limestone rock

[Anonymous]

:roll: here we go again...

sompa,

Before you take any advice from BBob, I suggest you do a search of his many posts on this board, and other reef sites on the web. His methods and advice are countercurrent to accepted practices in reefkeeping. He also couples his wrong advice with dubious reasoning that is frankly misleading unless you have the knowledge to see the holes in his arguments.

All that having been said, his tank speaks for itself in terms of the results he obtains.

 

[Anonymous]

Sompa

Now you have all the arguments.

So you can judge for yourself.

FWIW the blue hippo tang was 3/4" long 4 years ago.

.02

 

[Anonymous]

Nice to see how much it's improved since 2004 .

 

[blackcloudmedia]

Regardless of any data the fact is copper is deadly to organisms in the reef tank, and even if the plants consume it, the copper is STILL in the tank, its just inside the plant. Copper is an element not a compound. ANY form of copper is deadly to corals. So even if the plant took in the copper and turned it into an isotope or compound or did anything to it....it would still be copper based and would leech out (as most metals do) and kill the corals. Battery acid is deadly. If you poor it into the soil a plant might soak it up, but whatever eats the plant is dead in days if not hours. Geez

 

[Anonymous]

+1 for avoid Bob's advice....

 

[Anonymous]

Regardless of any data the fact is copper is deadly to organisms in the reef tank, and even if the plants consume it, the copper is STILL in the tank, its just inside the plant. Copper is an element not a compound. ANY form of copper is deadly to corals. So even if the plant took in the copper and turned it into an isotope or compound or did anything to it....it would still be copper based and would leech out (as most metals do) and kill the corals. Battery acid is deadly. If you poor it into the soil a plant might soak it up, but whatever eats the plant is dead in days if not hours. Geez

Black

Copper is also present in the food we add to the tank. As are other toxins.


In order to conduct an analysis you have to consider the concentration and what is acceptable to our aquariums. You will have copper and other toxins in your system. It can't be avoided. I just use macro algaes to filter out those toxins. And make the tank safe. And present the experimental results, in a controlled test to show how it works.

 

[Anonymous]

Is that what you call it :lol:

 

[Anonymous]

Just one thought?

Encouraging experimentation can be considered a good thing, in some instances. If one person states "This is my experience" and another states
" This is my experience", the original poster is encouraged to think and evaluate responses. By allowing differing ideas, our hobby can grow.

I feel our hobby has become relatively stagnant. I would love to see new ideas and products emerge from anywhere.

This thread starts out "Can I use lime stone?" Then a response is offered. The next two pages do not have any replies to the original question, just attacks on the person who took the time to reply. If you have another experience, it would be great to hear. Have you tried limestone and had a issue? Relate that, then the original poster will learn something and then decide how he wants to go. There is not even a response that tells the person why they feel limestone should not be used.

How can our hobby evolve and grow if we already know everything? Please, tell us why you think something is? Is thinking out of the skimmer really a bad thing? Can we find better ways without allowing dissent?

Bob, your corals have good polyp extension, your fish look happy. I think your tank looks great! I think it needs more macros, though! I found the sexiest red that my scopus tang doesn't nibble. It is feathery! Thanks for inviting me back? I left when the lawyer insulted my profession. I always though it was not a personal reason that medical people hate attorneys. Now, that birth control joke makes sense.....

Wait 'till I make my push to bring back the UGF! See you elsewhere!

 

[blackcloudmedia]

Ok aerosmith your right. To answer the original question, limestone will be fine in your tank as long as you know there are no toxins in the stone i.e. where the rock came from and whats been used on/near it. Any rock will do considering its an inert material (hopefully) However coralline algae loves growing on things higher in calcium ie dead coral or limestone or concrete. Lava rock and slate and non calcium based rock can be used considering they are just rock so no adverse problems will arrise, however coralline wont be as likely to grow on them as opposed to calcium based rocks. I say as likely cause In the right conditions coralling will grow on anything. So to answer your question. You can use limestone just set it into a control bucket or tank of saltwater and monitor the PH for a while and run some tests to see if anything is leeching out ie oil on the surface or funny things happening.

 

[blackcloudmedia]

Oh and by the way if anyone doesnt believe me about limestone being safe look at my 55 gal tank thread and notice the mushroom shaped pillar in the middle, its made out of concrete, it has exellent coralline growth on it and a nice soft layer of algae on top that the lawnmower blenny loves. On the bottom of the sculpture there is a layer of nothing but sponges. And the rocks on the left are all limestone that have been completely covered in coralline. Ive actually considered "farming" coralline since what my local LFS considers live rock is ugly as crap.

 

[Anonymous]

I was just scanning Advance Aquarist. The featured tank is using limestone. It looks really good, has been thriving for 6 years, I believe.

I think it would not be the best for a typical SPS only tank, IMO, just because it does not seem very porous. Typical "live" rock from the LFS might serve your needs better if you will need the low oxygen areas that are abundant in typical reef rock. You will need the anaerobic areas to convert nitrate to free nitrogen gas that bubbles out of the water if you are relying on bacteria to help remove nitrate. A DSB will do the same thing. You can actually see the bubbles form....

But, then you will need to find ways to remove the phosphate.

Also, good live rock from the LFS will provide those tiny, microscopic organisms that create the biodiversity that a strong healthy reef needs. Zooplankton larvae (worms, ampho & copepods, ect) feed the organisms you will cherish later on.

I use macroalgae to remove nitrate and phosphate, but some prefer strong skimming, anaerobic bacteria, freq water changes and adsorbers. There are differing ways to have the tank you want. You will find what works for you. Good luck!

 

[wade1]

In point of fact, the aquarium at Riverhead (the feature in Advanced Aquarist) has both a base of limestone and a great quantity of real live rock. As Aerosmith noted, you cannot replace real LR diversity very readily - though poorly treated rock has much lesser diversity than fresher rock.

I have seen examples of limestone used well - but it will degrade over time in your tank, just as will concrete based rock. It takes a while, but just be warned that rocks can begin to crumble. I would highly (and I mean highly) recommend regular water changes along with activated carbon and heavy skimming as a just in case measure. Corals are very sensitive and those compounds that might be released from the rock are not common in oligotrophic waters that normally feed the reefs.

 

[Anonymous]

Does limestone have any relationship to lime water? I've never used it myself, but I did try sandstone in a display refugium once. It looked really cool, until it got coraline growing on it, then it was not the look I wanted....

 

[wade1]

Lime water = Ca Cl2 dissolved in water (that forms carbonic acid and carbonates)

Limestone is the same thing, but in a compressed state. Contains the minerals that surrounded it on creation. Its actually often the same base as live rock, but its much much much older and has been buried for millenia.

Live rock = aged and compressed coral skeleton which is the same basic thing, BUT with the nearly same mineral content as live skeleton. Thats what makes it so nice in a reef tank.

 

[Anonymous]

So, would adding limestone be like adding kalkwasser? If it were to break down, it would raise your calcium and alkalinity level?

Why would that be bad?

And, I cannot believe Bob showed pics of his tank and I missed an opportunity to increase views of my latest production! I agree with Bobs theories, but I like having a bigger emphasis on aesthetics! Sure, macroalgae removes NO3, PO4, heavy metals,ect but that is not it's major attraction. Bob likes to emphasize the utility of macros, while I like to show it's beauty....

Turn up your speakers?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9fODy1vp34

Ok, bring on the insults!

"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" and my fish are beautiful....

 

[wade1]

So, would adding limestone be like adding kalkwasser? If it were to break down, it would raise your calcium and alkalinity level?

No.

1- You wouldn't be adding it fast enough to make a measurable change.
2- You'd be liberating many compounds that shouldn't be there (including iron , manganese, magnesium, mercury and many others).
3- The release of limestone is probably into smaller and smaller bits of limestone because our tanks are not operating in an acidic environment. If you acidify it (ie- Calcium reactor) then yes... except for the added elements part.

 

[Anonymous]

So, would adding limestone be like adding kalkwasser? If it were to break down, it would raise your calcium and alkalinity level?

No.

1- You wouldn't be adding it fast enough to make a measurable change.
2- You'd be liberating many compounds that shouldn't be there (including iron , manganese, magnesium, mercury and many others).
3- The release of limestone is probably into smaller and smaller bits of limestone because our tanks are not operating in an acidic environment. If you acidify it (ie- Calcium reactor) then yes... except for the added elements part.

My understanding is that kalk (lime water) is actually calcium hydroxide caoh which reacts with carbon dioxide to produce a high ph, high alk and carbonate (or bicarbonate)

Whereas calcium carbonate is in limestone and used in calcium reactors to return calcium and carbonate which dissolve at lower ph. Just like with other calcium carbonate sources like crushed oyster shells.

With respect I have a problem with your assertions. While they are all true there is no analysis. And with no numbers it is impossible to conduct any analysis. For example, my analysis of the copper and macro algae did have the numbers and analysis for everyone to respond to.


If the limestone rock does not dissolve sufficiently to provide calcium carbonate to the system and it is say 80% or so calcium carbonate, then it also makes sense that the much smaller ammounts of anything else are not being added to the system either.

Plus when tap water concentrations of copper which are thousands time higher than ocean levels are filtered down to ocean levels in a matter of days, I highly suspect the heavy metals and toxins in slowly dissolving limestone are also.

So it is not surprising a tank of the month has had limestone rock in it for years and years.

So the only possible correct answer the original question is yes you can use limestone rocks in your tank. With great results. And at very little risk.

my .02

 

[blackcloudmedia]

lol Im sure the original poster just wanted a yes or no answer. But all said and done......I think rocks are pretty.

 

[Anonymous]

lol Im sure the original poster just wanted a yes or no answer. But all said and done......I think rocks are pretty.

:lol:


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[wade1]

My understanding is that kalk (lime water) is actually calcium hydroxide caoh which reacts with carbon dioxide to produce a high ph, high alk and carbonate (or bicarbonate)

There are some great reviews of the process done by Bingman and others. I would recommend the OP do a search both on these forums and via the advanced aquarist search. Your description is very lacking, although the general idea is there.

With respect I have a problem with your assertions. While they are all true there is no analysis.

I find this vastly amusing based on a single aged and barely relative reference I've seen posted. What is science? Science is the building of theories and disprovings of theories... so that means that it comes down to a 'weight of evidence' approach to analysis. So you agree that the assertions are correct, but disbelieve in the weight of the evidence?

Without starting up this roundabout illogical argument set again... I will say that your assertions are not correct. Specifically, reduced dissolution of the carbonates that make up limestone are not at all relative to the amount of release of other minerals/compounds - that would assume a fully even distribution within the rock and that rock dissolves evenly on all surfaces which is incorrect. It also says nothing of the soluble state of those minerals, nor the speciation of those compounds (which has massive affects in regards to toxicity).

I have to laugh at this one:

So the only possible correct answer

And the earth is flat!