Can cheap carbon cause algae problems?

  • Thread starter Thread starter carlson
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users None

carlson

Well-Known Member
View Badges
Joined
May 17, 2014
Messages
501
Reaction score
187
Location
Albany, Ga
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I bought some Marineland activated carbon after never using carbon in my tank before, only phosguard. I didn't need it, I just figured I would after being motivated to after watching some BRS videos. I through some in a bag and in the sump, and in a couple of days I had some algae blooming on the glass and spots of red slime.
 
I'll also point out that I've had a some algae growing on corals and my calcium and kh started dropping faster than normal
 
I believe I red somewhere that Randy said he used the Marineland Black Diamond for years before he recently switched to BRS Rox. Not sure if Marineland makes a cheaper brand or not though.
 
I've heard of carbon helping some kinds of bacteria grow, but your problem seems a bit odd. Did you stop using phosguard? When I went from phosguard to carbon, I noticed algae growth. It was from phosphate, not the carbon though.
 
The word thing is that I have no detectable phosphate. I've always used phosguard an everyone I test for phosphate nothing shows up. The only possible thong I can think of is adding carbon and I did keep the phosguard
 
You might need someone with more experience with this then. I've never heard of carbon causing algae. Dosing carbon(vinegar, ethanol) does cause some forms like cyano.


Make sure you didn't have anything die in the system. It could be something you didn't stir a certain area sand bed, kill off inverts or fish.
 
Hmm didn't hear the post..
Carbon will NOT cause algae to grow.
Well unless its been in a reactor for 4 months lol
 
The only differences with types of carbon is how well it absorbs. I would guess something else is going on in your tank.

Note in mainland carbon. The base carbon they offer is very ineffective and its absorption rate is horrendous compared to other types of carbon. Black diamond is much better than the base but I still recommend using rox carbon. Highly absorbant and very low dust.
 
Depending on how long you had gone without carbon, the tank water may have yellowed, and suddenly adding carbon can this increase the light level, which might possibly have helped the algae. It may also be coincidence.

FWIW, I prefer ROX carbon over Marineland Black Diamond (which I used for years) because the ROX is acid washed, reducing dust which itself may cause problems (but not algae).
 
FWIW, some folks will claim that some types of carbon add phosphate, and it is true that it can add a small amount, but usually vastly less than you feed each day, making it unlikely to be driving an algae issue.
 
a full tank shot would xfer lots of detail about algae origins, got a pic?
 
I can add a little bit of first hand info about the carbon themselves. I just recently, as in 2 days ago, finished the last of my Marineland Diamond and swapped to the BRS ROX. I always just figured, "Ya know, it's carbon, it has a specific job, no big deal." I basically switched because I already had a BRS order I could include it on, and noticed all of the great reviews of it. The product description makes some claims about it making me coffee in the morning and even scrambling eggs, so I figured I would give it a shot.

Typically when I would refill my reactor I had to drain about 1.5-2 gallons of water through the new carbon before it would look, to my eye, crystal clear. When I added the ROX, I literally flowed about half a gallon through my reactor and into a bucket and probably didn't need to flow it for that long. I actually even double checked my reactor to make sure water was making contact with the carbon and not just flowing up on the outside of it, and sure enough it was. Whether or not it works better/longer in my tank will remain to be seen, but I can say I was definitely impressed by the cleanliness.
 
The carbon would have stripped the yellow color\ organics from the water and the light level would have increased. But you put the carbon in a bag and that is considered a passive way of using carbon, Vs water being forced to flow through it. Passive will strip things more slowly so it could be coincidence. Cheap carbon does leach phosphates into the water but at low levels.

Did you do anything else when you added the carbon?
 
po4 is assumed to be the cause of all algae problems, by many, why would adjusting light matter if po4 w was the original limiter? if nutrients indeed are the cause of all algae problems, we're not through phosphate hunting I'd think.

many problem algae threads start with people already using po4 controls, curious as to other details here
 
Last edited:
po4 is assumed to be the cause of all algae problems, by many, why would adjusting light matter if po4 w was the original limiter? if nutrients indeed are the cause of all algae problems, we're not through phosphate hunting I'd think.

many problem algae threads start with people already using po4 controls, curious as to other details here

None of us know what was limiting algae in this tank prior to the outbreak. :)

That said, regardless of what may or may not have been limiting in the past in any given outbreak, one can frequently make phosphate limiting by reducing it adequately. That doesn't mean it is always the best plan, however, but in a reef it frequently is (along with herbivores).
 
I worry about over bleaching when hunting for it too harshly, after having already started at least some controls.
its true we dont have solid readings or pics yet, they w help


since changing the carbon was the action that seemed to correlate w the algae, it seemed to have been limited alreadyish
need em pics
 

IF YOU HAD TO TAKE A REEFING EXAM, WOULD YOU PASS?

  • Yes!

    Votes: 32 45.7%
  • Not yet, but I have one that I want to buy in mind!

    Votes: 9 12.9%
  • No.

    Votes: 26 37.1%
  • Other (please explain).

    Votes: 3 4.3%

New Posts

Back
Top