Jump to content

Question about city water treatment


Leo2o915
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Administrators

Many cities are moving to chloramine from chlorine because they can better manage it in their system and it is more stable. It’s not as easy to get rid of for us fishkeepers though. I have not heard of anything else that cities are moving to. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Zenzo said:

Many cities are moving to chloramine from chlorine because they can better manage it in their system and it is more stable. It’s not as easy to get rid of for us fishkeepers though. I have not heard of anything else that cities are moving to. 

Been hearing they moving completely away it’s called Bromine I think 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fish Folk said:

What’s replacing chlorine / chloramine?

Any news sources?

Ozone has been suggested. Sometimes huge UV sterilizers.

Curious where you’re hearing the info from.

I’ve heard it’s bromine or however you spell it 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Administrators

I'm not sure. If it's bromine, I suppose we'll all be learning together. The good news is, if something like this happens, all the biggest companies will solve it first. They've got the most to loose. Can you imagine Petcos and Petsmarts, having 30 stores in a state, all of a sudden can't sell any fish stuff. I assume there must be a way to counteract it to be safe. As other pets such as dogs, cats, birds, reptiles etc rely on water. Also if that water goes into natural water ways it can't kill the natural fauna.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I highly doubt it would be bromine, much more $$ than current methods and more corrosive than chlorine/chloramjne (pipe killer).

I wouldn’t think it would be ozone either, as this process produces several harmful by products.

The Dutch have been using UV, in conjunction with settlement methods, for over a decade now.  It’s very safe and effective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cory said:

I'm not sure. If it's bromine, I suppose we'll all be learning together. The good news is, if something like this happens, all the biggest companies will solve it first. They've got the most to loose. Can you imagine Petcos and Petsmarts, having 30 stores in a state, all of a sudden can't sell any fish stuff. I assume there must be a way to counteract it to be safe. As other pets such as dogs, cats, birds, reptiles etc rely on water. Also if that water goes into natural water ways it can't kill the natural fauna.

What do you think would be better ? Is it less harmful to fish the chlorine and chloramine ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, tonyjuliano said:

I highly doubt it would be bromine, much more $$ than current methods and more corrosive than chlorine/chloramjne (pipe killer).

I wouldn’t think it would be ozone either, as this process produces several harmful by products.

The Dutch have been using UV, in conjunction with settlement methods, for over a decade now.  It’s very safe and effective.

I thought bromine is safer for the pipes and less affect 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...