Washing Your Bio
- Thread starter benzjamin13
- Start date
Studies show that nitrifying bacteria can grow in distribution systems with 5 mg/L chloramine and you want us to think that the reason some people can get away with washing bio media with tap water is b/c they're on chlorine or have low levels (< 3 mg/L) of chloramine?
Yes, that is for sure what I am doing. lol I was hoping that you would go away before this thread became a bigger clusterphuck than it already is. But at this point, I guess it doesn't matter.
Seeing as you chose to throw down the gauntlet, allow me to explain.
I'll actually use past threads, and comments by you, squint, to prove my point.
https://www.monsterfishkeepers.com/forums/threads/metals-in-tap-water.704350/#post-7939909
Being closer to the treatment plant might mean higher chlorine levels.
https://www.monsterfishkeepers.com/...e-or-not-to-dechlorinate.699847/#post-7887381
Chlorine is very reactive and will be neutralized by combining with organics. That's why people with chlorine in their tap water can often get away with small water changes without dechlorinator
https://www.monsterfishkeepers.com/...ater-change-implications.699140/#post-7879337
As I understand it, chloramine is less reactive than chlorine so you can't rely on organics in the tank to react to it.
…………………………...
So you clearly understand the concept, but in your haste to attempt to discredit me, again, you must have forgot one of the primary differences between chlorine, and chloramine. That being chloramine does not react nearly as much to organics in a distribution system, compared to chlorine.
The fact that chloramine doesn't easily dissipate, such as chlorine does, is also one of the primary reasons that many water treatment facilities now use chloramine as their primary source of water disinfectant.
So someone on MFK that lives 10 miles from their source of water treatment, and their municipality is on 2 ppm max chlorine residual, could be receiving less than 1 ppm chlorine at their tap. If sprayed into a Rubbermaid tub and allowed to sit for 5-10 minutes, the residual could be close to zero.
Flip that same scenario to chloramine @ 2 ppm, and chances are at mile 10 your water will still be at 2 ppm. Ditto to if one sprays it into a tub, and allows it to sit for 48 hours. Still 2 ppm, or very close to it.
Hope that helps.
Seeing as you chose to throw down the gauntlet, allow me to explain.
I'll actually use past threads, and comments by you, squint, to prove my point.
https://www.monsterfishkeepers.com/forums/threads/metals-in-tap-water.704350/#post-7939909
Being closer to the treatment plant might mean higher chlorine levels.
https://www.monsterfishkeepers.com/...e-or-not-to-dechlorinate.699847/#post-7887381
Chlorine is very reactive and will be neutralized by combining with organics. That's why people with chlorine in their tap water can often get away with small water changes without dechlorinator
https://www.monsterfishkeepers.com/...ater-change-implications.699140/#post-7879337
As I understand it, chloramine is less reactive than chlorine so you can't rely on organics in the tank to react to it.
…………………………...
So you clearly understand the concept, but in your haste to attempt to discredit me, again, you must have forgot one of the primary differences between chlorine, and chloramine. That being chloramine does not react nearly as much to organics in a distribution system, compared to chlorine.
The fact that chloramine doesn't easily dissipate, such as chlorine does, is also one of the primary reasons that many water treatment facilities now use chloramine as their primary source of water disinfectant.
So someone on MFK that lives 10 miles from their source of water treatment, and their municipality is on 2 ppm max chlorine residual, could be receiving less than 1 ppm chlorine at their tap. If sprayed into a Rubbermaid tub and allowed to sit for 5-10 minutes, the residual could be close to zero.
Flip that same scenario to chloramine @ 2 ppm, and chances are at mile 10 your water will still be at 2 ppm. Ditto to if one sprays it into a tub, and allows it to sit for 48 hours. Still 2 ppm, or very close to it.
Hope that helps.
BTW - I'm so out of touch with what kids say thess days I had to google BTFO.
BTFO is short for “blown the F out.” In gaming, its meaning is similar to “pwned” or “rekt.” If an individual or a team is BTFO, it means that they have been spectacularly defeated. A BTFO can also refer to someone losing a debate, particularly an online one.
Funny stuff, squint, except I'm not losing. lol
BTFO is short for “blown the F out.” In gaming, its meaning is similar to “pwned” or “rekt.” If an individual or a team is BTFO, it means that they have been spectacularly defeated. A BTFO can also refer to someone losing a debate, particularly an online one.
Funny stuff, squint, except I'm not losing. lol
Both of these are in reference to toxicity to fish, not nitrifying bacteria.
There's no need to speculate whether chlorine or chloramine is more toxicity to nitrifying bacteria as there's plenty of scientific evidence. Not to mention the fact that nitrifying bacteria thrive in
chloraminated systems. Those systems sometimes resort to temporarily switching to chlorine to control nitrifying bacteria.
Ummm, yeah, sure, whatever. How toxic becomes irrelevant after the fact. It's like saying a little second hand smoke is only a little toxic to infants.
Both chlorine & chloramine are toxic to nitrifying bacteria, the only difference is that as chloramine breaks down in a distribution system free ammonia is produced, which allows nitrifying bacteria (that feed off of ammonia) to populate in slow moving areas, such as holding tanks etc.
I already explained all of this several pages back. Maybe post some more irrelevant scientific links to irrelevant scientific papers. lol
Both chlorine & chloramine are toxic to nitrifying bacteria, the only difference is that as chloramine breaks down in a distribution system free ammonia is produced, which allows nitrifying bacteria (that feed off of ammonia) to populate in slow moving areas, such as holding tanks etc.
I already explained all of this several pages back. Maybe post some more irrelevant scientific links to irrelevant scientific papers. lol
