[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Chloramine thread.
Dave Boukman writes:
> I have lost an entire tank of plants to a 20% chloramine-laced tap
water
> change a few yeas ago (It was a straight addition, however). At the time I
> had no idea chloramine would actually damage plants. Nowadays, I use an
> inexpensive Kleen-plus CTR-210 countertop water filter with an ordinary
> carbon filter and I avoid chloramine and chemical dechlorinators
altogether.
>
> Before I put this liquid menace in my tanks in ANY amount I am surely
not
> alone in needing some specific values for time, concentration and volume
> before taking such a chance. Is it safe for example, to assume all
> municipalities add chloramine in identical concentrations? Perhaps it is.
> But if not, is it possible that the initial concentration may affect the
> length of time neaded for this Rxn to eliminate chloramine? What about the
> initial volume of tap water that should be stored? Is its volume also to be
> factored in?
> I think a formula would clarify the questions. Something like; INITIAL
> CONC. CHLORAMINE (Xmg/L) over some TIME(X days) will yield ----> FINAL
> CONC. CHLORAMINE (Zero mg/L) at TIME (Zero days).
>
I can buy into this concept. I know that some public waters that use regular
chlorine contains 3-4 times as much as others. So chloramine would also
follow suit. Some brilliant chemically enabled individual on this list ought
to be able to figure this out. I suspect it may be pH/ GH dependant, and
that would also have to be figured in. Once such a formula were calculated,
based on the chlorine/chloramine levels as admitted to by the local water
authority, one would know how much could be changed straight from the tap how
often. It also would tell us how long it needs to stand "in the barrel"
before going into a tank.
While I can't dispute the thought that a 20% change was responsible for your
lost plants, I still find it unlikely based on my personal experience. But
my experience doesn't mean you're wrong. I wonder if temperature or other
factors may have played into it.
Bob Dixon