5 Gallon Nano tank

[Bill S]

Thanks Len - now I know on the pix. I know my first post I could NOT post a picture...

Here are the definitions:

"Absorption indicates an active ongoing process in which something is taken up by something else by various physical actions: The absorption of spilled juice into a paper towel occurs by capillary action. Adsorption, in contrast, describes the holding or accumulation of something, such as a gas, a liquid, or a solute (a substance that has been dissolved in another substance), on the surface of a solid or liquid: The removal of dissolved gases from tap water is achieved by their adsorption onto a substance such as activated charcoal."

So, I guess you could say that carbon COULD be used to absorb water - but it wouldn't make a very good sponge!!!

 

[Snake USMC]

Gentlemen

You people have not read what I posted. The key word is FINITE. This means there is ONLY X amount of P contained in carbon to begin with. That is a fact. Read this sentence over and over again so you will not post a rebuttal saying something I have alleged said.

When food gathers in the pores, the food contains P. Go back again and read what I wrote, not what you THINK I wrote.

Concerning NO, no, my comment Len was not out of line. I do NOT subscribe to PC BS that was started by that great commie chairman mao during the Cultural Revolution in 1965. I have read and have his original red book from that era in Chinese that contains that phrase. It was given to me by my friend when I was stationed in Changchung, PRC in manjodi. And since when does the thought police tell any American the 1st Amendment has been superseded. Too many scars on my body to change. I cannot be pressured to do so, and it is not conducive to this thread.

Now when I read some of the rebuttals concerning carbon, I KNOW for a fact many of the writers do not know what they are speaking about. The fractionation of carbon releases P and other things in the water???? What nonsense. Carbon is not a spong. That would mean when I sell a 600 mesh (size of the carbon which is a very fine powder) then is should release everything back into the water. Also carbon aDsorbs not aBsorbs. My Metal Gone which removes 26 heavy metals from salt water aBsorbs. My Carbon Adsorbs. Totally different.

I shall state about P again reread my last post again slowly.

1. P is totally water soluble.
2. Put NEW carbon in distilled water will allow the soluble compound of P to go into solution.
3. There is only a FINITE (only so much, not an never ending supply) amount of P contained in New carbon.
4. If number three statement was NOT correct, then when No Phosphate carbon is sold on the market they would be lying, BUT THEY ARE NOT! Why, because the water has already flushed out the carbon of P.
5. You source of P is from your food.
6. You NEED P for your RNA to function.
7. My Bacteria consumes P
8. Because it consumes P even with my Virgin TBPC, if you set up your system as we say, you will have very low or 0 P on your test kits.

Reread what I said, and you will see I have not changed my view point at all.

Gentleman, none of you are willing to test my product. Therefore, you have only opinions if it works or not. Until you test it, then you are not in a position to comment on it in a real fashion. Your comments are based on Old Science not New Science. Therefore, they are not applicable in this instance.

Len, I gave you High Bright who is a wholesaler in the Los Angeles area. You asked for longevity, well he has it. But you have not bother to pick up the phone and call Brian (Kile lee)

Remember this, you can try the system and see it functions as I have stated, or you can still watch the train pass you by. You cannot stop this science. The new people in the hobby are buying the Red Torpedos, and setting up their tanks in one day, and stocking them fully in one week. They do not use skimmers, cal reactors etc as you do because they do not need it with this system

Respectfully submitted, and not politically correct and shall never be because intellectual honesty precludes me from doing so.

Snake

 

[Len]

I'm confused. How does your RN bacteria and tribase carbon replace calcium reactors (amongst other gear)?

If you can have Brian of High Bright participate here, that would be much appreciated. I (and I'm sure most others) am not willing to experiment for many practical and ethical reasons. But I would love to see success stories from your established users. There must be hundreds of people able to provide evidence for the efficacy of your recommended methodology. I'm just asking for a few examples.

Hehe. I wasn't aware that sensitivity and honesty were mutually exclusive.

 

[skylab1]

In spite of his sense of humor - I'm still trying this. What the heck. BTW, I understand that Sea World's shark "tank" is somthing like 1000ppm nitrate.

1000ppm :?: You are kidding right? Must be a typo.

 

[skylab1]

It appears skylab's experience contradict this assertion and debunks the notion RN Bacteria requires "special" carbon.

Len actually my experience with my 60 gallon at home proves the RN bacteria need this "special" carbon.

Remember this tank was already been setup about 2 years with the convention setup just like everyone here; and still is.
Fact: I have no carbon. Not because I didn't want to use, but because the two HOT filter is just too small to put any in.
Fact: all of my returns are some what underwater not above it.
Fact: I didn't have the correct flow rate, and still don't.

I did a quick test this morning, all of the reading are 0 except Nitrate. The current reading is at 120ppm, very high.

If I were to correct my setup tonight, added the topedo filter filled with 10lb of TBPC, adjuest my return to above the water and have a correct flow rate, I have no doubt the nitrate would drop 50% overnight.

This tank is scheduled to be break down in two weeks. I am moving all the fish to the 220g in the warehouse. I just don't have the time at night to take care it anymore. Beside, the blue tang I have after 3 1/2 years is approaching 7". It's time to give him a bigger home.


P.s. I'll post more pic tonight after I got home. The CF reader at work are still busted.

 

[skylab1]

I'm confused. How does your RN bacteria and tribase carbon replace calcium reactors (amongst other gear)?

It dose not.

The pH rock does that and only if you use it at the correct amount with the correct flow rate. Otherwise you will have to buffer the pH and calcium as you always do with all sorts of equipment.

In fresh water or pond setup, I don't use the pH rock because there is no need to buffer the pH to high range. In salt water application there is a need to buffer the pH and calcium in reef setup. You can use pH buffer sold in LFS today and expensive calcium to buffer calcium, or you can try the pH rock. It totally up to you.

 

[Len]

Ah. I was basing my comments on what you wrote earlier

Yes I have. My own 60 gallon FOWLR tank at home use no carbon at all. I have 7 fish in the same tank about 3 years now, the right now was added about a year ago and that was it. I have two HOT filters in a 30 gallon sump, one has a skimmer build in but it was shut off about 2 years ago, so I've been running it without a skimmer all these time. I havn't test the water for about a year now, no water change in about a year also. All the fish are big and healthy with a breeding pair of percula clown spawning every 3 weeks.

Apparently, in your experience, NO3 doesn't kill and fish thrive in its presence nor is RN bacteria responsible for your 60g's success since you did not use necessary tribase carbon.

Prior to taking down the tank, try running "regular" activated carbon and see what happens with the NO3. If the NO3 levels remain high, try tribase and let us know the results. From what I've gathered, there is minimal work required to upkeep an aquarium via Snake's methodoloy, so hopefully you can run it a bit longer.

I'm curious what this "special" carbon is.

I look foward to seeing your new pics.

 

[Len]

I'm confused. How does your RN bacteria and tribase carbon replace calcium reactors (amongst other gear)?

It dose not.

The pH rock does that and only if you use it at the correct amount with the correct flow rate. Otherwise you will have to buffer the pH and calcium as you always do with all sorts of equipment.

Oh. Snake made no mention of yet another component to his methodology in his post where he states "Red Torpedoes" replaces the need for skimmers, Ca reactors, etc. What is a pH rock and how do you use it? It's not anything like Sea Lab's No.28 (28 trace elements?) blocks, is it? I hated those things and they definitely can't be used effectively to encourage SPS growth.

 

[Anonymous]

OK.. so after 16 pages... what's the verdict? I lost interest after page 8.

 

[Len]

I personally have no verdict yet Most of my questions haven't been answered so I can't formulate a meaningful conclusion. Right now, I believe (but don't know with certainty) that RN bacteria can quickly reduce nitrogenous products in aqueous solution. Everything else is a big, mysterious question mark.

 

[Bill S]

OK, I'll chime in here with a couple of notes:

Yes, Sea World's shark tank (it's something like a million gallons, maybe half a million, I don't know, but it's HUGE) runs at 1000ppm, allegedly. Wow. That's 1 part in a thousand. Yuk...

Red torpedos: both carbon & pH rock are put into these. Your choice as to whether you want to use both. As I have a top quality Ca reactor I bought, I'm going to use that.

Tank parameters (215g) day 12:

Ammonia=0
Nitrates~15 (they were over 20 a couple of days ago).

 

[skylab1]

Ah. I was basing my comments on what you wrote earlier

Apparently, in your experience, NO3 doesn't kill and fish thrive in its presence nor is RN bacteria responsible for your 60g's success since you did not use necessary tribase carbon.

Prior to taking down the tank, try running "regular" activated carbon and see what happens with the NO3. If the NO3 levels remain high, try tribase and let us know the results. From what I've gathered, there is minimal work required to upkeep an aquarium via Snake's methodoloy, so hopefully you can run it a bit longer.

I'm curious what this "special" carbon is.

I look foward to seeing your new pics.

The problem is I have no where to put the carbon, the two hot filter is just too small for carbon to fit in. I have the via aqua multi skimmer and cascade cpf 3 from penn plax.

How many lb of regular carbon would I need?

I know I need 10lb of tri-base and 600gph flow rate with Snake's methodoloy for a 60 gallon.

 

[skylab1]

Oh. Snake made no mention of yet another component to his methodology in his post where he states "Red Torpedoes" replaces the need for skimmers, Ca reactors, etc. What is a pH rock and how do you use it? It's not anything like Sea Lab's No.28 (28 trace elements?) blocks, is it? I hated those things and they definitely can't be used effectively to encourage SPS growth.

The red torpedoes is just a filter to house the carbon and ph rock.
in page 3 of this thread the ph rock was mention and discuss upon.

 

[FragMaster]

Carbon adsorbs as well as absorbs. Comparing it to a sponge or a paper
towel is like comparing a finely tuned 1000 hp F1 engine to a Ford Pinot's 76 hp Iron duke 4 banger.
One is made specificly for a single purpose ( paper towel's and sponges) and the other is made to be multifaceted ( carbon). Carbon is porus throughout not just on the surface. So it stands to reason that merely pressure washing it out wont do it ( unless you are usuing a 600psi washer! ), AND most people do not own a kiln to be able to fire that crap to 1000 degrees to "reactivate" it.

If you can reactivate the TBC that means we can reactivate any carbon.
Granted some will simply turn to charcoal dust because they are to cheap of a carbon, but those of us that use highgrade carbons could save a butt load and "reactivate" our own right? All we would need then is the RN and not the TBC.
If the carbon bed is where these little boogers live, grow, feed, and they are already present in the marine aquarium, and not cultured or man made in any way then that means we dont need the TBC or the RN.
Just our own carbon.
I fail to see the secrecy in this if its already present, and not made made in our tanks as is? When it comes to carbon fellas, just about every high grade carbon is the same. Some may be a little harder than others and some prewashed and have a little more porus surface area(which it is a BAD idea to buy prewashed) but they serve the same purpose.


1000 ppm has to be a mistake, or just made up by some one who told it you?
There would have to be just as much amonia, and nitrite to support that level of nitrates. The water would litteraly have a yellow tinge, and stink like a rock curing tank
1000 ppm would kill just about any shark you put in it.
The Enviormentalists groups would be frying Seaworlds but right now as I type this if that were true.
40-50ppm in our own fish tanks with less sensetive fish can be fatal man.

 

[FragMaster]

Skylab; buy a used canister filter and use it. seems like you could plumb a higher pressure rated pump inline with it?

 

[Bill S]

Now I know why Snake gets so frustrated. You folks just post willy-nilly and haven't read WELL what was posted before.

FragMaster: Go look up adsorb and absorb. You WILL see the difference. Carbon could, technically, be called an absorbant, because it WILL soak up liquid - but let's be realistic, it's an ADSORBANT in it's intended use.

Also re-look the posts on reactivating carbon. NO ONE has suggested that it can be done other than by heating it to extreme temperature. You are blathering on about something no one said! The only note that could possibly be THOUGHT to be this is about backwashing the canisters to REMOVE DETRITUS. NOT to remove nitrates or any other chemical. AND, as usual, this conversation has turned BACK to one about the adsorbtion of carbon, rather than about it's use as a habitat. GET OVER THE CARBON BEING USED CHEMICALLY - IT' NOT.

Don't believe the Sea World numbers - I don't really care. I heard it from someone who heard it from Sea World - that's all. And, it's NOT important in the conversation. However, the bioload in those tanks is GIGANTIC.

Finally, I think I'll now just post updates to my tank. If you want to see if it works, try it yourself. Or, just wait until you see if mine works or not. That's all. Quit trying to critique the methodology. I remember when people thought the live rock was snake oil. Now we know.

 

[RichardS]

It really isn't hard to understand the concept.

TRI Base Pelletized Carbon - this is the media required for the RN bacteria to dominate. Each pellet is composed of 3 types of carbon, two of which are like the carbons found in other brands. The 3rd type of carbon is a proprietary synthetic carbon that provides an available carbon source to the RN bacteria. This available carbon source along with the surface area it provides allows the RN bacteria to dominate. You can just add RN to a tank without the TBPC and it MAY help clean the tank up a bit but the RN bacteria will quickly run out of an AVAILABLE carbon source and the normal nitryfing bacteria will win out.

 

[RichardS]

Oh, let's not get caught up on the 1000ppm nitrate thing.

I was showing a seaworld guy the setup and telling him how quickly nitrates dropped. He said that would be useful for them because the nitrates on their shark tank were really high. I asked how high and said said "like a 1000 but the fish seem fine" and then laughed. I assume he was exaggerating a little bit.

That's it, not worth arguing about.

 

[RichardS]

Skylab; buy a used canister filter and use it. seems like you could plumb a higher pressure rated pump inline with it?

The problem is that most canisters do not hold the required amount of carbon. Also, if you have looked back at my SH thread, the actual flow rates can be lacking.

Here is a link to a do it yourself method...
http://saltaquarium.about.com/cs/filter ... 012999.htm

I'm not much of a DIY'er (i.e. I'm Lazy LOL) and the torpedos are fairly inexpensive so I'll just stick with them.

 

[skylab1]

It really isn't hard to understand the concept.

TRI Base Pelletized Carbon - this is the media required for the RN bacteria to dominate. Each pellet is composed of 3 types of carbon, two of which are like the carbons found in other brands. The 3rd type of carbon is a proprietary synthetic carbon that provides an available carbon source to the RN bacteria. This available carbon source along with the surface area it provides allows the RN bacteria to dominate. You can just add RN to a tank without the TBPC and it MAY help clean the tank up a bit but the RN bacteria will quickly run out of an AVAILABLE carbon source and the normal nitryfing bacteria will win out.

Thank you richards, that's what happend to my 60 gallon at home since I use no carbon at all.