Another sketchy sounding one to me on nitrates

[RD.]

Yes, along with metabolic waste (measured in this case as nitrates) comes potentially other changes & issues in water parameters, such as changes in alkalinity, conductivity, TDS, pathogenic bacteria numbers, etc.

As far as TDS, if ones TDS shifts too quickly it can cause osmotic shock, which for many years hobbyists confused with pH shock, only because most hobbyists don't own a TDS meter. Osmoregulation has nothing to do with pH, and everything to do with controlling the balance of water/salt concentrations. pH has nothing to do with regards to if ones water is a hypertonic solution, hypotonic solution, or if it's isotonic. The shock part of the equation comes in when a fish has difficulty reaching equilibrium. The "high to low" shift in TDS values becomes more dangerous as the fish cells can become flooded with water faster than they can reach equilibrium, and burst .... which is where the term "shock" comes in. The biggest issue with pH is ammonia toxicity, as at higher pH values free ammonia can be much more lethal, especially when higher temps are involved.

But again, it's a sum of all evils, not simply a "nitrate" issue.

 

[Sassafras]

As far as human drinking water, and the EPA, I would be far more concerned, or at the very least, just as concerned with the LEAD content in my drinking water. Something that many areas of the USA still have very serious issues with.

Note of interest. I worked years ago for a company that was a major manufacturer of plumbing fixtures, among other products. 30-40 years ago, "solid brass" was a signature of quality and a large percentage of faucets were polished brass. Then the EPA lowered the lead standards. Because lead is present in the ores containing copper and zinc, and it is extremely difficult to remove the lead as an unintended contaminant in brass, manufactures could not meet the lead leaching standard with brass products. As a result, solid brass fixtures largely disappeared from the market. Not sure if they ever improved the refining process to remove all lead, but in the U.S. brass fixtures are still definitely "out of style".

 

[jjohnwm]

Note of interest. I worked years ago for a company that was a major manufacturer of plumbing fixtures, among other products. 30-40 years ago, "solid brass" was a signature of quality and a large percentage of faucets were polished brass. Then the EPA lowered the lead standards. Because lead is present in the ores containing copper and zinc, and it is extremely difficult to remove the lead as an unintended contaminant in brass, manufactures could not meet the lead leaching standard with brass products. As a result, solid brass fixtures largely disappeared from the market. Not sure if they ever improved the refining process to remove all lead, but in the U.S. brass fixtures are still definitely "out of style".

Interesting. Almost all my tanks are drilled and bulkheaded, each with a brass hose spigot screwed permanently in place, attached to garden hoses which all lead to a manifold feeding the utility pump which removes waste water form my tank during water changes. Been doing it this way for several decades now, with excellent success.

The young son of one of my neighbours can't believe that I would dare to allow those spigots to be in contact with my tank water on a continuous basis. He tut-tuts and tsk-tsks every time we discuss it; don't I realize the toxic exposure my fish are suffering on an ongoing basis? He has a single tank...which I helped him build!...and has been keeping fish for just about two years now. I am positive he has gone through more medications and treatments and water conditioners and de-this-ers and anti-that-ers and lotions and potions in those two years than I have in a half century. But he "knows" that my spigots will lead to the eventual death of all my fish.

When I tell him that this is just another example of the endless reasons why I am constantly changing water, he gets confused.

 

[Sassafras]

I believe the fact that water chemistry is a prime determiner of whether an exposed metal will corrode or be prone to deposition or scaling is relevant here. There are other factors, including galvanic corrosion, treatment of the metal during the manufacturing process or mechanical removal of metal through abrasive exposure. But basically, if your water is corrosive to the metal in use, it will leach into the water. If your water promotes deposition, then the metal will essentially be covered by a deposited layer of scale that may greatly slow, or stop, leaching of the base metal. The latter is the case with much of the older lead plumbing in the U.S. Yes, the lead is there, but its surface was long ago converted to scale. Depending on the composition of the scale, lead leaching is in many cases almost negligible. Such may be the case with your brass hose spigots.

 

[RD.]

The latter is the case with much of the older lead plumbing in the U.S.

I think that the word "much" might be overly generous in this situation. At least when it comes to the millions of consumers that don't have the benefit of hard water.

 

[Sassafras]

"Much" may well be overly optimistic. In any case, it was too hastily offered, as I really don't have the data to back it up. I have background in water treatment, so I do know it is the status in some instances but, consistent with my main observation, water chemistry will largely determine the rate and degree of metal loss. You are right, given the amount of lead pipe still extant in the U.S., the number of people exposed is too many.

 

[jjohnwm]

Certainly, water chemistry plays a role, but I think that one the biggest factors at play, IMHO, is the area of metal exposed to the water. In my case, the tanks range from about 75 gallons at the small end to 360 at the upper limit. In each of those cases, the surface area exposed to the water is whatever the area of the inside of the spigot, so...what, maybe 2 or perhaps 3 square inches?

Even more important is my water change schedule. I have always done plenty of large-volume water changes; now that I am retired, I have stepped this up to the point where I have virtually no tanks that don't experience in excess of 100% water changes weekly. The exceptions are two smaller tanks on the main floor of my house as opposed to my basement. One of these has recently been drilled and linked in to my basement network; the utility pump pulls waste water out of that tank, down to the basement manifold, and then back upstairs to the outside. It only makes sense because it is such a tiny proportion of the overall volume being changed each week. In any case, that single brass spigot is not going to have any kind of effect on even that 20 when the water is completely changed on a regular basis.

My young friend approaches his fish-keeping in a radically different fashion. If he is concerned about any aspect of his water...chemistry, pollutants, whatever...he can always come up with a way of throwing enough money at the problem and buying enough superfluous gear and equipment and assorted magical potions to bully the offending water back into line with what the catalogs and websites tell him he wants it to be. I can't be certain exactly how well this works for his fish on a long-term basis; none of them have ever lived long enough to really provide much feedback...

 

[Sassafras]

There are lots of hobbyists like that these days. Reminds me of what my mother, a 40-year "old school" registered nurse, said about the "younger nurses". She called them "dry hands nurses", all book/tech knowledge but didn't spend enough time getting their hands dirty by working directly with the patients to really understand their needs.

My philosophy is that the fish will tell you how you're doing. Happy, healthy, growing, spawning fish -- You're getting it right.