To: Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com
Subject: Re: Chlorine
From: psears at NRCan_gc.ca (Paul Sears)
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 1996 09:48:03 -0500 (EST)
In-Reply-To: <199612122039.PAA27521 at looney_actwin.com> from "Aquatic-Plants-Owner at ActWin_com" at Dec 12, 96 03:39:02 pm
> From: nickedmunds at juno_com
> Subject: Re: Automatic Water Changer vs Python Syphon
> The Automatic Water changer works by the principle that chlorine is very
> unstable in water. As the fine jet of water hits the surface, causing
> turbulence, the chlorine is broken down, no longer to be found present
> as chlorine.
This is nonsense. To remove the elemental chlorine put in
water, you need a reducing agent. Turbulence will do nothing.
> In testing the product, they went for 48 hours on smal
> tanks and then tested for chlorine and none was found.
I'm not surprised. Small tanks have lots of reducing agents
in them - fish, plants, fish poop, algae. The question is:- Does
the chlorine damage the fish significantly before it is gone?
I would think that planted tanks would be much better, as the plants
should take most of the damage from what is, after all, very
Paul Sears Ottawa, Canada
Finger ap626 at freenet_carleton.ca for PGP public key.