Re: [RML] Re: Filtering tap water (was unhappy xmas)

Chuck Gadd (cgadd at cfxc.com)
Thu, 28 Dec 2000 19:11:08 -0700

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Ken Brook: "[RML] Moving to the New Year for a change ..."
Previous message: Harro Hieronimus: "AW: [RML] Re: Filtering tap water (was unhappy xmas)"
Maybe in reply to: Murray Lalor: "[RML] Re: Filtering tap water (was unhappy xmas)"
Next in thread: Phil: "Re: [RML] Re: Filtering tap water (was unhappy xmas)"

PETER.UNMACK at ASU.Edu wrote:
>
> Yes, it deals with chloramines (Phoenix water is full of it). If it does
> leave any free ammonia then it has never been a problem with anyone I've known
> who uses it.

I'm not disputing your success, but sodium thiosulfate only deals with the
chlorine portion, leaving free ammonia. If you were to do a 100% water change,
then you'd end up with a little under 1ppm ammonia on average. And beware
that at certain times of the year, water treatment plants will occasionally
increase the amount of chloramine added, resulting in more free ammonia.

--
Chuck Gadd

Next message: Ken Brook: "[RML] Moving to the New Year for a change ..."
Previous message: Harro Hieronimus: "AW: [RML] Re: Filtering tap water (was unhappy xmas)"
Maybe in reply to: Murray Lalor: "[RML] Re: Filtering tap water (was unhappy xmas)"
Next in thread: Phil: "Re: [RML] Re: Filtering tap water (was unhappy xmas)"