robert
Valuable Member
Hi AquaCraft,
I think everyone would agree that the quality, composition and consistency of the salt we use is critical to successfully maintaining healthy systems. The same is true for the water, supplements, media and food we employ.
I for one don't doubt for a moment that there are companies in this industry that do a poor job auditing their quality and that from time to time, even some of the better known companies, put out contaminated or downright deadly product.
A recent regrettable example was the recall of carbon contaminated with copper and other metals this past spring. While this particular company owned up to the mistake, you have to wonder how often this actually happens. I know I've encountered suspect additives which seemed to have unexpected negative effects and the odd lot of salt which didn't mix properly or had levels way out of range. Usually its alk or calcium, but if these are out of range and the manufacturer didn't catch it, then IMO, the same variability likely exists in other aspects of the mix as well.
With this said however, I have not ever personally encountered salt which I suspected of having copper levels elevated to the ranges indicated in your post, nor do I know of anyone who has. Maybe I've been lucky, or maybe things have improved since the studies leading to the s-15 report were conducted.
I'm aware of some of the controversy surrounding this report and I find most of the criticisms unsubstantiated, unfounded and unfortunate. Speaking for myself, I find little wrong with it except it's age. It is my understanding that the tests were conducted in the early 1990's and are now 20years old. I also see nothing wrong with the inland report, except again, its age. Its now ten years old.
I believe the s-15 reports demonstrates the state of salt manufacture at the time it was completed. I have no reason to doubt it. I also think things have come a long way in 20 years, if for no other reason, than the Internet. Manufacturers know that any defect such as the Cu levels you cite would destroy their product reputation in the marketplace over night.
Do I believe all the stats on my bucketof salt? No, and I'll keep that little piece of poly-filter floating around in my mixing tub just in case.
Do I think that copper build up totoxic levels in our systems? Yes, but I think its less a function of the levels in the salt and more a function of inappropriate substrate. We continually pour copper in minute amounts into our tanks and it doesn't stay in the water. Its built into the precipitates, rock andsand. Why would I suspect this? Oolitic sands - precipitated in pristine environments contain Cu at the levels approaching 40ppm -40,000ppb! If it can achieve these levels with the Cu concentration found in NSW - I wonder how high it can get in the substrate of our tanks with the levels of Cu in our salt mixes and additives?
I think everyone would agree that the quality, composition and consistency of the salt we use is critical to successfully maintaining healthy systems. The same is true for the water, supplements, media and food we employ.
I for one don't doubt for a moment that there are companies in this industry that do a poor job auditing their quality and that from time to time, even some of the better known companies, put out contaminated or downright deadly product.
A recent regrettable example was the recall of carbon contaminated with copper and other metals this past spring. While this particular company owned up to the mistake, you have to wonder how often this actually happens. I know I've encountered suspect additives which seemed to have unexpected negative effects and the odd lot of salt which didn't mix properly or had levels way out of range. Usually its alk or calcium, but if these are out of range and the manufacturer didn't catch it, then IMO, the same variability likely exists in other aspects of the mix as well.
With this said however, I have not ever personally encountered salt which I suspected of having copper levels elevated to the ranges indicated in your post, nor do I know of anyone who has. Maybe I've been lucky, or maybe things have improved since the studies leading to the s-15 report were conducted.
I'm aware of some of the controversy surrounding this report and I find most of the criticisms unsubstantiated, unfounded and unfortunate. Speaking for myself, I find little wrong with it except it's age. It is my understanding that the tests were conducted in the early 1990's and are now 20years old. I also see nothing wrong with the inland report, except again, its age. Its now ten years old.
I believe the s-15 reports demonstrates the state of salt manufacture at the time it was completed. I have no reason to doubt it. I also think things have come a long way in 20 years, if for no other reason, than the Internet. Manufacturers know that any defect such as the Cu levels you cite would destroy their product reputation in the marketplace over night.
Do I believe all the stats on my bucketof salt? No, and I'll keep that little piece of poly-filter floating around in my mixing tub just in case.
Do I think that copper build up totoxic levels in our systems? Yes, but I think its less a function of the levels in the salt and more a function of inappropriate substrate. We continually pour copper in minute amounts into our tanks and it doesn't stay in the water. Its built into the precipitates, rock andsand. Why would I suspect this? Oolitic sands - precipitated in pristine environments contain Cu at the levels approaching 40ppm -40,000ppb! If it can achieve these levels with the Cu concentration found in NSW - I wonder how high it can get in the substrate of our tanks with the levels of Cu in our salt mixes and additives?
Last edited:
after reading many articles Seachemcopisorb may be a potential solution to the problem. I want to hear from those that had issues and those that have experience using this product.
