Shoot me down please!

[Patch]

My intention is to develope a self contained closed system; one with no wasted salt, no purchased water, and no lost nutrients or elements.

I have a 60 gallon I'm building into a reef tank. We are about to add the first live rock when it finishes curing,( seperate bucket of course).

I have a seperate new trash can on the back porch that I intend to use as a sump.

What I need from you guys is to shoot down my configuration, show me where you think I might be making errors.

Here is my thesis:

I intend to conserve the nutrients and trace elements removed by Remora C protein skimmer by rinsing the collection cup in the sump, making partial changes(even daily bucket doses), and allow the detritus to cycle in the sump.

By the points, if you please, and thanks !
Check out my Nitrogen Cycling Spreadsheet

1. Apx. 45 gal/salted appropriately in large black plastic can.

2. Heated to normal range, but not cooled. It will definately warm up this summer.

3. Lava rock substrate one foot deep from garden shop- ph,amonia,nitrite,nitrate within normal limits. Bacteria added to establish cycle.

4. One small bubbler in a tube reaching the bottom of the can, slowly turning water over.

5. I believe I wont have an algae issue due to no light in the can.

 

[reefman5511]

By rinsing the collection cup in the sump you're just putting back all the junk you just took out.
You're going to have to add water due to evaporation unless you've figured out some way to grab all the vapor & condense it back out.

 

[Anonymous]

my advice would be to skip the skimmer althgether.

And just let the tank balance out and be stabilized by macro algae.

That way nutrients are recycled back into fish food.

You could also try filtering the water through crushed oyster shells to help buffer calcium. Then watch calcium/alk/magnesium and use the 2 part system.

And of course do no water changes. Just replace the water that evaporates.

Do you plan to make it a completely close system? Like even to air also?


.02

 

[Anonymous]

I would like to shoot you down, PLB.

Telling people nott o use skimmer all together is almost never a good suggestion, particular if you don't know the skill level and system involved.

 

[Anonymous]

...

 

[Patch]

I figured the water would evaporate and wasn't trying to exclude that need. I have a large amount of shells in the tank, #20 I think as part of the substrate.

The gunk from the skimmer is bio matter and lost elements if I throw it out. I was thinking let it cycle through the sump where it can't hurt anything and still retain the elements. Occasionally swapping water with the sump would then replenish elements in the tank. I realize there will be a long build in process, but I'm asking about the feasibility of the concept.

 

[Anonymous]

I figured the water would evaporate and wasn't trying to exclude that need. I have a large amount of shells in the tank, #20 I think as part of the substrate.

The gunk from the skimmer is bio matter and lost elements if I throw it out. I was thinking let it cycle through the sump where it can't hurt anything and still retain the elements. Occasionally swapping water with the sump would then replenish elements in the tank. I realize there will be a long build in process, but I'm asking about the feasibility of the concept.

the concept is valid. Only I would not use the skimmer ar all. See the skimmer also removes oyster eggs, micro algaes and so on that are coral food.

Additionally, I saw a proposed design where the skimate was routed to a low flow sump. The idea was the phosphates in the skimmate could be reduced by cyano bacterial in that sump.

But what I do is just not use a skimmer and let the aerobic bacteria reduce the wastes generated. (and in the process leave the coral food where it can feed the corals). Then balance out the tank with macro algaes which also stabilized the operation as well.

FWIW on another board a user had some troubles with his skimmer. So it was turned off for a while. He noticed not only no rise in nitrates but also stronger macro and coral growth. So he tried not doing water changes. And again the macros and corals grew even stronger. all the while with unmeasureable nitrates and phosphates.

so yes it is possible. and very doable.

.02

 

[ivgonmad]

This is a very complicated project and will be impossible to sustain long term without dosing, if you are even able to build such a thing. Nutrients and other necessary elements like calcium, magnesium, strontium, iodide, etc, get absorbed by the animals and coral and will be depleted quickly.

 

[Anonymous]

I do dose calcium/alk/mag. Diy 2 part system.

 

[ivgonmad]

sorry, but I was talking to "Patch"

 

[Patch]

Once my new live rock is installed and the Nitrogen levels stabilize, maybe I could put the skimmr on a timer, with the intention of reducing the run time over time. I would keep monitoring the levels as I went.

 

[Anonymous]

Where will your light come from, if it's a closed system? You are looking at an energy system and it can't be closed if the energy comes from outside.

 

[Anonymous]

i'd shoot you down just for even suggesting the idea of putting skimmate BACK into a system

 

[Anonymous]

Why take it out if you are going to put it back in?

Lets ignore that and assume it is not a problem:
Just becuase you put it back in, does not mean that it is in the same form that it WAS in. Chemcial and biological reactions can change the form of many compounds.

Think of this idea like you would think of a perpetual motion machine They don't exist.

Your "system" will slowely but surely become a literal cesspool of decaying matter, metals, organics, and other compounds.

 

[SnowManSnow]

more trouble than its worth IMO. if you have the funds let technology work for you.

i wouldn't put the stuff back into the sump either. You aren't just putting the detrius back in, but all the toxic chemicals too.

while i like beaslebob, cause hes from alabama i don't think that skimmerless is the way to go

IMO it will be a tough tank to maintain over a 5-10 year period .. maybe even 2-4 years!

 

[busdriver]

I think that it'll work, given he has enough live rock (AKA: the stuff in the black bucket) and he lightly stocks his tank.
of course it isn't a true closed loop! that is where the light in his show tank come in. engry is going into the tank in the form a light... blah blah blah... i'm in the UK now and in one of the mags here one of the TOTMs was a 2' cube with 3 or 4 small fish, power heads, lights (of course) and loads of live rock. no canister filter, no PS, no UV... also, i lot of ppl over here are using sumps/regfugiums...

 

[busdriver]

GOTO: http://www.reefsuk.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=13002
I visited this guy's house yesterday... 530 Imp. gal. total volume system ( Imp. Gal. =4.5 l US Gal. =3.79 l) anyway. no PS just small 303 with carbon. he has had it going for 2 years, his first and only water change was a month or two ago. ( i can't remember) it was 160 Imp. gal tho... check it out! 32 or so fish!!!

 

[Anonymous]

how would you like to live in a 'closed system' you only get to eat your own wastes. . .

B

 

[busdriver]

isn't NASA trying to make it so people can live is a "closed system" in space? also, did he ever say that he wasn't going to feed them food? i think he meant no water changes and do PS...

 

[busdriver]

wow, i sure killed this thread...