nc_nutcase;4190425; said:
I'm familiar with the term "chemcial filtration" to refer to types of media that will absorb chemicals from the water...
It is best to offer mechanical filtration as the first stage of filtration. This will prevent other forms of media from clogging and becoming less efficient...
The chemical media or biological media can come next, it really doesn't matter. Some will suggest placing bio second is best to avoid bacteria from colonizing in the chemical media, but good luck convincing bacteria not to move in despite not titling it 'bio media' (bacteria will grow all over).
Activated Charcoal/Carbon is the most common form of chemical media. Yet several manufacturer's make an array of other products that work in similar ways to remove a wider range of pollutants.
In freshwater systems, 'chemical filtration' is not often emphasized as it is quite rare to have a problem with 'hazardous chemicals' in the water supply. Although some of the other products will not only remove 'chemicals' but will also remove organic by products of fish waste.
I personally discourage the use of products that claim to reduce/remove ammonia. Healthy biological filtration will reduce ammonia into nitrates on it's own and using a product to remove ammonia forces you to be 100% dependant on that product for your fish's health/survival. If you mistakenly forget to replace the product your fish will suffer. Also this forces you to spend money on such a product ongoingly.
This is in no way to discourage all manufacturer's other chemcial medias though...
Sorry for the delay in answering you on this post, but I have to say I'm quite impressed with your knowledge and personal experience with/of filtration systems. Or that is to say, what works best for you.
I just spent the entire day looking for and reading 7 of your threads. Unfortunately, I couldn't find the one I was looking for, (Bio Force 2000 Pressurized Pond Filter). But let us get back to the topic of discussion here.
When I was referring to "Hazardous Chemicals", I should have been more specific in saying nitrites and nitrates. My appologies to you and others on this thread. I had not given thought to using synthetic (man made) chemical medias to reduce/remove nitrites and nitrates, from freshwater environments. I made this decission before reading your threads, do to some past experience and cost efficiency is needed here as well.
And after reading your thread on the importance of Bio-media, your ideas, train of thought and encouragments of the subject could not be more enforced on the topic.
In your discussion on Bio-media, I was understanding that in the process AFTER the mechanical filtration stage the water continues to flow and then comes in contact with the (BB) beneficial bacteria. At this point during this contact of the water with the BB, the nitrites were disolved by the BB and transformed into nitrates. The nitrates were then eliminated through the maintenance of fresh water changes. (Let me know if I'm wrong here. I no professor here at this.)
With this in mind, it would eliminate a stage of chemical filtration in a w/d (sump) system, would it not? Hence the meaning of my earlier statement of chemical filtration being incorporated with the bilogical-media stage. I guess my terminology should have been more detailed and direct.
But in my exploration of what different filtration systems do and which are the best for me to use for a 130 gal., I know for certain I do not want to use a canister type (e.g. Fluval FX5). Maybe an HOB, an "in line system" or a w/d (sump) system. Just not convinced yet as to which one is best for me. Any plausible suggestions would help right about now. It is just to easy to get caught up in the hype of this system or that system. Every one seems to be describing the water, and I'm over here drowning. Hurry up and throw me a life jacket as I can only tread water for just so long. What to do?
Spot on...