Best carbon?
- Thread starter Zuska
- Start date
- Location
- Long Island, New York
I don't know if it is the best but it certainly is good and I have been using the rox carbon from BRS for over two years. Just remember to replace it often. Most people let it sit way to long after its effective life.
- Location
- bayonne / nj
I just ran a similar post. The guys at Saltwater Critters turned me onto ESV.
This carbon works for me .
This carbon works for me .
Yes, ESV is excellent carbon, so is Black Diamond. I have no experience with the BRS carbon.
There is NO carbon that you don't have to replace often
From 2 studies that I read, one from BRS and the other from another site. Don't remember site, the BRS and the ESV are the best.
The studies ran tests on removing phosphates, etc.
Most agree to change carbon often.
I change mine monthly. However, there is no hard and fast rule, except that as stated above, most people don't change it often enough.
Also, remember an Advanced aquarist online study that said running carbon and a phosban reactor are very effective at helping with phosphates, besides water changes and not over feeding, etc.
This study was first testing skimmers for their effectiveness at removing cr@p from the tank.
The studies ran tests on removing phosphates, etc.
Most agree to change carbon often.
I change mine monthly. However, there is no hard and fast rule, except that as stated above, most people don't change it often enough.
Also, remember an Advanced aquarist online study that said running carbon and a phosban reactor are very effective at helping with phosphates, besides water changes and not over feeding, etc.
This study was first testing skimmers for their effectiveness at removing cr@p from the tank.
Last edited:
- Location
- Staten Island, NY
Thanks for this thread! I'ma get ESV.. much cheaper than the BRS
Richard,
"ESV cheaper than BRS", I am surprised. I would have thought BRS would be cheaper.
I just checked Marine Depot and BRS prices. I guess you are right !!!
A funny thing, is that when I started several years ago, at first I never heard of BRS, then their name kept kept popping up with reefers. They produce a number of top notch products, that now, I like going to their site first, because of their videos are so good and their prices seem excellent.
- Location
- Staten Island, NY
Well, it depends on which kind of carbon you getting from BRS. of course the higher quality carbon will cost more. I can't make up my mind!! The reviews of carbon are all over the place.
...how do people use it here bag or reactor and where is the cheapest place to get it?...
Forgot about that question. Well, for GFO ( not the question asked ), a reactor works best. For carbon, a reactor works best, however, used in a bag, (carbon) is still effective.
I have a BRS reactor that can be used for GFO and Carbon, however, I personally, run carbon in my filter, just easier to change. The reason, is that in my sponge filter, I actually rinse out my sponge and media ( such as carbon ) weekly.
I don't use my filter for the bacteria that collect to help with nitrates, because I have a DSB and a lot of live rock and my nitrates are 0, anyway.
However, as far as choosing one over the other, a reactor is probably better, but for Carbon ( not GFO ), a filter bag is still effective.
PS. I also run Carbon in my Solana and you would be surprised how much cr@p came out when I started to rinse this carbon weekly.
How I rinse it out, is with my old water changed aquarium water. I rinse out sponge and carbon bags weekly and get rid of a lot of detris.
Forgot about that question. Well, for GFO ( not the question asked ), a reactor works best. For carbon, a reactor works best, however, used in a bag, (carbon) is still effective.
I have a BRS reactor that can be used for GFO and Carbon, however, I personally, run carbon in my filter, just easier to change. The reason, is that in my sponge filter, I actually rinse out my sponge and media ( such as carbon ) weekly.
I don't use my filter for the bacteria that collect to help with nitrates, because I have a DSB and a lot of live rock and my nitrates are 0, anyway.
However, as far as choosing one over the other, a reactor is probably better, but for Carbon ( not GFO ), a filter bag is still effective.
PS. I also run Carbon in my Solana and you would be surprised how much cr@p came out when I started to rinse this carbon weekly.
How I rinse it out, is with my old water changed aquarium water. I rinse out sponge and carbon bags weekly and get rid of a lot of detris.
...The reviews of carbon are all over the place....
Richard,
The author from the Advanced Article was at the MR Swap, so I drilled him. This guy and Advanced Aquarist are really cool, because they actually try to evaluate claims with scientific data. Best of all, this on-line magazine is free ( and is frequently, over my head, ha,ha).
Anyway, the consensus is that nothing is totally effective, such as using a skimmer, running carbon, running gfo, etc.
The trick is that each one of these ( skimmer, running carbon, running gfo ) is "somewhat effective" and using these methods combined, really helps.
On a separate subject, this same article compared skimmers and it was found that claims on effectiveness were also all over the place. Basically, one the most effective skimmers and a low end skimmer actually worked best.
So again, nothing works 100% and it is the combined effort that produces effective husbandry.
For instance, years ago, I use to fight high nitrates, etc. I learned later, it was much more effective to have a smaller bio load, and that in itself, has helped more than trying to fix overstocked tanks,with many gismos, etc.
Like in my tank, phosphates and nitrates are 0 measured with a Salifert test kit.
"The other surprise, is how many tank crashes occur and how frequently these rare events really occur is much more frequent than you would think. The trick is to try to minimize these failures and plan." This is true for many other things as well. People tend to believe these events will hardly ever happen because they play the odds and these events seem to happen more frequently than expected. Just ask anyone who has played the stock market for a long time and this seems to be true...
Separate subject, not for this forum, ha,ha...
Richard,
The author from the Advanced Article was at the MR Swap, so I drilled him. This guy and Advanced Aquarist are really cool, because they actually try to evaluate claims with scientific data. Best of all, this on-line magazine is free ( and is frequently, over my head, ha,ha).
Anyway, the consensus is that nothing is totally effective, such as using a skimmer, running carbon, running gfo, etc.
The trick is that each one of these ( skimmer, running carbon, running gfo ) is "somewhat effective" and using these methods combined, really helps.
On a separate subject, this same article compared skimmers and it was found that claims on effectiveness were also all over the place. Basically, one the most effective skimmers and a low end skimmer actually worked best.
So again, nothing works 100% and it is the combined effort that produces effective husbandry.
For instance, years ago, I use to fight high nitrates, etc. I learned later, it was much more effective to have a smaller bio load, and that in itself, has helped more than trying to fix overstocked tanks,with many gismos, etc.
Like in my tank, phosphates and nitrates are 0 measured with a Salifert test kit.
"The other surprise, is how many tank crashes occur and how frequently these rare events really occur is much more frequent than you would think. The trick is to try to minimize these failures and plan." This is true for many other things as well. People tend to believe these events will hardly ever happen because they play the odds and these events seem to happen more frequently than expected. Just ask anyone who has played the stock market for a long time and this seems to be true...
Separate subject, not for this forum, ha,ha...
Last edited:
- Location
- Staten Island, NY
I can't decide.. which is better then. the ESV or the BRS carbon?
Or do they all work around the same?
ESV carbon says
Or do they all work around the same?
ESV carbon says
- Molasses Number: 225
- Iodine Number: 1050
- Hardness Number: 92
- Iodine Number: 1000 min.
- Ball-Pan Hardness: 97min
- Surface area (BET) m2/g : 1225
- PH: Neutral
- Food Chemicals Codex : Passes
- Ash, Mass %: 3
- Methylene blue adsorption g/100g: 24
- Washed with Hydrochloric Acid
Last edited:
Sponsor Reefs
We're a FREE website, and we exist because of hobbyists like YOU who help us run this community.
Click here to sponsor $10:
