This guy preaching not using tank water to clean media

[AR1]

I was waiting for a particular Manitoban to post before sharing my experience.

I used to worship YouTubers, including some like Paul Cuffaro, lol, but I’ve since steered away from my path of wrongdoing, haha.

A couple of months ago, I tried something pretty foolish. Normally, I just lightly rinse half of my filter media—specifically the pillow stuffing—to wash off larger bits of poop and dirt. But one day, I decided to give it a 'deep' clean using tap water. The tap water here can get quite hot, reaching 40 to 50°C easily during the day, and I thought since chlorine dissipates faster in warmer water, it’d be safe to take the risk.

Even though I only deep cleaned half of the filter media, my entire stable biological filtration system collapsed. Nitrates spiked, the water turned green, and it took three 80% water changes to bring the nitrates down. When I tested the water, I found the chlorine level was 2 ppm. I’ll never make that mistake again.

Thus, I agree with RD and Esox—only an experienced aquarist should attempt such steps

 

[FINWIN]

Agree on the chlorine/chloramine level variation. In D.C. the highest levels are in the summer months due to increased runoff and organic matter. If there are concerns about contamination near the aqueducts (like a burst main pipe) levels will be high for a day or two. During water alerts like that the recommendation is the usual, run the tap for 30 minutes (for each tap).

Money was appropriated for water main repair and replacement around the city. A lot of the massive pipes date back to the 1870s and are beyond their lifespan. These pipes are so big you can walk in them easily.

 

[RD.]

While we are on the subject of disinfectant and residuals, see past post below.

While this data is from 2018, I think that it proves a point regarding potential residuals. Pretty sure that other than a handfull of folks like duanes , no one at these water distribution facilities are overly concerned about tropical aquariums in the end users homes, or the bio-bacteria that supports them.

…….. and while I am on this chlorine/chloramine residual rant, below is part of discussion I had with Seachem reps 3 years ago when they decided to dumb down their water treatment directions due to consumers not being able to do math. After discussing this further in private with Dr. Greg Morin, the head chemist & CEO of Seachem, he added more detailed instructions on their FAQ page for Safe.

………………...


Before reading the following please understand that I post this information with the intention to help, not hinder Seachem. I am a very loyal customer of Seachem products, including both Prime & Safe, and have been for many many years. I'm also very well informed when it comes to treating tap water, both chlorine, and chloramine systems.




In Canada, Health Canada has established a maximum acceptable concentration (MAC) for chloramines in drinking water of 3.0 mg/L (3000 µg/L). This MAC is based on a risk evaluation for monochloramine only, as mono-chloramine is usually the predominant chloramine and as information on dichloramine and trichloramine toxicity is insufficient to establish guidelines for these two compounds.


http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ewh-semt/pubs/water-eau/chloramines/index-eng.php


In the USA , the EPA has a standard (the Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level or MRDL) and a health goal (the Maximum Residual Disinfectant Level Goal or MRDLG) for chloramine. The enforceable MRDL is the highest level of a disinfectant allowed in drinking water. The MRDLG is the level of a drinking water disinfectant, below which there is no known or expected risk to health. EPA sets the standard as close to the health goal as feasible, while considering technology, treatment, cost, and risk tradeoffs. In the case for chloramine, the MRDL and MRDLG are the same. (4.0 mg/l or 4.0 ppm)


http://water.epa.gov/drink/contaminants/basicinformation/disinfectants.cfm



American Water Works Association recommends a goal of 2.0 mg/L combined chlorine residual for water leaving the treatment plant and a level of 1.0 mg/L combined chlorine throughout the distribution system.


http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ewh-semt/pubs/water-eau/chloramines/index-eng.php


The average municipal water system maintains residual monochloramine concentrations around 2 mg/L (range: 1.5 mg/L to 2.5 mg/L).


http://www.wqa.org/Portals/0/Technical/Technical Fact Sheets/2014_Chloramine.pdf


3.1 Water


Typical chloramine concentrations of 0.5–2 mg/litre are found in drinking-water supplies where chloramine is used as a primary disinfectant or to provide a chlorine residual in the distribution system (26). Chloramine residuals in the USA range from 0.6 to 5.0 mg/litre; 75% of utilities have finished water with chloramine residual levels between 1.0 and 3.0 mg/litre entering the distribution system.


http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/chemicals/en/monochloramine.pdf


© World Health Organization 2004


Some specific examples of actual chloramine levels found in drinking water located in the USA.


Portland Oregon 2015 Drinking Water Quality Report


Maximum levels of total chlorine residuals from chloramine detected: 2.02 - 2.72 ppm.


http://www.portlandoregon.gov/water/article/244813




San Francisco CA 2013 Water Quality Report


Chloramine residual levels average 2.2 ppm, with a high range of 2.9 ppm.


http://sfwater.org/index.aspx?page=634




San Diego CA 2013 Water Quality Report


Disinfectant Residual (Chloramine) distribution system average 2.2 ppm, with a high range of 4.1.


http://www.sandiego.gov/water/pdf/wq13.pdf




Massachusetts Water Resources Authority 2014 Report


An average of 1.8 ppm chloramine was reported (no maximum level given?)


http://www.mwra.state.ma.us/annual/waterreport/2014results/metro.htm




Houston TX 2013 Water Quality Report


An average of 1.96 ppm chloramine, and a maximum level of 3.8 ppm


http://www.publicworks.houstontx.gov/sites/default/files/images/utilities/wq2013.pdf



Kansas City 2014 Water Quality Report


An average of 2.27 ppm Chloramine, with a maximum level of 3.07 ppm


https://www.kcwaterservices.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/2014WQR1.pdf



Miami Florida


An average of chloramine residual in the main system of 2.5, with a high range of 4.2 ppm, and the Aventura (Norwood) system showing an average of 3.1 ppm, with a high range of 4.0 ppm


http://www.miamidade.gov/water/library/reports/water-quality-2014.pdf



Philadelphia


Philly has its tap water sourced from three different water treatment facilities, which across the entire distribution area average out at 1.98 ppm, with a high range of 3.8 ppm.


http://www.phila.gov/water/wu/Water Quality Reports/2014WaterQuality.pdf




Fairfax VA


An annual chloramine residual of 2.8 ppm, with a high of 4.1 ppm.


https://www.fcwa.org/waterqualityreport.pdf



Washington DC


Highest running annual average, 3.0 ppm chloramine, with a high range of 4.2 ppm.



https://www.dcwater.com/news/publications/DC_Water_Annual_WQReport_2014.pdf



So someone please explain to me how treating for 1.0 ppm chloramine is going to be effective for everyone on the planet that uses this product, let alone your customers based in various locations within the USA? The answer is there is no ONE SIZE FITS ALL for these types of questions, one has to have a local water disinfectant base number to start with before they can calculate the quantity of water conditioner such as Seachem Safe required.


There is no possible way on earth that one can make a blanket statement such as "the typical chlorine/chloramine concentrations across many municipalities ", equates to 1.25 mg/l or 1.25 ppm. That's junk science, total nonsense, and you all know it. If you don't know it, spend some time checking out some of the larger municipalities that are using chloramine as their main treatment for disinfection.

I can assure you that what you will find is that most run between 2.0 - 2.5 ppm chloramine. not 1.25 ppm as you are suggesting. Even from a sales perspective it's bad advice, as Seachem is shorting themselves on sales. For chlorine you are probably slightly closer to the mark as chlorine begins to break down the moment that it enters the system. The same does not hold true for chloramine. In other words if the chloramine levels are 2.0-2.5 ppm when leaving the treatment facility, it will retain that strength for many miles while being piped to residential homes. Even homes 50 miles away from the source.


If one is going to go way out on a limb and suggest dosage rates in a "one dose fits all" manner, then as previously suggested it would be far safer to target a level of 2.5 ppm chloramine, or inform consumers to first check with their local water treatment facility.

 

[RD.]

Agree on the chlorine/chloramine level variation. In D.C. the highest levels are in the summer months due to increased runoff and organic matter. If there are concerns about contamination near the aqueducts (like a burst main pipe) levels will be high for a day or two. During water alerts like that the recommendation is the usual, run the tap for 30 minutes (for each tap).

Money was appropriated for water main repair and replacement around the city. A lot of the massive pipes date back to the 1870s and are beyond their lifespan. These pipes are so big you can walk in them easily.

DC is listed in my post above. High level 4.2 ppm chloramine. As you stated, probably during spring/summer months during runoff and storms.

 

[jjohnwm]

The true measure of success, or not, would always start out with the disinfectant residual at the users end. In other words, the answer is far more complicated than what Duane posted. As an example, some cities in the US list 4 ppm chloramine as the high end range for their district, and if one lived near by, as in the first few miles, the residual could potentially be as high as 4 ppm. Still think that would be ok to blast with a garden hose? And nitrifying bacteria found in a supply water system, will not necessarily be the same as what’s found in an aquarium. squint and I already had that discussion in the past as well. Lol

Yeah, I didn't mean to sound like I ignored the danger completely. I virtually never clean my biomedia, largely because I'm constantly cleaning my mech media. I know that established aquarists are very aware of the difference, and it's easy to overlook sometimes that discussions like this one are being read by newer people in the hobby who may not be as cognizant as they should be of the differences. When I clean biomedia, it's usually because of sludge that's accumulated over many months, not to remove solid matter that has made its way past the mechanical stuff. And I virtually never clean all the biomedium in any tank or system at the same time.

I suppose duanes would know...but my logic kicks in here. How exactly would you treat a certain volume of untreated water at a certain concentration to disinfect it, then what? Mix that concentration into a larger volume of untreated water, thus diluting it so it would not effectively disinfect it? Or is it all treated at a certain concentration then removed somehow before leaving or simply dissipates as it moves into the water mains? Perfectly honest here, i should know more about this and i'm admittedly confused about this "residual" chlorine factor.

I hear that. The whole "residual" chlorine thing makes me wonder where exactly the chlorine that is originally injected into the water is going. Sure, once it comes out the tap, we smell it because it is evaporating into the air...but the pipes are all a sealed pressurized system running straight from the water treatment plant to your faucet. How does any chlorine or other gas escape when there is no air-to-water interface? Why isn't the concentration coming out your faucet the same as it was when it left the facility?

I miss the good old days when we just filled a bucket and let it sit a couple days before using it; that was the sum total of water treatment we practiced, and the fish seemed to live. The first time I bought a bottle of dechlorinator I thought I had enterd the space age for sure. The first time I ever heard about chloramine, I was aghast; surely fish-keeping would wither and die in the face of such a challenge. And when I moved away from the city and became responsible for my own water system...sucking fresh water up out of Mother Earth with my own pumps and distributing it where I needed it through my own system of pipes...I felt like I had it made! Still do, in fact...

I was waiting for a particular Manitoban to post before sharing my experience.

I used to worship YouTubers, including some like Paul Cuffaro, lol, but I’ve since steered away from my path of wrongdoing, haha.

A couple of months ago, I tried something pretty foolish. Normally, I just lightly rinse half of my filter media—specifically the pillow stuffing—to wash off larger bits of poop and dirt. But one day, I decided to give it a 'deep' clean using tap water. The tap water here can get quite hot, reaching 40 to 50°C easily during the day, and I thought since chlorine dissipates faster in warmer water, it’d be safe to take the risk.

Even though I only deep cleaned half of the filter media, my entire stable biological filtration system collapsed. Nitrates spiked, the water turned green, and it took three 80% water changes to bring the nitrates down. When I tested the water, I found the chlorine level was 2 ppm. I’ll never make that mistake again.

Thus, I agree with RD and Esox—only an experienced aquarist should attempt such steps

I think it's adorable that you think the last time you did "something foolish" was way back a couple months ago.

But this tale of woe illustrates what I was saying earlier about mech vs. bio media. You experienced one of those "collapses" or "crashes" or whatever other term is commonly used nowadays for these calamities. In your description you don't mention which medium you were abusing so badly to cause it...mech or bio? Is there a distinction between the two in your mind, and/or in your filter? Cleaning the bio medium in hot heavily chlorinated water would do...exactly what it did. But cleaning mech media would have no such dangers attached to it.

The art and the science of aquarium keeping is much like that in any other hobby; you really need to get a good handle on the science before you start playing with the art aspect of it.

While we are on the subject of disinfectant and residuals, see past post below.

While this data is from 2018, I think that it proves a point regarding potential residuals. Pretty sure that other than a handfull of folks like duanes , no one at these water distribution facilities are overly concerned about tropical aquariums in the end users homes, or the bio-bacteria that supports them.

Yep! And not just the people who run and work at those places. To the average Joe on the street...germs is germs. Kill 'em all!

 

[RD.]

I hear that. The whole "residual" chlorine thing makes me wonder where exactly the chlorine that is originally injected into the water is going. Sure, once it comes out the tap, we smell it because it is evaporating into the air...but the pipes are all a sealed pressurized system running straight from the water treatment plant to your faucet. How does any chlorine or other gas escape when there is no air-to-water interface? Why isn't the concentration coming out your faucet the same as it was when it left the facility?

It gets used up along the way, when mixing with organics in the system. The longer the run, and the higher the organic load, the lower the residual at the faucet. Chloramine not so much, hence why it is being used more & more over the past couple of decades. It's simply more efficient. and supposedly safer for the end consumer.


This might be worth reposting, another portion of a discussion we had here yrs ago.

This is such a complex topic that it is well beyond the scope of the average hobbyist, including myself for a lot of it.

My focus is generally on chloramine, as it seems to be what most areas in North America have switched to, or are in the process of switching to, and it tends to remain at near full strength while in the system. I believe that Duane once said that when tested after 1 week their sample was still at 100% full strength. The water treatment supervisor here told me in the past that a similar test showed the same, full strength after 2 weeks in a glass jar. Chloramine does not break down nearly as quickly as chlorine. How much and how fast that break down takes place will vary among distribution systems based on numerous factors.

Yes, nitrifying bacteria can be present in distribution systems, how much if any will again vary greatly dependent on numerous factors. Yes, nitrifying bacteria need ammonia to be present in order to thrive, in some distribution systems ammonia will be naturally present, in other systems ammonia will only become present via the decomposition of chloramine. (once the chlorine/ammonia bond has split) This is precisely why one of the most common ways to resolve nitrifying bacteria in a distribution system, is to increase the level of disinfectant. In some cases water utilities will form chloramines as a strategy to remove naturally occurring ammonia in the raw water supply, while others may use breakpoint chlorination.

Chloramine kills nitrifying bacteria. Chlorine kills nitrifying bacteria. Both are oxidizing agents that are not bacteria friendly, and not fish friendly. I think that we can all agree on that. These are not facts based on hobbyist hyperbole, but facts based in hard data supplied by scientists who specialize in this field. Many hobbyists have seen the results first hand, tanks that keep going into a mini cycle, and/or dead fish.


The only real questions left are how much, and how long? This is where disinfectant type, residual levels, and contact time all come into play.
Obviously someone like Dr. Tanner with such a low disinfectant residual doesn't have any issues, he could probably spray the water in while refilling his tanks and not even have an issue if he didn't use a water conditioner. At least in an established tank full of organics, and the volume of incoming water wasn't too great. Many people have stated that they do just that, and have for many years. For those folks, disinfectant becomes a non issue.

But that doesn't mean that someone on a different system, with disinfectant residuals several times higher (at the tap) could safely do the same thing. Again, residual disinfectant levels, contact time while cleaning, as well as how established ones bio-media is, will determine how safe tap water is to use, or not.

This type of discussion reminds me of many others posted here and elsewhere over the years, where hobbyists are asking how much water conditioner they should use (often Prime), and others will chime in stating 1 capful per 50 gallons, as somehow through internet magic they know the OP's water parameters, including their local water treatment plant disinfection levels, or the residual level at the OP's taps. One capful per 50 gallons, as everyone should know, is based on a specific amount of disinfectant residual. It amazes me that many hobbyists still do not understand that basic element in adding tap water to their tanks. Many under-dose, and I think that it's safe to say that many overdose. The reality of overdosing issues, causing 02 depletion, is why Seachem dumbed down their recommended dose 3 years ago.

And finally, there are systems that during part of the year use chloramine, and part of the year use chlorine, sometimes even different sources of water. And there are systems that are currently on chlorine, but are switching over to chloramine.

This topic has never been answered with a one size fits all.


And on that note, impossible to say with any real certainty, Ben. If the tank had enough decor (gravel, wood, skulls lol, etc) and the bio load itself wasn't too high, one might be ok. With a large bio load (fish/food) and a bare tank, the tank will most likely crash. Same result when certain meds are added to a tank, even an established tank. Been there, done that, and in my case it wasn't what I would consider a mini cycle. Some bio bacteria most likely survived the meds, but the majority were clearly wiped out. The problem with nitriying bacteria is at least from my understanding they don't multiply nearly as fast as we would like. Having some back up established media can sometimes be a real blessing.

http://www.bioconlabs.com/nitribactfacts.html

"Nitrifying bacteria reproduce by binary division. Under optimal conditions, Nitrosomonas may double every 7 hours and Nitrobacter every 13 hours. More realistically, they will double every 15-20 hours. This is an extremely long time considering that heterotrophic bacteria can double in as short a time as 20 minutes. In the time that it takes a single Nitrosomonas cell to double in population, a single E. Coli bacterium would have produced a population exceeding 35 trillion cells."

 

[troublesum]

I've been a member here since 2006 I've learned so much here from MFK.
I use to have 2 Oscars over 10in in a 75 back then no one said anything i use to move my fish to a bucket during WC.
Now i just take what i see or read from YT or the net and take it or leave it, If it aint broke don't fix it
When i clean filter and media i use to just fill a bucket with tank water dip and swish but i always seen how dirty the bucket water was after i finished and thought how is my media clean i just swished it in dirty water.
Now i use 2 buckets filled with tank water first one i shish, wring and repeat then move to the second bucket where i just dip and swish.
For the last 8 years that has been my routine my nitates have never been over 10 (I've heard and read believe it not NYC has some of the best tap water)
But again i have a 125 that always has either had 1 or 2 large cichlids so my bio load has always been super light

 

[AR1]

I think it's adorable that you think the last time you did "something foolish" was way back a couple months ago.

But this tale of woe illustrates what I was saying earlier about mech vs. bio media. You experienced one of those "collapses" or "crashes" or whatever other term is commonly used nowadays for these calamities. In your description you don't mention which medium you were abusing so badly to cause it...mech or bio? Is there a distinction between the two in your mind, and/or in your filter? Cleaning the bio medium in hot heavily chlorinated water would do...exactly what it did. But cleaning mech media would have no such dangers attached to it.

The art and the science of aquarium keeping is much like that in any other hobby; you really need to get a good handle on the science before you start playing with the art aspect of it.

LOL, I guess you’re saying you do something wrong every day then!?

As for your question, I was using the pillow stuffing as biological filtration, not mechanical. The thread-like structure provides a high surface area for nitrifying bacteria to grow and establish themselves. I just needed to occasionally rinse off the goo, poop, etc. that sometimes got stuck in it.

 

[jjohnwm]

RD. thanks for that ^ excellent post; probably one of the single most interesting and educational ones I've read on MFK.

I should have realized that the chlorine/chloramine would be "used up" as it oxidized the bacteria and other organic goodies in the water! Seems pretty obvious...now that you point it out to me...duh...

I was a bit surprised when you made the initial comment about how long the generation time of nitrifiers was...and then when you quoted a realistic time period of 15-20 hours I was relieved, as that's what I had read and accepted as correct in the past. I don't really worry that other types are much faster; knowing that I could obliterate 75% of the good guys with even the most ham-fisted cleaning and still be back up to full-strength colonies within a day or two is quite enough to keep me happy. Relatively low stocking levels, combined with minimal or no feeding for a day or two after a major bio-clean...which might be a once-yearly thing, and as stated earlier usually only involves a portion of the total volume of biomedia...is enough to keep me out of the weeds and on the asphalt.

LOL, I guess you’re saying you do something wrong every dy then!?

Wouldn't surprise me to find out that I did...but, no, that's not really what I was saying at all...

 

[AR1]

Wouldn't surprise me to find out that I did...but, no, that's not really what I was saying at all...

Well, you sure had me convinced there for a second! But fair enough, I’ll take your word for it.