Are there chloramines in Dublin water ?

Anyone know what is in Dublin water

A forum full of fishkeepers and nobody knows what they are putting in their tank ?

Yeah it seems most of the action is in the trading section the past while. Personally Ive never tested for chloramines as the dechlorinator I use gets rid of them as well as chlorine and metals etc. There are test kits out there for sure, just never saw the point in buying one. Although, more fool me for believing whats stated on the bottle. Ill be investing in one when I set up the salty next week...taking no chances there.

Jay

Damian the best thing to do is have your water tested.
I dont know what area you are living in or were your water supply comes from so ring 01-2220600 and tell them there is a bad taste off your water. They will usually have someone out to test your water the following working day.
Then those testes go back to the lab and a full analysis is done.
A copy of this is then sent out to you but you may have to chase them to send it out to you.
IME the longer it takes to get these results the more the results are doctored to show they are within EU guidelines.
Any results sent to me have shown no chloramine. But any independent EU tests show there is chloramine used.
I dont know why they hide this because they are allowed to use it.

I used to keep contact with one of the guys in the lab and one in the office, both have unofficially admitted there is chloramine used but wont put it on paper. I dont know why?
I havent been able to get through to either of these since Christmas. I think i have been black balled for annoying them to much.

dont mention you want the water tested for your fish. They are only concerned if it is fit for human consumption.

platty252 wrote:

Then those testes go back to the lab and a full analysis is done.
quote]

that sounds sore.

like yourself jay im going to the salty side, rocks going in on monday!

but i would be terrified to use tap water even though i'd be treating it i just dunno about it ill be buying my water until im able to make it myself


maybe im being silly:laugh:

@ John,

Thanks for the vote of confidence man, I was pleasantly suprised when I read your post. I gotta say, I love this forum. Its people here like yourself that encouraged me to stick it out in this hobby when things went south. I would be happy to share my experience of setting up this tank on the forum for all to see, warts and all. Without doubt I will definately need advice and pointers during this process and hopefully any of the mistakes I make will help people planning similar projects avoid them.

@ Damian,

I hope you find the answers to your questions soon. If you do, be sure to let us know what the situation is like where you live as Ive heard that the water supply is in a bit of a state lately and that info is worth having for sure.


Jay

Stephen wrote:

like yourself jay im going to the salty side, rocks going in on monday!

but i would be terrified to use tape water even though i'd be treating it i just dunno about it ill be buying my water until im able to make it myself


maybe im being silly:laugh:

Awesome!! Great knowing someone else is just starting out here also. I totally agree with your plans not to use tap water. I have RO stockpiled for the initial fill myself and wont be putting tap water near this system. Best of luck man ,

Jay

you too man!

oh you still interested in those rocks?

still have em

Stephen wrote:

you too man!

oh you still interested in those rocks?

still have em

Absolutley!! I completely forgot about them. Up to my eyes here . I just noticed on another post that you work in what used to be wackers. If you like I can meet you there as Ive not seen the place. If thats not convienient pm me with your details and Ill try to get to ya during the week.

Jay

no problemo!
thats handy for me ill bring the rocks in tomorrow

Sound, cheers man. Ill see ya then. Probably in the early afternoon.

Jay

Damian_Ireland wrote:

A forum full of fishkeepers and nobody knows what they are putting in their tank ?

Hi Damian,

And some of us biochemists/toxicologists as well.

When I was just outside Bray, some of my water was fed from Stilorgan; and my next-door neighbour (50 feet away) had all of their supplied from a different source. So, the answer may depend upon where you live.
The effective residual amount of chloramines is also pH based.

As with ViperBot, I don’t bother testing the water for Chloramines as I use AquaSafe…..it does a pretty good job of removing them.
Hence, one reason that I suggest using such dechlorinators and maybe even slow filtration over activated carbon.

The biggest problem that I see with chloramines is if using a R.O. without adequately maintained carbon filters of low peroxide number.
If low peroxide-number activated carbon filters are used with a slow trickle rate with a pH over 7, then there is a very good chance of removing all significant chloramines.

So, all in all, and knowing that chloramines have been added to drinking water since the early 20th century (maybe not here though), then good water conditioning should remove any real concerns over chloramines.

I don't see any problems with chloramines for drinking purposes.....but there are for fish and dialysis machines.

I'm not sure why water-suppliers are a little coy about stating the use of chloramines, as their use (although not as good a disinfectant as chlorine is) reduces the potential for trihalomethanes (as produced with chlorine alone). But, then are water-suppliers also adding ammonia after the addition of chloramines? Now that is worth asking.

Ian

igmillichip wrote:

The effective residual amount of chloramines is also pH based.
Ian can you explain this a little more?

The biggest problem that I see with chloramines is if using a R.O. without adequately maintained carbon filters of low peroxide number.
If low peroxide-number activated carbon filters are used with a slow trickle rate with a pH over 7, then there is a very good chance of removing all significant chloramines.
[color=]What is a peroxide number or an example of a low peroxide number?
I use RO but the flow is not that slow (1.5bar). Sediment and carbon filters are well maintained but there is no info on carbon filters regarding peroxide number. The pH going in to the RO unit is usually above 7.[/color]

I'm not sure why water-suppliers are a little coy about stating the use of chloramines, as their use (although not as good a disinfectant as chlorine is) reduces th[color=][/color]e potential for trihalomethanes (as produced with chlorine alone). But, then are water-suppliers also adding ammonia after the addition of chloramines? Now that is worth asking.Ian

Yes it dosent make sense why they wont admit (on paper) they use chloramines.

Trihalomethanes? I have tried looking this up but as usual i got a bit lost in the info. Dose it help dissolve organic compounds?

What would happen if they were adding Ammonia after chloramines? I will put this question to them next time a get them on the phone.

Sorry for all the questions Ian my curiosity just gets the better of me.

As usual, I wrote it late at night and hence may not have explained all of it.

pH.......the basic method of making chloramines is to dissolve chlorine in water with ammonia.
Dissolved chlorine will react with water to form hypochlorous acid (that has a pKa of about 7.5) and hydrochloric acid. The hypochlorous acid and hydrochloric acid dissociation is pH dependant.
When reacted with ammonia, the solution will form the monochloramine, dichloramines, and trichloramines in varying amounts according to pH, and relative amounts of chlorine and ammonia added.

Hence, the amount of chloramines is pH dependant (without going too far into the science at this time of night).

I had stated my concerns over RO. Now, there does seem to be a problem there. The reaction catalysed by low peroxide number carbon seems to proceed best with a pH of about 7.5 or slightly higher. BUT....and this is the but I didn't mention. The catalysed reaction over carbon (a multi-stage process) produces ammonia.
That has to be removed by the RO membrane....but if the pH is high, then the pH-indiced increased pore size of the membrane tends to have a reduced 'rejection' (ie molecules can get through). Now, here is a problem.....monochloramine (the most common one, and the one most predominant at pH of 7.5) is small and will also pass the membrane and potentially damage the membrane if the Carbon hasn't removed it.

Now, it acually gets quite complex at this stage. But, the bottom line is if the carbon filter is not maintained then the RO unit is basically useless against chloramines.

Peroxide number is one of the measured used for catalytic activity. It measures the rate of peroxide breakdown...and the lower the number, the better the catalytic activity. A good cataltic carbon should be around 10 (or less), but normal carbon is around 100.

THM.....trihalomethanes.....probably the reason for water suppliers not to use chlorine alone. Chlorine can react with dissolved organic matter to form THMs....these have been suspected as being either carcinogenic or cancer forming. Chloramines tend to reduce the formation of THMs....but chloramines are not as good a disinfectant as is chlorine.
It may be found that addition of ammonia after formation of chloramines will increase the disinfectant properties....but then that is additional ammonia to the water systems: not good.

I also mentioned 'chemical dechlorinators'.....and I was specific with naming AquaSafe.
The usual thiosulphate-only dechlorinators are no use against Chloramines....well they rid the chloramine, but one of the products is ammonia.
Some dechlorinators have compounds such as a hydroxymethanesulphonate....this will effectively bind the ammonia (for want of a better word).

I hope I've not made too many typos.

ian

You lost me at hello:laugh:

Ian i think i should explain my science background.
Within the first year of secondary school i was chucked out of science for trying to make science "fun"
The only science i've learnt is from keeping fish.

I can grasp some of what you are saying but not all.
It's late(or early) but i will be back with more questions i'm afraid.

Soz about that.

From reading your posts, you have a good grasp of the science bits.
So fishkeeping has served a second purpose.

Funnily enough, I was always into chemistry....but fishkeeping help give me that extra edge at school.
When at secondary school, fishkeeping had already emphasised the concepts of pH and Hardness and ammonia reactions etc (and one of the first topics started at secondary school was soaps and water hardness!....and I owned ion-exchangers).

So I’d say that fish-keeping was a damn good hobby for me as a youngster.

I often say to reptile keeping persons that fish keepers have been willing to get into the science quite a bit......and that maybe more reptile keepers should do the same.

Anyway, if I have some time on my hand to jot down something more structured that a simple forum post.

In the meantime, any questions? fire away, and I'll see if I can explain.

Diagrams are always good as well.

I no longer use RO systems, and so can't do any tests on some of the newer carbons with respect to testing how to break an RO unit.


ian

I have done bit of reading but quickly get lost in the scientific lingo.
Dose this seem right. The higher the pH the less hypochlorous acid there is in the water so it would take longer to oxidize any organisms in the water.
If the pH was high would there be more chlorine/Ammonia added to the water?
If the pH was low <7 would this mean it would be pointless adding Ammonia? Or will Ammonium do the same job?
What dose pKa stand for?

igmillichip wrote:

I had stated my concerns over RO. Now, there does seem to be a problem there. The reaction catalysed by low peroxide number carbon seems to proceed best with a pH of about 7.5 or slightly higher. BUT....and this is the but I didn't mention. The catalysed reaction over carbon (a multi-stage process) produces ammonia.
That has to be removed by the RO membrane....but if the pH is high, then the pH-indiced increased pore size of the membrane tends to have a reduced 'rejection' (ie molecules can get through). Now, here is a problem.....monochloramine (the most common one, and the one most predominant at pH of 7.5) is small and will also pass the membrane and potentially damage the membrane if the Carbon hasn't removed it.ian

Dose this only happen with GAC filters?
I cant get my head around how a high pH can increase the pore size of a membrane.
If you were to only answer one question will you answer this one. I just cant figure it out.

Thanks, Darren

Hi Darren,

The actual science behind all of this is quite complex.
It is not just water chemistry or normal 'bulk-phase' chemistry and physics that we are talking about. This subject brings in 'surface chemistry' and other things.

To do this justice, there needs to be a simple guide to RO but one that is scientific....not an easy task.

I'll answer a few quickie questions here.....and maybe should do a longer article on this.

the effect of pH on hypochlorous acid in the context that I was originally refering to is to do with which type of chloramine is produced....mono-, di- or tri-chloramine.

GAC.....really this mainly to do with the size of the particles. GAC gives a lower surface area for adsorption or chemisorption than dust a fine dust-like carbon, but GAC particles allow a better dissociation of the products (release of gases).


Pore size......there is still some research needed on this.
The effcet of pH and ammonia on pore swelling depends upon the exact material used in membranes.
In general, there seems to be an increase in pore size in the presence of high pH. Other things also tend to increase pore size eg ammonia or a synergistic effect of salt and high pH (but all depends on membrane material).
The effect of high pH on some membranes is not really noticable.

How might pH affect pore size in a membrane? the answer is almost the same as how pH affects many macromolecules in biology. And this is related to that value called the pKa of a particular part of the macromolecule.

Changes in molecular 3-D structure caused by pH is exploited to a great extent in biological systems. Some of these changes result in a hole opening up in the biological molecule for something to pass through (or a hole close to stop something passing into that hole). Very important process.

Say, that a membrane filtration film (any membrane, not just RO) has an acidic group in its make-up (say acetic acid as with an acetate film).
Then at pHs above the pKa the acetate groups will have a negative charge......they may undergo a slight spatial rearrangement (eg because of repulsion or increased hydration shields etc etc) and thus form larger pores. At acid pH, the acetic acid part will tend towards being neutrally charged because it will tend to accept a proton (H+)…and thus there may be less swelling of the pores.

I’d need to do some pictures and be specific about the exact material in question to give a comprehensive answer….but the above may suffice as a simple model. Remembering that some membranes resist swelling better than others.


Now, there is a problem for RO: Ammonia.
Carbon will not really remove the ammonia; ammonia may help swell the membrane pores and thus help in facilitating its own transport throught the membrane.
The membrane itself will not remove ammonia even if there is no swelling.

But, an RO membrane will remove ammonium. The pKa of ammonia is about 9.2 in water.
So, addition of an acid will form ammonium.

Hence, having an acid water will not only abrogate swelling or pores, but will facilitate the removal of ammonia.

Also, there is the other problem of calcium carbonate scaling….at higher pHs there could be an increase in carbonate scaling. But, then there is a problem as adding too much of the wrong acid may result insoluble calcium salts. That would equal a wrecked membrane.

pKa query…….pKa is a logarithmic measure (as is pH a log measure) of the acid dissociation constant. (It is not the same as pH by the way.)
The acid dissociation constant is the relative proportions of a starting and end products in a reaction at equilibrium.
It is a measure of the strength of an acid in solution.
If the pKa is high then the weaker the acid (eg ammonia); if it is low then the stronger the acid (eg acetic acid).
But….as usual, things are not as simple as that in reality.

From here on I would need different fonts to explain more fully.