fraction who keep tanks for ten years , most people upgrade or ditch the hobby long before , how long do you think an average reefer keeps his tank is my question then??

[reefwars]

That's the thing, you probably won't notice a difference like that, at least not beyond the short term benefits of water clarity maybe. I'm talking about the kind of difference you notice after 5 years and "gee, this tank just doesn't sustain corals the way it used to." I guess if nobody makes it to 5 years anymore than it's going to be real easy to question why something is necessary.

Besides on a tank that size, doing a 100% water change to reboot the tank is something totally realistic too. This changes the playing field somewhat. So maybe yeah, in some cases, carbon isn't "necessary." But I still there is benefit to its use in this case as well.


I can run a reef tank VERY successfully for a week with crappy lights, no skimmer, and no waterchanges and and come on here and declare all of the usual support tools as "totally unnecessary and I'm the proof." It doesn't carry the same weight as someone who's run a successful tank for 5-10 years though. And I guess each person's definition of "successful" will probably have some variation from person to person too.

i do agree though tony that yes there are situations that would make one think whether running carbon is a good idea , im not saying its bad , im also not saying its needed for long term use either , but i am saying its not something that has to be running on a system , myself and a many others are proof.

[kien]

:pop2:

[reefwars]

if my bubble tip hits the powerhead you can better believe ill run some carbon , but i wont run it 24/7

so my question regarding the organics the skimmer doesnt catch , if running carbon is beneficial to solving that(which i doubt carbon would do by its self) would it be safe to say if i ran my carbon reactor one day a week would fix that?? or may be twice a week? or would i have to run it 24/7??

[reefwars]

carbon bad = most times not(notice i said most lol )

carbon good= sure it is its a fact

carbon needed to run reeftank = no

carbon need to run a reeftank longterm = whos to know for sure??

if i have a tank for one year maybe i got lucky and had a good year with no carbon while if i have the same tank for ten years maybe i didnt get so lucky and had a few incidents where i was glad i ran carbon, one method compared to the other can ony really be done by a tank to tank basis, your tank in ten years may not be in the same state mine is in ten years and vice versa.

[lastlight]

there's only about a million other factors to influence how a tank does over ten years or even a year. that said i am still a believer in running carbon 24-7 i just don't have any yet lol.

[kien]

ya, I have no clue if it is needed or not. I have always run carbon though because I like the clearer water that it gives me. I can totally tell the difference. I had a tank in the basement that I didn't run carbon on and that water in a white bucket definitely appeared less clear than the tank that had carbon running.

[Delphinus]

So can I have all the Vertex carbon from Concept for free? Since clearly nobody actually needs it... I wouldn't want you to sit on all this useless stock taking up space. I'm very helpful that way.

[reefwars]

ya, I have no clue if it is needed or not. I have always run carbon though because I like the clearer water that it gives me. I can totally tell the difference. I had a tank in the basement that I didn't run carbon on and that water in a white bucket definitely appeared less clear than the tank that had carbon running.


thats another variable too is the fact that carbon does make your water more clear , but that said there are also other products that do the same as well. me personally am happy with my water clarity , im sure it could be better but with my type of tank water being clear is something thats hard to aquire when its being fed 24/7:)

[reefwars]

So can I have all the Vertex carbon from Concept for free? Since clearly nobody actually needs it... I wouldn't want you to sit on all this useless stock taking up space. I'm very helpful that way.


haha yeah yeah ok ill cut you a deal on the works for sure;P

[reefwars]

So can I have all the Vertex carbon from Concept for free?

im not sure now though that theres an obviously high demand for it all of a sudden lol :P

[Delphinus]

:) You're welcome ! :p

[reefwars]

lol ok picture this then:


yor stranded on a dessert island , your boat sank and all that made it to the island is you and your reeftank.

lets just assume that running both carbon and gfo isnt an option and has never been done before.

so i can only run carbon or gfo......im going gfo lol

i know that was stupid lol

[reefwars]

lol i gotta get off the morning coffees lol

[sphelps]

I just hate using carbon because it's a PITA to clean and change out on a regular basis. If I can't automate something then it better be damn good for me to consider it. It's also an easy way of adding contaminants, these days you got to be really picky on the brand you use and even then a bad batch is still possible. Not much point using a product for long term tank health of 5+ years when it can wipe out the whole tank from one dose.

Water changes are you friend, carbon isn't going to eliminate all your build ups and ruling out certain organics as causes for long term failures may not be overly accurate either.

For water clarify, UV and ozone are other options. I use UV on and off, water clarity has never been an issue and I can't think of any risk involved in using it.

[Delphinus]

Well now wait. I can't answer this without knowing the unstated assumptions. What other variables are there? Is said desert island near good reefs? Is the snorkeling any good? Wait, what, is there food to eat? Because I hear tangs are delicious and if I'm stranded anyhow I might need to eat something sooner or later. But fish are friends not food. I'm so conflicted! Argh!

[kien]

thats another variable too is the fact that carbon does make your water more clear , but that said there are also other products that do the same as well. me personally am happy with my water clarity , im sure it could be better but with my type of tank water being clear is something thats hard to aquire when its being fed 24/7:)

With my tank being a room divider I have actually noticed my water get dirty when the carbon runs out/is used up. It is evident when you try to peer through one side and out the other.

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/af144/muzanji/IMG_5619.jpg?t=1286573628

The cleaner the water is the clearer it is to see the other side of the tank, etc.

[reefwars]

Well now wait. I can't answer this without knowing the unstated assumptions. What other variables are there? Is said desert island near good reefs? Is the snorkeling any good? Wait, what, is there food to eat? Because I hear tangs are delicious and if I'm stranded anyhow I might need to eat something sooner or later. But fish are friends not food. I'm so conflicted! Argh!


lol , im just looking out my window at the snow and i think i got side tracked about what i was even talking about and got to talking about where id actually like to be :P

[lastlight]

It's also an easy way of adding contaminants, these days you got to be really picky on the brand you use and even then a bad batch is still possible. Not much point using a product for long term tank health of 5+ years when it can wipe out the whole tank from one dose.

This is possible with salt too. But of course that's a necessary evil in this case you're suggesting why add more risk.

[kien]

This is possible with salt too. But of course that's a necessary evil in this case you're suggesting why add more risk.

or if you turn your lights on wrong apparently that can nuke your tank too.

[sphelps]

This is possible with salt too. But of course that's a necessary evil in this case you're suggesting why add more risk.

Yeap pretty much, for me I don't like adding anything I don't have to. While it might be hard to believe I keep things as simple as possible, it's just that my idea of simple might be different than the next guys.

[reefwars]

With my tank being a room divider I have actually noticed my water get dirty when the carbon runs out/is used up. It is evident when you try to peer through one side and out the other.

http://i1002.photobucket.com/albums/af144/muzanji/IMG_5619.jpg?t=1286573628

The cleaner the water is the clearer it is to see the other side of the tank, etc.

ok so in your tank carbon is useful for those reasons, its not whats keeping your tank going though, it may help with things for sure and make your tank more enjoyable.

in my tank i could add carbon all day and it wont clear my water as food is added continuiusly and clouds up the tank, for me heavy skimming is my best choice in clear water and keeping things in check.

i also know that i should be running carbon with so much food added but i just dont trust carbon to fix the problems.....i hate relying on things i know will let me down one day im use to it , so i run heavy amiunts of gfo and large water changes.

im not too worried about trapped organics as i dont have a sand bed so i do daily blastings in both the rock and glass for ditrius, which my nps corals love anyways:)

[reefwars]

see what you got started brad lol way to go!!

after today i bet a dozen people are either going to pull their carbon or start to run carbon lol


disclaimer:

if you dont run carbon because i dont and your tank crashes....its not my fault lol

i choose what i feel works best for me even if its not what others find to be successfull....everyone, do your own research and choose based on your own tank and what works for you both long term and present.

[sphelps]

I think people have to realize that your tank will eventually crash, if it's not the use of carbon or the non use of carbon it will be the faulty float and rolling blackouts, or the kids dumping a full container of something in the tank, or the faulty heater, or the faulty pump, or the bad programming of the controller user, or the tank breaking, or the LEDs burning, or the jealous wife poisoning, or the inexperienced tank sitter, or that special fish or invert that died and polluted the tank or the....

The point is using something purely for long term tank survival is utterly pointless :lol:

[jorjef]

or if you turn your lights on wrong apparently that can nuke your tank too.

Use the wrong source water and some say your tank is doomed....

[Aquattro]

see what you got started brad lol way to go!!



Only because you were hijacking some for sale thread with this topic :razz:

[lockrookie]

You could always pee in the tank I read somewhere here that helps cycle... Could be a daily additive too who knows. I am not running carbon on the 180 but I have a reactor waiting to do on my 50 it's usually very clear but I think I have a bloom. Or something happening ATM


Sent from my porcelain aquarium

[reefwars]

Only because you were hijacking some for sale thread with this topic :razz:


im sorry i dint realize its hijacking when im the one giving him a reactor and gave him the gfo last week??both for free mid you....do need to post that im giving him the reactor for everyone to see?? i thought thats what pm's were for so why do we have pms again??

and since im the one giving him the reactor im not allowed to give advice on the equipment he got??


its all noted though no worries ....just so were clear i have to post if i want to sell something a pm is not good enough , and i cant offer advice for anything i sell.....

gotcha !!

[christyf5]

I run carbon, have for years. Would I ever not run carbon? No. If carbon removes some bad juju out of the water why would I not want to run it. I also do weekly 20% waterchanges when time allows (sometimes bi-weekly or tri-weekly but mostly I stick to the schedule).

Would I not run carbon for short periods of time? Sure why not. Sometimes I'm lazy. Then I think, I should get my act together and put some carbon on there. Makes the tank look better, water clearer etc. I've been in the hobby 10+ years now and frankly I wouldn't run my tank without it, but then there's a lot of things I wouldn't run my tank without that others seem to get by without just fine.

Do I think I need carbon? yes.

Do I think everyone needs carbon? No, because the average time of the average joe in this hobby seems to be about 18 months. I think you can "get by" without carbon for about that time, then the **** hits the fan, perhaps from not using carbon, perhaps from a myriad of other factors.

Do I think everyone should use carbon? Yes. Someone needs to open a window sometime when stuck in a small room with a bunch of people.

And thats my two cents :wink:

[sphelps]

Ah Oh, Denny missed his coffee again :surprise:

[sphelps]

Has a tank ever crashed from not using carbon? No
Has a tank ever crashed from using carbon? Yes

[Aquattro]

Has a tank ever crashed from not using carbon? No
Has a tank ever crashed from using carbon? Yes

Not sure we can factor defective products into this. Tanks have crashed from defective salt, we're not going to call salt optional :)

[Reefer Rob]

Some people have beautiful tanks and don't do water changes. No way I have the guts to try this... I'll keep running carbon.

But keep the desert island analogies coming just the same.

[Seriak]

Not sure we can factor defective products into this. Tanks have crashed from defective salt, we're not going to call salt optional :)

Has a tank ever crashed from not using salt: Yes
Has a tank ever crashed from using salt: Yes

Lol! A little different.

[Aquattro]

Has a tank ever crashed from not using salt: Yes
Has a tank ever crashed from using salt: Yes

Lol! A little different.

Well, we don't know if a tank ever crashed form not using carbon. Maybe yes. Then it's exactly the same story.

I think for the purposes of this discussion, we're talking about quality products without contaminants :)

[Seriak]

Well my two cents is I use Carbon and will continue to do so!!

[FishyFishy!]

Well, we don't know if a tank ever crashed form not using carbon. Maybe yes. Then it's exactly the same story.

I think for the purposes of this discussion, we're talking about quality products without contaminants :)


LOL, yeah lets not throw a curveball into this home run of a discussion ok????

:smile:

PS.. I use carbon and GFO on all of my tanks... always have, always will.

[Aquattro]

I personally have run carbon 24/7 for 12 years, wouldn't think of not using it.

[sphelps]

Not sure we can factor defective products into this. Tanks have crashed from defective salt, we're not going to call salt optional :)

Of course you can, it's a risk involved in using it so one has to determine if the risk is worth the benefit. You can't say a tank has crashed from not using carbon, plan and simple. You can argue the use of carbon MAY prevent a crash but the lack off is certainly not a cause.

Salt is not optional and neither is water or the container everything is held in, those risks are unavoidable.

[Aquattro]

Of course you can, it's a risk involved in using it so one has to determine if the risk is worth the benefit. .

Everything can present a risk, but I think it's so small and random, that we can't discuss the use of a product, as a requirement for tanks, based on that small risk.
The discussion is about using good carbon vs not using good carbon. Now with that identified, we can carry on. :)

[FishyFishy!]

I personally have noticed water quality issues (as far as clarity is concerned) when not running carbon. I have had no bad experiences with running it. So on that alone, I will always run it for that reason.

I think that if it is regularily changed out, and used in a reactor, the benefits are obvious.

I think a lot of issues come about when people run the same carbon all the time in media bags which just collect detritus, and cause spikes nitrates or phosphates. Changing it out regularily, and using it in a reactor has benefits that I enjoy having in my tanks.

Is it nessessary? No. Does it have visible benefits? Yes.

[sphelps]

Everything can present a risk, but I think it's so small and random, that we can't discuss the use of a product, as a requirement for tanks, based on that small risk.
The discussion is about using good carbon vs not using good carbon. Now with that identified, we can carry on. :)

Good carbon? :lol: Yes lets discuss the benefits of using a product but only if that product is good, and by good it will only do good and not cause any issues.

[Aquattro]

Good carbon? :lol: Yes lets discuss the benefits of using a product but only if that product is good, and by good it will only do good and not cause any issues.

This is a theoretical discussion on the use of carbon. Fine, you voted, you don't like carbon. Ok, got it.
THIS particular thread is about the good carbon. I only use good carbon, therefore I run it 24/7 and it's awesome. Now we can let others give their thoughts.

[Delphinus]

You can't say a tank has crashed from not using carbon, plan and simple. You can argue the use of carbon MAY prevent a crash but the lack off is certainly not a cause.
.

But if it can be demonstrated that carbon removes compounds that otherwise cannot be removed by skimming or water changes, then it is providing a function that is helping a closed system exist in good health for longer. Claiming that it's pointless to run things on the hopes it helps promote longer term health, on the basis that "something else will ruin it for you in the meantime" is like saying go ahead and enjoy an unhealthy lifestyle because who knows maybe you'll die in a car accident. It may be a technically true statement but that doesn't make it the best advice.

I take the viewpoint that there are certain best practices. To me, for the reasons that are outlined nicely in the link I put up earlier, I do consider carbon use a best practice approach. In this case I don't consider it optional whatsoever. I know it's providing a function that serves to keep the system at optimal health.

[sphelps]

This is a theoretical discussion on the use of carbon. Fine, you voted, you don't like carbon. Ok, got it.
THIS particular thread is about the good carbon. I only use good carbon, therefore I run it 24/7 and it's awesome. Now we can let others give their thoughts.

No this is typical Brad ignorance. Trying to globally disregard a perfectly logical reason why not to use carbon based on actual fact and previous experience from many members here for the pure reason you don't agree.

[jorjef]

Nothing to see here folks, move along....

[reefwars]

the only thing i got from this thread is i was right and carbon in not essential to running a system, its helps sure and MAY even save your tank someday...but it could also ruin it too.

so with that right there i dont run carbon nor will i unless an emergency arrives in which case i have carbon and a reactor on standby...god forbid :)

after having a look at my tank it seems everything is happy, no horrible contaminants or old tank syndrome. my water is clear enough for me and im not trying to sue kent for garbage carbon....

at the end of the day im happy and my tank is healthy....ill let you know when it crashes then everyone can say " told you to run carbon"

[sphelps]

I also learnt a valuable lesson, one that could change everything.

Only use good things and everything will be awesome :lol: Wish I thought of that.

[kien]

has a tank ever crashed because it ran carbon: YES
has a tank ever crashed because it didn't run carbon: YES
has a tank ever crashed because it used bad salt: YES
has a tank ever crashed because it used good salt: YES
has a tank ever crashed because it was totally awesome: YES
has a tank ever crashed because a baby kola bear farted : YES

So, what I got out of this thread is that I should just pack it in now because my tank is going to crash at any moment (again). :cry:

[kien]

No this is typical Brad ignorance.

Brad.. step away from the button..

http://idontbreak.files.wordpress.com/2007/09/dogtags.jpg

[jorjef]

Can you hear the silence? errie, isn't it......

[Delphinus]

On second thought ... forget it. I'm out.

Peace all.

[FishyFishy!]

On second thought ... forget it. I'm out.

Peace all.


YUUUP. No use beating things to death lol

[ChizerBunoi]

For a reef, success is often achieved by ensuring that your water source is pure. That starts with RODI which uses carbon to remove the toxins. Running carbon in the tank then continues that process.

But I am a hypocrit. I run local Calgary tap water, but believe in using carbon. I don't think I would ever run RODI water. Then I make up for it by using carbon.

[lastlight]

I'm currently rocking tap water WITHOUT carbon. I'm doing things you guys haven't even DREAMED of :mrgreen:

[Jason McK]

never mind

[Aquattro]

Brad.. step away from the button..

http://idontbreak.files.wordpress.com/2007/09/dogtags.jpg

Not gonna ban the poor guy just because he doesn't get something :razz:

[Aquattro]

No this is typical Brad ignorance. Trying to globally disregard a perfectly logical reason why not to use carbon based on actual fact and previous experience from many members here for the pure reason you don't agree.

Not typical at all. My ignorance has no pattern. And I think you mean arrogance, right? Thanks for wrecking a perfectly good thread about a real topic just because you're your typical poohead. Big sigh, let it all out.

Oops, look at that, thread closed.