Bats would be helpful for sure.
I often wonder of the efficiency of carbon at removing chlorine . . .
I often wonder of the efficiency of carbon at removing chlorine . . .
Chlorine. . .
- Thread starter Tifftastic
- Start date
We have been informed by the company that it doesn't remove chloramine at all. However, we've also been informed by the city that they don't use chloramine.
Tested the water again this morning and the chlorine is down to trace levels. Not up to my standard but it could be the error margin in the test. I threw in some dechlor anyway.
Whatever has been going on has resulted in some weird growth rates for one of my batches of fish. So there's definitely something wrong.
Tested the water again this morning and the chlorine is down to trace levels. Not up to my standard but it could be the error margin in the test. I threw in some dechlor anyway.
Whatever has been going on has resulted in some weird growth rates for one of my batches of fish. So there's definitely something wrong.
IME, many municipalities that use chlorine as primary, or chloramine, shock the systems with the other once or twice a year, especially during rainy times. Just a thought. By switching to the other for a short period,it breaks the bond in the membrane of what is growing and coating the interior surfaces of the pipes.
That's an interesting thought. I'd like to think the superior brain buckets at work know exactly which the municipal water supply uses, chlorine or chloramine. Wouldn't that be something if it's chloramine, and all this time it's slipping right through the granulated activated carbon bed and clogging the ROs. Thanks for the insight Bob!
