Any feedback from AQUACHAR users?

hart24601

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 18, 2014
Messages
6,576
Reaction score
6,630
Location
Iowa
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I am in that FB group that is going nuts over this. It’s so silly I have almost left the group due to how fast stuff like this spreads. It’s just lump wood based activated carbon but the mob mentality doesn’t listen. FB groups are also tough because really good answers like below are quickly lost.



FWIW even Robert Stark owner of ESV chimed in here is what he said, it’s too good for losing in a FB group about carbon in general which I didn’t know:



(I typed this up so might be some mistakes as I couldn’t copy/paste here)



“Since ESV has been mentioned I’ll chine in with my perspective. I met Brian Covey at MACNA and was impressed by his enthusiasm about his product, and he seemed like an all around great guy. Activated carbon, in general, is used to lower dissolved organic carbon (DOC) through the process of adsorption onto the surface area of the carbon particle.

Over a relatively short period of time, the carbon surface area collects enough organics to become an ideal environment for bacterial colonization, and bacterial mats are formed. Once the mat is thick enough, the ability for the carbon particle to adsorb organics is severely hampered. At this point it becomes a bacterial filter and only the more labile (easily broken down by bacteria) DOC will be processed. That means the more refractory (resistant to bacterial breakdown) DOC will not be readily removed.

Most of the yellowing compounds that build up in our systems are refractory, so to keep them at bay, the carbon must be changed often enough to resume adsorptive removal of the refractory yellowing compounds. Of course there are other ways to mitigate refractory organics from accumulation like ozone and/or aggressive water changes, and to a lesser extent protein skimming. So we have two modes of filtration with carbon..initial adsorption following by bacterial filtration. The type of DOC (larger molecular weight vs smaller molecular weight) adsorbed by carbon is a function of the diversity of the pore sizes, which in turn is dependent on the type of raw material used as manufacturing method.

At ESV we choose a bituminous coal variety, which we feel has the best combination of pore size diversity and hardness. We also choose a clean product which is certified for use in drinking water, meaning minimal to no leaching of heavy metals. The AquaChar website seems to imply bituminous coal is a dirtier material to use and not as natural as wood. All bituminous coal is fossilized natural materials, so I’m not sure where natural becomes unnatural on a time line. Using recycled wood may carry it’s own problems if the wood was previously treated with a preservative, especially a copper based preservative as copper will not burn off. Previously painted wood may also have some heavy metal concerns.

I’m sure Brian has a way of avoiding that material. It would be great if AquaChar could get certification for drinking water usage. As an adsorptive media, smaller particles, like ESV’s carbon, expose the aquarium water to the greatest pore surface area, allowing faster adsorption of organics before the media is inhibited by bacterial mats. The smaller particles however work against the long term use of the carbon as a bacterial filters as the carbon bed will clog faster with detritus. By the time this happens, the smaller particle carbon has already lost it’s adsorptive properties, and should probably be switched out anyways.

If the purpose of the carbon bed is to become a long term bacterial filter, then I see the advantages of AquaChar with that regard..it has great macro-porosity at the surface, and the large particles facilitate flow thru the bed with less detritus accumulation. It could very well be a great addition to a system with minimal rock and substrate that requires more surface area for biological filtration, possibly replacing these ceramic bio block products. One would have to be careful not to change out all the AquaChar at once in case the system was heavily reliant on that biological surface area.

I think it’s pretty cool people are seeing almost a refugium type environment within the AquaChar bed..complete with amphipods and other beneficial critters. Can AquaChar overcome the bacterial mat inhibition of yellowing compound adsorption after even 2 weeks on a system? I remain extremely skeptical and would need to see some test results on that. Someone earlier mentioned the white bucket test and I agree that’s the best option for the aquarist to test carbon longevity.

Simply fill one white bucket with 4 gals newly mixed seawater and compare it to 4 gals of tank water in a white bucket next to it.

The ability for carbon to raise pH is common to other carbons and probably not significant long term. In the process of heating, oxides are formed which when added to water, form hydroxides (For example some aquarists use calcium oxide instead of calcium hydroxide knowing the oxide converts to hydroxide when added to water). Some of these oxides leach from certain carbons facilitating an initial pH increase..but that effect is temporary. If AquaChar exhibits chemistry other than that, which allows long term buffering (by definition prevents increases and drops in pH), I’d love to hear about the mechanism behind that.

As the AquaChar bed becomes more of a bacterial filter, I would think it would release pH lowering CO2 as a byproduct from the organics the bacteria are oxidizing. The microscopic photos I’ve seen comparing AquaChar to coal based carbons look like they are at 50x magnification, which is great for seeing the macro-porosity on the surface of AquaChar, but not powerful enough to show the tremendous microporosity of the coal based product. Sorry for the lengthy post.”
 
Last edited:

James Kanouff

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Jul 19, 2016
Messages
366
Reaction score
253
Location
Orlando lake nona area
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I'm kinda afraid to go see the FB page and think ill keep my posts here for now.... I think Mr Stark @ ESV points out the interesting claims of extended C02 removal beyond the first day or week as different than expected with other carbons.
If your wanting to remove ""yellows"" from the water you would need to change the product out at an interval not yet dialed in but i'd guess 2-4 weeks tops and highly dependent on the water levels to begin with and the rate of biological formation on its surface.
I think the bacteria angle of it also is what has been said before and makes sense. I think this supports what most of the claims are for the product. If you want to create a biological system leaving it there is only going to improve the effectiveness to the point of a detritus trap or a biological balance of bacteria to food source. Similar to marine pure bio blocks for example".
If your goal is c02 removal then there is a third angle and time frame yet to be outlined and understood and I point to there recommendation of 30 days ish if properly sized per there recommendations. How it continues to absorb and reduce c02 is my biggest question and takes someone smarter than me to break down. "I really hope RHF or MR Bingman can chime in with some thoughts maybe"
I had hoped someone would understand the c02 part of it and help me. I do still see an obvious effect on my systems at day 20. Which is leaning me towards its not the initial hydroxide reaction but something more lasting. I can't say if the biological catches up with the hydroxide and take is place somewhere in the middle. I have never read anyone post there C02/ Ph was elevated for a significant period of time after they added a appropriate sized dose of other carbon in a bag to there system.
I have never looked at my tank chemistry after I changed a bag of other carbon that closely or noticed it temporarily buffered my water.

I went and cleaned my glass and the skimmer cup this afternoon and ill take some pictures tonight or tomorrow. If nothing else than to share some eye candy lol. After all were all here for the love of the hobby I think.

I also want to dose my big system with flocazole this weekend for bryopsis which I have been battling in one frag tank and now see in another and I'm over manually removing it, so I get to venture down that path and will add an unwanted factor into AQUA CHAR test and remove it for the next two weeks I think from that system and keep it in the other four systems. I'm sure we all understand that my one opinion here is not the gold standard but just a person talking about what there seeing with the product. I wish more hobbyist would share there wins and losses so we may all learn but many folks give-up and just quit. I almost quit when C02 became my last real hurdle to successfully keeping a growing SPS system in my home. I spent years fighting it with all sorts of ideas only to loose a great colony here n there when the Ph dipped or ALK spiked from something I was doing to try n counter act c02 I knew was there. Very frustrating. I really hope this is even a partial solution to that issue for the hobby. Many people can't just put it all in the garage like I ultimately did.
 

Rostato

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Oct 23, 2018
Messages
130
Reaction score
69
Location
Fremont, CA
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Snake Oil...

Unproven claims...

Lots of ”mansplaining”...

The list goes on.

All they do is delete negative posts on their Facebook page that is hawking the product to reefers who stumble on their page looking for “real reefers.”
 

erk

Valuable Member
View Badges
Joined
Mar 19, 2014
Messages
1,382
Reaction score
2,048
Location
DFW
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Are people actually buying this stuff? This is a blatant scam. If you can't see that, then I pity you. As I said before, it is agriculture charcoal. The stuff you pot plants in. It is cheap as heck and easily sourced. My grandfather always said, "a fool and his money shall soon part."
 

las

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Jan 19, 2010
Messages
561
Reaction score
246
Location
chicago
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Any reviews by real reefers who have actually used this stuff longer term.
 

las

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
Jan 19, 2010
Messages
561
Reaction score
246
Location
chicago
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I’ve heard good things. I Just want to get some info before I give it a try
 

A worm with high fashion and practical utility: Have you ever kept feather dusters in your reef aquarium?

  • I currently have feather dusters in my tank.

    Votes: 64 36.8%
  • Not currently, but I have had feather dusters in my tank in the past.

    Votes: 59 33.9%
  • I have not had feather dusters, but I hope to in the future.

    Votes: 25 14.4%
  • I have no plans to have feather dusters in my tank.

    Votes: 26 14.9%
  • Other.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
Back
Top