Opinions/Experience-Seachem Purigen/Carbon Alternatives

[Chrissi]

So thinking of crossing over the debate line and going no carbon. I have always been pro carbon but the more I am reading the more I am thinking of going away from it in general use.

Any advice on alternatives to carbon. I could go the double sponge or bio route but I am more interested in another form of chemical filtration for dissolved organics. I have increased mechanical and bio-filtration already with my internal sponge filters. I found Purigen but would be interested in any suggestions.

Users of SeaChem Purigen, what are your thoughts on it? And does it really last 6 months? If not, what is the realistic life of the product? I like the idea of less often media changing.

Running a Fluval C4, and 3 AquaClear 50's on my tanks. Would the 100 ml already meshed bagged work for me? If I did my math correct (1 L treats 1000 so 1 ml treats 100). Concerned in the size mostly for the AquaClears, the mechanical compartment in the Fluval is quite large. Read a lot if complaints about finding mesh bags to contain it so I may be better served by the profiles bag.

 

[Haileyjade]

I just took the plunge and began using Purigen. I'm on day two and I'm astounded by how clear the water looks. So far, I love it. My only concern is the recharge. I might just buy new stuff instead if messing with the bleach--paranoid me!

 

[Haileyjade]

Oh, and I forgot to add--I have it in my Aquaclear 30. Fits just fine!

 

[Chrissi]

Works in a 30 should be good in a 50 thanks! I am not planning to recharge either. I would be concerned both for myself (leaving a bucket of that strong bleach to "perfume" my home, but my tank should I make an error. For what the product cost just doesn't seem worth it to play with bleach.

Let me add to my original post I am finding confusing information on Purigen in that it removes ammonia and Nitrite. Can someone clarify this for me? I am not interested in removing the ammonia and nitrite needed to maintain my cycle, just a product that, like carbon, filters out excess fine waste and impurities from the water column.

 

[tomtom14]

I have used carbon and it's great but it's expensive and doesn't last long. If I had the money I would use it as it's good at its job. Can't use it in freshwater and saltwater like you can carbon but matrix is a good substitute for carbon. The same price and lasts a year before it has to be changed at all.

 

[Chrissi]

Did you mean purigen in first sentence? Who manufactures Matrix?

 

[Haileyjade]

I haven't tested my params since I added it (on the agenda today), so I can't comment on that. Though to me I think it seems unlikely that it would make too much of a dent in anything to disrupt the cycle.

Also, FYI-the smaller package does come in a media bag. The one for 100 gallons.

 

[Chrissi]

Scratch that. I know Matrix, bio media alternative. Was thinking another name of a chemical media. I have been looking at Matrix for when I move into canister filters down the road. I'm leery of it in a HOB, my flow rate is well above 50 gph so I can see it effecting nitrates and if it did may not be able to sustain my plant life. My nitrate typically stays below 20ppm by time of water changes pre plants and down to 5 with plants. I did think of using Matrix or Denitrate in a separate filter set to a 50 gph flow. Just to experiment.

 

[libertybelle]

Purigen removes organics. Keeps water clean and nitrates low by not letting the organics get that far. In my experience whatever the nitrates are at when I add purigen is approx where it stays. I have the 100mL bag in an AC 70. Big filter but it's only on a 30 gallon tank. I recharge it approximately every 6 months or so but it probably doesn't need it quite that often because my tank is not fully stocked.

Don't be afraid of recharging, it's really not that bad. Mix bleach in a closed tubberware container so it doesn't stink. then rinse well and soak in prime and water. When you pull it out again you can't smell the bleach just the prime. It's perfectly safe as long as you use the recommended time/amount of prime. Some people will tell you to dry it out to be safe but don't...it ruins the beads.

I have two that i switch back and forth. Whichever one I'm not using goes into a ziplock with just a little water to keep it damp until I have to recharge the next one.

I'm never buying chemical media again that's for sure. Until a few years from now I guess...I suppose purigen stops working as well eventually.

 

[libertybelle]

Oh and I have plants too, if you are worried about that. They seem to do fine with the nitrogen sources they have. Maybe they compete for the ammonia when it is first produced. I dunno, either way they're fine while using purigen. And purigen doesn't suck up the other ferts I add either, unlike carbon

 

[Andy Sager]

Another alternative to carbon would be Chemi-pure by Boyd enterprises. It will last approx. 6 months depending on fish load. I've used it for years in my saltwater and freshwater tanks back when it first came on the market. I happened to know and worked with Dick Boyd (creator of Chemi-pure) who was a genius in the science of fish keeping.
That all being said, it has been my experience that when you try to cut corners and use inferior/ alternate products due to costs, the end results are not usually pretty. Charcoal and later carbon have been staples in the aquarium hobby as well as the water filtering business for a reason.....they WORK! Why mess with a good thing? For a few pennies?
Just my opinion

 

[libertybelle]

Charcoal and later carbon have been staples in the aquarium hobby as well as the water filtering business for a reason.....they WORK! Why mess with a good thing? For a few pennies?
Just my opinion

My tank looks better for cheaper on purigen than they did with carbon. And that combined with not wanting to use carbon because it takes out so much that my plants need....that did it for me.

 

[Andy Sager]

My tank looks better for cheaper on purigen than they did with carbon. And that combined with not wanting to use carbon because it takes out so much that my plants need....that did it for me.

With all due respect, back in the 60s and 70s we kept very nicely planted tanks using carbon in our filters. There was no such thing as purigen back then. I guess it's all situational

 

[libertybelle]

With all due respect, back in the 60s and 70s we kept very nicely planted tanks using carbon in our filters. There was no such thing as purigen back then. I guess it's all situational

I've no doubt. I just don't see the need to spend more and have to replace it more often for the same or similar results.

Perhaps it's more to do with me not wanting to go to the store and buy more carbon I have a definite lazy streak!

 

[Chrissi]

Thank you Libertybelle, very informative answer!

 

[Andy Sager]

I've no doubt. I just don't see the need to spend more and have to replace it more often for the same or similar results.

Perhaps it's more to do with me not wanting to go to the store and buy more carbon I have a definite lazy streak!

LOL, I can see your point. I can fix a number of things but I can't fix lazy
To the OP, all you can do is try it and see. If it doesn't work out, you can always switch back

 

[threnjen]

I use Purigen but mine only lasts 2-4 weeks, so I definitely recharge it. I have two packets so I can recharge one while the other is in use. This way I can let it sit in the dechlor water for a long time. It's perfectly safe to recharge.

 

[Chrissi]

Andy, where would I find the product you mentioned? I totally get your point on the carbon. I agree but I am starting to disagree. I have been pro carbon for a long time, and like my sponge filters, tried and true and lasted through time for reliability can't be argued. My shift to the "dark side" is more focused on less disruption of seeded media and the potential links between carbon and HITH (seeing more and more articles relating to a potential link). This may hold as much water as the beliefs that carbon leeches back previously bonded toxins (getting on my soap box). Reality is once the bond is created it would take condition changes not typically seen in the home aquarium for de-bonding to occur. I do see the possible HITH link as warranting at least trying out ulterior options for chemical filtration. Not really cost to me, I really do not see carbon as that expensive, I just hate tossing good bacteria in the trash every other week. The up to 6 months draws me in but I maintain stocking between 60-80% and my Kisser Al has a pretty heavy bio load so I may not get the 6 months out of the deal. Something to consider. Figure maybe I'll try it out on one tank, see what it's looking like. I buy a years worth of media at a time so I still have 4 months stock if I need to switch back. But admit I am still debating. My tanks have always been pristine and I have a strong cycle. Want to tread on a well informed line if making changes.

 

[Andy Sager]

Andy, where would I find the product you mentioned? I totally get your point on the carbon. I agree but I am starting to disagree. I have been pro carbon for a long time, and like my sponge filters, tried and true and lasted through time for reliability can't be argued. My shift to the "dark side" is more focused on less disruption of seeded media and the potential links between carbon and HITH (seeing more and more articles relating to a potential link). This may hold as much water as the beliefs that carbon leeches back previously bonded toxins (getting on my soap box). Reality is once the bond is created it would take condition changes not typically seen in the home aquarium for de-bonding to occur. I do see the possible HITH link as warranting at least trying out ulterior options for chemical filtration. Not really cost to me, I really do not see carbon as that expensive, I just hate tossing good bacteria in the trash every other week. The up to 6 months draws me in but I maintain stocking between 60-80% and my Kisser Al has a pretty heavy bio load so I may not get the 6 months out of the deal. Something to consider. Figure maybe I'll try it out on one tank, see what it's looking like. I buy a years worth of media at a time so I still have 4 months stock if I need to switch back. But admit I am still debating. My tanks have always been pristine and I have a strong cycle. Want to tread on a well informed line if making changes.

I did a quick check and you can go to this page for multiple results: chemi-pure - Bing or you can go to their website direct: www.chemi-pure.com and use the store locator.

I'd like to address a couple of things: #1) IMO (to be politically correct ) your carbon should not be a major source of your biological filtering bed. If it is, you need a better place to house your bacteria. Since any carbon alternative will need to be changed, at some point, you will be replacing the biological. As for the small amount you will be replacing based on the amount of carbon you should be using in a tank, your bacteria bed should be healthier by needing to grow to replace the ones that had been on the carbon. Your biological filter is a living breathing organism and grows and contracts almost daily based on availability of a food source. That means you have biological die off almost daily. In a properly set up and stocked tank, your bed should be able to handle the disruption and correct itself before you can even notice it. The key is to not change all your bacteria bed sources at the same time.

#2) carbon and HITH: If you are reading a lot of recent articles relating to this, I would be willing to bet they are just regurgitating old info and theories because they have nothing new to say. Maybe they are trying to sell a product? This "theory" has been floating in the hobby for decades. It may have even started when we switched from charcoal to carbon. ( It was that long ago that I can't even remember when that was. lol ) I've seen too much evidence that it's false. HITH is more commonly caused by dirty tanks and dirty water than the presence of Carbon. I've taken in customer's fish with HITH and put them in clean tanks with better filters with carbon in them and the fish have not only survived but over a period of time, have healed. The better discussion is whether a Vitamin deficiency, a parasite or environmental factors is the major cause of HITH . I've seen saltwater Angelfish and Tangs that have the condition and were placed in outdoor sumps that got direct sunlight and used algae as a natural filter as well as a food source for the entire warehouse and these fish have, again, over time, healed and became salable animals again.
There is also the thought of the hexamita parasite being the causative agent. This is a parasite of the gut or intestines and may be the reason some fish are more effected by their presence than others. The parasite infects the organs of the fish that help regulate the absorption of vitamins and nutrients. Again, fish kept in dirtier tanks or in a more stressed out scenario tend to show more signs of HITH than ones in less stressed scenarios with carbon in the filter.
All these things lead up to one common denominator: If you house your fish properly, stock their tanks responsibly, clean their tanks and water regularly and feed your fish correctly, you should have healthier fish and not have to deal with diseases as these steps make for a healthier environment therefore making healthier fish. You are creating an ecosystem in your tank that needs maintenance because it's a closed system. You cannot be lazy or your fish will pay the price. This process has rung true for the 40+ years I have been keeping fish and I doubt anything new will change that.

Hope this helps

 

[Chrissi]

Andy, I value your opinions. And, like previously stated, I was always pro carbon and do agree with you. The effectiveness if carbon us well documented. Your not saying anything I didn't say when discussing its use over my years.

Except the word lazy.

Looking at new ideas is not being lazy, methods that are effective do not always remain the most effective, if we never tried newer methods out tanks would still be as healthy as they were hundreds of years ago when fish keeping began or even 50 years ago when it began to burst into a common household hobby. I am not debating the effectiveness of carbon, nor that changing it out should (and in my home does not) disrupt my cycle as it is only a part of the established bacteria. But if the same results as carbon can be achieved through a method that less often involves disrupting the equipment, then it's much easier to fully alternate bio disruptions. Changing carbon every two weeks means when time comes for other maintenance, you are only a week out from another disruption. I just can't view progress and less disruption as a bad thing. I can't say for sure, without further information, that these carbon alternatives are as effective, but I am looking to find that out.

As for HITH it is more recent articles relating to the dust particles from the carbon. Now in theory this is a non issue if you thoroughly rinse your carbon, but I cannot say that even in the best practices, dust particles could not be missed. Human error exists. And yes HITH has shown strong connections to water conditions and possible links to Hexmita but it is still something we do not fully understand and cases have occurred where an obvious answer was not present. Carbon may have no such link but hypothesis that are not yet proven or disproven must be considered until a statistically significant finding is made one way or the other. I do not really worry about HITH, odds are I will never encounter it, but I can't discredit it yet, more information is needed.

Things to reflect on, but lazy, sorry nope. Maybe for some people that is truth, but can't be generally assumed across the board of people considering alternatives. I am not the best aquarist out there. 10-20 years ago I didn't cycle, research, or quarantine. I never treated my tanks, only the pond. So I am looking to grow now that I am back in the hobby. My tanks may not be stocked to completely mimic a natural environment, I use crashed planes, dragons, castles. And many would judge me for keeping single Angelfish as an ornamental rather than a species tank with a shoal. I keep Cory's with my Kisser, theory is he could eat them, but even my Cory fry get right by him and he does nothing (he will kill anything else though). My fish are well fed on a varied quality diet, they are healthy, and regularly cared for. I observed them twice a day for warning signs, check and maintain my equipment regularly, test weekly, WC weekly, provide (mixed in with my fun decor) plant life, drift wood, and cover. My species have all been heavily research prior to buying as has my equipment. So no again, lazy has nothing to do with it.

I am searching for better. The currently offered chemical alternatives may not be it and I appreciate your input, but I don't believe in pigeon holing myself into tried and true. I trust tried and true, and if they hold their place in the lead I continue with tried and true. But if I find something more valuable out there, it could be the next best thing. Reason for asking people experiences in the first place.