I personally have noticed water quality issues (as far as clarity is concerned) when not running carbon. I have had no bad experiences with running it. So on that alone, I will always run it for that reason.

I think that if it is regularily changed out, and used in a reactor, the benefits are obvious.

I think a lot of issues come about when people run the same carbon all the time in media bags which just collect detritus, and cause spikes nitrates or phosphates. Changing it out regularily, and using it in a reactor has benefits that I enjoy having in my tanks.

Is it nessessary? No. Does it have visible benefits? Yes.

Good carbon? :lol: Yes lets discuss the benefits of using a product but only if that product is good, and by good it will only do good and not cause any issues.

This is a theoretical discussion on the use of carbon. Fine, you voted, you don't like carbon. Ok, got it.
THIS particular thread is about the good carbon. I only use good carbon, therefore I run it 24/7 and it's awesome. Now we can let others give their thoughts.

But if it can be demonstrated that carbon removes compounds that otherwise cannot be removed by skimming or water changes, then it is providing a function that is helping a closed system exist in good health for longer. Claiming that it's pointless to run things on the hopes it helps promote longer term health, on the basis that "something else will ruin it for you in the meantime" is like saying go ahead and enjoy an unhealthy lifestyle because who knows maybe you'll die in a car accident. It may be a technically true statement but that doesn't make it the best advice.

I take the viewpoint that there are certain best practices. To me, for the reasons that are outlined nicely in the link I put up earlier, I do consider carbon use a best practice approach. In this case I don't consider it optional whatsoever. I know it's providing a function that serves to keep the system at optimal health.

No this is typical Brad ignorance. Trying to globally disregard a perfectly logical reason why not to use carbon based on actual fact and previous experience from many members here for the pure reason you don't agree.

Nothing to see here folks, move along....

the only thing i got from this thread is i was right and carbon in not essential to running a system, its helps sure and MAY even save your tank someday...but it could also ruin it too.

so with that right there i dont run carbon nor will i unless an emergency arrives in which case i have carbon and a reactor on standby...god forbid :)

after having a look at my tank it seems everything is happy, no horrible contaminants or old tank syndrome. my water is clear enough for me and im not trying to sue kent for garbage carbon....

at the end of the day im happy and my tank is healthy....ill let you know when it crashes then everyone can say " told you to run carbon"

I also learnt a valuable lesson, one that could change everything.

Only use good things and everything will be awesome :lol: Wish I thought of that.

has a tank ever crashed because it ran carbon: YES
has a tank ever crashed because it didn't run carbon: YES
has a tank ever crashed because it used bad salt: YES
has a tank ever crashed because it used good salt: YES
has a tank ever crashed because it was totally awesome: YES
has a tank ever crashed because a baby kola bear farted : YES

So, what I got out of this thread is that I should just pack it in now because my tank is going to crash at any moment (again). :cry:

Brad.. step away from the button..

http://idontbreak.files.wordpress.co...09/dogtags.jpg