[Prev][Next][Index]
Re: Chlorine
-
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
corrosive stuff!
--
Paul Sears Ottawa, Canada
Finger ap626 at freenet_carleton.ca for PGP public key.