• The SH Membership has gone live. Only SH Members have access to post in the classifieds. All members can view the classifieds. Starting in 2020 only SH Members will be admitted to the annual hunting contest. Current members will need to follow these steps to upgrade: 1. Click on your username 2. Click on Account upgrades 3. Choose SH Member and purchase.
  • We've been working hard the past few weeks to come up with some big changes to our vendor policies to meet the changing needs of our community. Please see the new vendor rules here: Vendor Access Area Rules

Activated Carbon Powder

BassBoysLLP said:
I did an interview with Garrett and Boswell on the DIY sportsman podcast. I haven't done anything with wired to hunt.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

That will be what I was thinking about. I knew it came up on the wired to hunt or sportsmen’s nation RSS feeds...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
g2outdoors said:
Concerning skin rafts... We lose a lot of them during a hunt and they smell like a human. I understand that. But how are they escaping my clothes? Are they sliding through the fabrics? I wear gloves. My pants are tucked into my boots. I wear a hat and face covering. How are those little SRBs escaping???

Sent from my Galaxy S8.
Click to expand...
Skin rafts are constantly leaving the body. Most clothing "breathes". As you move, air moves back and forth across the fabric and along the skin. Depending on the fabric they may exit out openings or they may pass through the fabric. Skin rafts are obviously regularly shed from exposed skin. Rafts leave our body every time we breath. Your body is also a heat source under most conditions outside Georgia and rafts will exit your body on the local thermal at 1 - 3 miles per hour.

The average skin raft is often regarded to be 14 micron. This is the number you will find published in FBI forensic guides and dog tracking literature. In reality, the skin raft size is a near gaussian distribution with rafts both smaller and larger than 14 microns.

The human eye can see particulates down to about 30 microns so most skin rafts can't be seen. If you can see through a fabric, skin rafts can definitely pass through the fabric.

That being said, most outdoor garments made as outerwhere are made to be breathable and water resistant. To do this they push the pore size down enough to allow water vapor to leave yet keep you dry in the rain. I don't know much about of pore size of Gore but I suspect most outerwears do a reasonable good job of limiting skin rafts exiting the body directly through the fabric.

That brings us to exit points and the value of tucking in your pants into your boots. Hands, head, neck all remain as point sources for losing skin rafts. Electrostatic clothing is a means of reducing the number of skin rafts. You will never eliminate all of them but you might eliminate enough to make a difference in your hunts.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
 
This was taken from
cameo.mfa.org/wiki/GORE-TEX
GORE-TEX has pore sizes of up to 0.2 micrometers. It is impermeable to any liquid such as water, solvents, acids, alkalis, bleaches, insecticides as well as bacteria, and viruses. However, it transmits moisture and other vapors. Thus, it is waterproof but breathable.
So it appears that a water droplet is larger than .2 microns and so is the average skin raft. I assume that breathable waterproof clothing should keep rafts contained. What I find interesting in the link above, was that Goretex also prevents bacteria from passing through. We've long been told that bacteria is what our odors are mostly comprised of. That's why most "hunter's soaps" are antibacterial.

So would a base layer of electrostatic clothing followed by a Gore type material, followed by an outer carbon garment, with pants tucked along with sleeves, etc, be the ultimate odor containment system?
The electrostatic layer would hold a certain percentage of rafts, and the gore layer would contain another percentage of the rafts. The carbon outer layer would absorb anything that the other layers couldn't handle. And is it possible that the non-carbon layers would extend the time between when the carbon needs tossed in the dryer? I figure that the less carbon has to absorb (because our other layers prevented most of it from reaching the carbon) the longer and better the carbon would do it's job?? Does that make logical sense?

Could this be a good use for a breathable dry suit? If drysuit gaskets on the neck wrists and ankles can keep water out, why wouldn't they keep skin rafts in?

Hey, I'm still going to attempt to hunt where the wind is in my favor, but in hilly terrain, that's often an obtainable goal. And even if "hunting the wind" can be accomplished, I still hate leaving the residual odor around my stand AND along my access trails.
I believe that a lot of what leads to the "October lull" is nothing more than the deer moving at night encountering our residual odor and learning where to avoid. And with sloppy odor control, the more we use those access routes, and the harder we hunt those stands, the faster and longer those stands will be cold and the more nocturnal our herd becomes.
Odor control is job 1.
 
Allegheny Tom said:
This was taken from
cameo.mfa.org/wiki/GORE-TEX
GORE-TEX has pore sizes of up to 0.2 micrometers. It is impermeable to any liquid such as water, solvents, acids, alkalis, bleaches, insecticides as well as bacteria, and viruses. However, it transmits moisture and other vapors. Thus, it is waterproof but breathable.
So it appears that a water droplet is larger than .2 microns and so is the average skin raft. I assume that breathable waterproof clothing should keep rafts contained. What I find interesting in the link above, was that Goretex also prevents bacteria from passing through. We've long been told that bacteria is what our odors are mostly comprised of. That's why most "hunter's soaps" are antibacterial.

So would a base layer of electrostatic clothing followed by a Gore type material, followed by an outer carbon garment, with pants tucked along with sleeves, etc, be the ultimate odor containment system?
The electrostatic layer would hold a certain percentage of rafts, and the gore layer would contain another percentage of the rafts. The carbon outer layer would absorb anything that the other layers couldn't handle. And is it possible that the non-carbon layers would extend the time between when the carbon needs tossed in the dryer? I figure that the less carbon has to absorb (because our other layers prevented most of it from reaching the carbon) the longer and better the carbon would do it's job?? Does that make logical sense?

Could this be a good use for a breathable dry suit? If drysuit gaskets on the neck wrists and ankles can keep water out, why wouldn't they keep skin rafts in?

Hey, I'm still going to attempt to hunt where the wind is in my favor, but in hilly terrain, that's often an obtainable goal. And even if "hunting the wind" can be accomplished, I still hate leaving the residual odor around my stand AND along my access trails.
I believe that a lot of what leads to the "October lull" is nothing more than the deer moving at night encountering our residual odor and learning where to avoid. And with sloppy odor control, the more we use those access routes, and the harder we hunt those stands, the faster and longer those stands will be cold and the more nocturnal our herd becomes.
Odor control is job 1.
Click to expand...

Where would you get electrostatic undergarment?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Allegheny Tom said:
This was taken from
cameo.mfa.org/wiki/GORE-TEX
GORE-TEX has pore sizes of up to 0.2 micrometers. It is impermeable to any liquid such as water, solvents, acids, alkalis, bleaches, insecticides as well as bacteria, and viruses. However, it transmits moisture and other vapors. Thus, it is waterproof but breathable.
So it appears that a water droplet is larger than .2 microns and so is the average skin raft. I assume that breathable waterproof clothing should keep rafts contained. What I find interesting in the link above, was that Goretex also prevents bacteria from passing through. We've long been told that bacteria is what our odors are mostly comprised of. That's why most "hunter's soaps" are antibacterial.
Click to expand...

Bacteria may not pass through but the odors produced by the bacteria will still readily pass through.

Allegheny Tom said:

So would a base layer of electrostatic clothing followed by a Gore type material, followed by an outer carbon garment, with pants tucked along with sleeves, etc, be the ultimate odor containment system?
Click to expand...
That sounds robust. Key is going to be controlling any breaks in your garment, head, hands, etc.

The ultimate odor containment system is NOT breathable (and miserable). Some components of odor are poorly adsorbed by activated carbon. Even odor components that adsorb well to activated carbon have a small residual. This can be seen in an activated carbon isotherm.
Allegheny Tom said:

And is it possible that the non-carbon layers would extend the time between when the carbon needs tossed in the dryer? I figure that the less carbon has to absorb (because our other layers prevented most of it from reaching the carbon) the longer and better the carbon would do it's job?? Does that make logical sense?
Click to expand...

Almost any layer is going to have have some (maybe minimal) adsorptive capacity. So yes, every additional layer is going to help extend the life of your carbon. However, a relatively high percentage of your garments adsorptive capacity is with the carbon layer.

Also, you obviously want to keep your garments clean. If you accumulate skin rafts, you are accumulating scent. If you take off the garment, the skin rafts will desiccate and the skin rafts will produce less scent. Put the garment back on and begin sweating, you'll reactivate the skin rafts and produce more volatile scent.

Allegheny Tom said:
Could this be a good use for a breathable dry suit? If drysuit gaskets on the neck wrists and ankles can keep water out, why wouldn't they keep skin rafts in?
Click to expand...

Yes. It will be very warm though. I've used Tyvek suits in the pass with good success.
 
TyJ said:
Where would you get electrostatic undergarment?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Bass addressed that in a previous post but I haven't followed up on it yet. Appatantly, there are some sources...not "camo", "hunting" clothes, but camo base layers are a bit stupid IMO. They make about as much sense as camo flashlights and camo knives.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
 
Allegheny Tom said:
Bass addressed that in a previous post but I haven't followed up on it yet. Appatantly, there are some sources...not "camo", "hunting" clothes, but camo base layers are a bit stupid IMO. They make about as much sense as camo flashlights and camo knives.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
It will definitely require some digging. It's easier to find split microfiber fabric than garments.

Sent from my SM-G900V using Tapatalk
 
Allegheny Tom said:
Bass addressed that in a previous post but I haven't followed up on it yet. Appatantly, there are some sources...not "camo", "hunting" clothes, but camo base layers are a bit stupid IMO. They make about as much sense as camo flashlights and camo knives.

Sent from my SM-G935V using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Except that I often use camo base layers as my actual shirt or as a camo extension when I wear shorts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I hate to say it but get a plastic suit. Put it on under your your ScentLok. You may shed a few lbs. especially on a hot day.
 
Carbon in the 325 mesh range is normally small enough. While the aquatic or granular is better than nothing, the powder is more ideal because it contains way more surface area. The carbon powder also helps absorb moisture if/when you sweat too. If you don’t want the dirty after look, zeolite is a great option also. I generally use the zeolite on layers against my skin and carbon powder on the remaining layers out. While we all know we cant eliminate our scent, the entire goal is to reduce it so the animals think we are way further away than we actually are. And the reality of it all is that : how we handle our cloths between leaving the tree stand and our next set is more important than anything we do, anything we can sprinkle on it or any type of clothing we choose.
 
Last edited:
this was an absolutely fascinating thread!!! For me, i typically use a bee smoker. smoke myself then all my gear and clothing. works great except if you sweat a lot. so ive been using activated charcoal in my boots and "other places" were sweat gathers. Its been pretty danged succesful. During a spot and stalk that lasted 45 minutes i had an older doe bed down 8 feet from me. totally spoiled my stalk but it was enlightning. she periodically sniffed the air and would look around but couldnt pin point anything and never became alarmed. Of course, i had to sit there for 2 damned hours waiting for her to wander off.
 
wvfarrier said:
this was an absolutely fascinating thread!!! For me, i typically use a bee smoker. smoke myself then all my gear and clothing. works great except if you sweat a lot. so ive been using activated charcoal in my boots and "other places" were sweat gathers. Its been pretty danged succesful. During a spot and stalk that lasted 45 minutes i had an older doe bed down 8 feet from me. totally spoiled my stalk but it was enlightning. she periodically sniffed the air and would look around but couldnt pin point anything and never became alarmed. Of course, i had to sit there for 2 damned hours waiting for her to wander off.
Click to expand...

Personally, I think smoke works great as both a scent eliminator and cover scent and I think your approach of using both smoke and carbon sounds good. I only stopped using smoke because my hunting buddy didn’t like how I made his truck smell like smoked brisket!!!!!
 
I've been using activated carbon since finding it at a show sold by Dr Jim as scentbuster dust. I like to keep my rubber boots in a garbage bag with the powder until I get to my hunting site. I can't recall any instance witnessing deer picking up the scent of my trail since using it, which was a regular occurrence previous to using the activated carbon. I think Dr. Jim has been using zeolite powder for the same purpose lately without the mess.
https://extremedeerhabitat.com/stuff-i-use/
http://www.refreshinglyfree.com/Zeolite-Bulk-Granules-25-pound-box_2
 
RainingArrows said:
I've been using activated carbon since finding it at a show sold by Dr Jim as scentbuster dust. I like to keep my rubber boots in a garbage bag with the powder until I get to my hunting site. I can't recall any instance witnessing deer picking up the scent of my trail since using it, which was a regular occurrence previous to using the activated carbon. I think Dr. Jim has been using zeolite powder for the same purpose lately without the mess.
https://extremedeerhabitat.com/stuff-i-use/
http://www.refreshinglyfree.com/Zeolite-Bulk-Granules-25-pound-box_2
Click to expand...

I really like the idea of keeping your boots in a garbage bag with the powder. Im stealing that. Thanks!
 
drew said:
I really like the idea of keeping your boots in a garbage bag with the powder. Im stealing that. Thanks!
Click to expand...
I also like to keep any clothes/gear that's not scentlok in a Rubbermaid tote adding a little fresh carbon powder every week or so. It can be messy, but much cheaper than buying scent eliminator gear that's available on the market.
 
drew13 said:
Personally, I think smoke works great as both a scent eliminator and cover scent and I think your approach of using both smoke and carbon sounds good. I only stopped using smoke because my hunting buddy didn’t like how I made his truck smell like smoked brisket!!!!!
Click to expand...
The deer dont spook from the smell of smoke?? I would think they would suspect fire or something
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top