Mega-Powerful Nitrate and Phosphate Remover Replaces Skimmer

[Anonymous]

nice DIY post

unfortunately, it's also full of assertions/assumptions/claims that have no basis in fact, and are more hyperbolic opinion, than evidence/fact based observations

alot of your statements re: skimming are simply ridiculous-and you ignore the crap that algae puts into your system

to assert than an algae scrubber precludes a need for water changes is patently ludicrous, AND false

 

[Anonymous]

you ignore the crap that algae puts into your system

Please state which crap you are referring to.

to assert than an algae scrubber precludes a need for water changes is patently ludicrous, AND false

Please state which portion is false.

it's also full of assertions/assumptions/claims that have no basis in fact

Please station which assertions/assumptions/claims, other than the first statement above, you are referring to.

algaes also produce wastes-NO plant or animal only takes up waste-there are whole classes of organics that all plants, and algaes produce-if you're of the opinion that there's some plant or animal out there that doesn't produce metabolic wastes, not only is this discussion pointless, your also an ignoramus by choice - you don't need me to do proper research before stating a bunch of bs as established fact

terpenes, voc's, PUFA's, pheromones,kairomones is a start for you, in addition to carbon

algaes cannot rid a system of phosphates completely, since they also produce them-they have cells, and undergo the krebs cycle, which generally means a continual production of PO4 into the system

take any tank that uses just an algae scrubber, with no water changes, and just watch how piss yellow your tank's water will get :lol:

this has been established a long time ago by tons of research-alot of it done during the 'heyday' of walter adey-who made most of the false/mistaken assertions you list as fact-a quick search on the net should lead you to the info so you can educate yourself

the amount of food a skimmer removes from the water column is minimal, especially compared to the amount of wastes it collects-i've NEVER seen a skimmer remove pods from any system i've worked with-at home or the commercial sized systems i deal with at work (skimmer 12 foot tall and over a 4' diameter on a 20k gallon (app) system

if you think that the wastes removed by a skimmer = food-your mostly wrong.one could argue that some of the wastes might be food sources for other animals in the system,but it would be a teeny fraction of the rest of the constituents of the skimmate.

a denitrifying sand bed is just as efficient at removing nitrates, once established, as any turf scrubber

but since YOU posted the assertions FIRST-how's about YOU showing us some hard data to back up your claims of what an algal scrubber does vs a skimmer ? surely you measured pod removal, how much food vs waste their is in skimmate, etc etc etc

turf scrubbers have their place in some systems as PART of a COMPREHENSIVE management plan/system-to state that it's a perfect end all be all for proper filtration replacing all other methods and water quality maintenance is the epitome of foolishness

 

[scifi_3d_zoo]

It's an interesting idea but so far it is all anecdotal personal accounts. No testing, research, statistics, #'s, etc. I also noticed your tank, the one you are making all these claims on, does not look very well established. It's not grown out, indicating age or some success from your methods, and it looks like it does not contain any SPS. Only with hard #s and results can I begin to take this seriously.

They've been talking about VODKA for a long time and ReefCentral just produced a nice article on it with some hard #'s and research. Gotta do this like a scientist man or it's nothing but anecdotal "personal accounts". This is the same sorta pseudo-science that is used to tell people wearing MAGNETS will heal them. It's not science. The VODKA article makes some quite stunning claims... increase skimmer performance, removes nitrates to the point that you should feed more, eliminates the need for carbon and phosphate media/reactors. BUT they back up the claims with some testing and #'s.

Has anybody here or at RC showed in any interest in testing your theories??

 

[Anonymous]

I don't have to prove anything. These are my opinions, based on the secondary (not primary) research I did.

It will replace (or keep you from needing) a skimmer, refugium, phosphate removers, nitrate removers, carbon, filtersocks, and possibly even waterchanges.

well, which is it? you say it's opinion, while stating things as fact

I never mentioned Walter Aday.

so ? I did

How much lower than a "zero" (clear) Salifert reading do you need?

salifert is far from being the most accurate or sensitive test kit around-i use a hach digital colorimeter

i really don't have time to tear up your points one at a time, as i'm posting from work on a coffee break

your 'style' of presenting your admitted opinions based on anecdotal observation rather than any type of organized scientific or logical proofs as 'facts' for noob hobbyists is dangerous and all to reminiscent of the beasle style of giving advice that will lead many into dangerous territory, imo

I don't have to prove anything. These are my opinions, based on the secondary (not primary) research I did.

er- if you state that some type of device WILL do a better job and outperform well established means of husbandry, you had better be able to prove it, or i'll rename you 'mr. eco-aqualizer'

based on the secondary (not primary) research I did

how was the research done ? what were the controls, etc. ? what do you mean by secondary/primary ?

 

[Anonymous]

your 'style' of presenting your admitted opinions based on anecdotal observation rather than any type of organized scientific or logical proofs as 'facts' for noob hobbyists is dangerous and all to reminiscent of the beasle style of giving advice that will lead many into dangerous territory, imo

The OP did sound like an infomercial :lol: . I remember the whole bruhaha over Dynamic Aquaria vs. Berlin and the tons of research done on both sides. Algae harvesting is not the panacea Adey asserted it was-nor was Berlin for that matter, and to suggest that one method is superior for all applications is a bit myopic.

 

[Anonymous]

just to avoid any misunderstanding:

i do not disagree with your contention that your particular algae scrubber performs the way it does on your particular system

nor do i disagree with the possibility that it could be as beneficial to other system-for all i know-you may have designed the first one to do that good a job

i dislike the hype and hyperbole used to assert either those or similiar contentions as fact-when i first saw the thread title and began reading the beginning of the post i thought this was a shill for a commercial poster, heh

here's what i find exception to the most, and i'll illustrate with a simple theoretical argument/thought exercise:

most folks, afaik, don't run their skimmers very wet, and the wetter ones on smaller systems ( <75 gal ) might get 1/2 gal of water a day, while wet skimming (i really wet skim atm, on my nano, and i've maxed at about a gallon of skimmate/day after a very heavy night and day of cyclopeeze feeding for my corals)

this water was initially foam, that wouldn't have nearly the pod density in it that an algal mat would-pods lo-o-o-ove algal mats-provides huge surface area for food, shelter, and space to have lots of pod sex, heh

pods are always being born, and therefore always dying.at any given time, there will be more dead pods on the algal mat than in the skimmer foam (again, how many pods did you find in your skimmate? )

pods are organic material, and every time one dies, it polklutes (admittedly on a minute scale, but multiply that by millions over years, if not more)

a skimmer removes whatever it collects completely from the system, so:

we have a skimmer completely removing an organic sink (that will eventually become a pollutant) in relatively small amounts, and an algal 'pod motel'mat creating organic sinks (that will eventually become polluters) in higher numbers (try and mentally compare pod reproduction speed vs what could get trapped in a foam column/unit of time )

remember, pods are dying on that mat and decomposing/getting eaten in between your mat cleanings


from just the pod issue/contention you state/make,given the example i just posted above, i hope i've clarified the nature of the issues i have w/your post-it's not the entire content, mostly the delivery and 'pitch' (plus your use of personal anecdotal observation (which can be an invaluable tool when used correctly) as tested proven data

 

[SnowManSnow]

I bet Beaslbob would be interested in this

B

 

[Anonymous]

Usually when one thinks "Why had no-one done this before!", someone usually has, found out the weaknesses and moved on...

 

[scifi_3d_zoo]

I've seen a lot of other tanks, with softies and whatnot, run without skimmers before. No turf algae either. Just big fuges, etc. SO it is possible to be skimmerless. The last TOTM at RC did not have a fuge at all... and was full of SPS. I think it depends on what you are stocking what you can get away with... and what you are using in place of the corner you are cutting. But I have not seen anybody with a mixed reef yet try TURF ALGAE. I did see one TOTM at RC do a "spraybar" but that was just to tumble cheato or something.

 

[Anonymous]

Lawdawg: It was supposed to sound promotional. It's for beginners, who's main problem in life is "green stuff in my tank", or if they've done some reading, "my nitrate and phosphate are high". They've never heard of scrubbers, Aday, DA, or Berlins. They just want their fish to be happy, for as little money (basically free) as possible, and with no risk. So in this application, yes, turf is superior. The overall goal of the post is get as many of them trying it as possible so we can get as much feedback as possible as to how turf will help us.

Rubbish. Most if not alll nitrate and phosphate issues are hobbyist induced and learning to minimize 'garbage in, garbage out' works far better in the long run than any cure all, supplementing it with skimming or nutrient export by other means. (BTW, who is this 'we' you speak of :lol: ?) As far as your assertion that THIS METHOD IS BEST for novices, it is your unsupported opinion and does the new hobbyist a real disservice by ignoring the volumes of data that say Adey's methods are hardly a magic bullet for a sucessful tank.

As I stated above, this method is hardly new, and I remember well the debates since I've been in the hobby a bit longer than your stated 3 years and in fact once upon a time had a tank with a DYI'd dump scrubbing system. It worked, but in no way was it a one size fits all approach and did require constant maintenance. Simple stonies and hardy fish were the norm of the time and frankly I got the same results using bioballs and a wetdry so I moved on to other configurations. All of us who have been in this hobby long term evolve and change as different concepts are put forth and tried out. Use what works, discard what does not. For the average new hobbyist, strict interpretation of Adey's ideas do not work.

Vitz hit the high points so I won't be redundant here but will put this forth as a proof of sorts. If they did, people would naturally gravitate to what works for the majority. For the most part, the hobby has evolved past Adey's ideas and use those that work for the majority, keeping what works makes sense. One of which is the concept of using macro as a nutrient export. Those who maintain a refug with macro do so because it incorporates some of the good ideas Adey had with less complications, but by no means is the THE ONLY WAY to achieve sucess.

IMhhhO, the only magic bullet that works for everyone is simple knowledge-learning about why a DSB works or a coil denitrator. This isn't telemetry, and to say the new hobbyist is better off being told THIS METHOD WORKS FOR EVERYONE without the background knowledge as to the downsides is really doing far more harm than (dubious at best) good.

 

[Anonymous]

:lol: far be it from me to put forth factual arguments with someone who is having this same discussion on 4 different reef boards.

 

[Ben1]

FWIW, I run a skimmer/fuge and do bi-weekly W/C's, I havent used GFO in a while and I run carbon every once and a while. My NO3 is 0 and my P04 is 0.02-0.03 on a colorimeter (or clear on a salifert test kit)

I feed my tank on an autofeeder 4 x a day with pellet, also I feed mysis, spirulina, coral freenzy, oyster eggs, and cyclopeeze everyday to every other day.

There are more then one way to skin a cat but I agree with whats been stated that solely depending on turf will end up will yellowing water over time, and like all filters it will have its limitations. I do believe your method of turf in a bucket could work as one part of a good filtration method.

 

[Anonymous]

Your assumption is that a dead pod is "pollution". I'm saying it's food. Aside from that, we both know that organic levels (food) will rise without a skimmer, and they would fall with a skimmer. I'm saying that without a skimmer, they would rise to a balance point as increased bacteria levels would consume them in greater amounts.

you obviously have no clue about how much food/energy is wasted/lost back to the local environment during the transfer from one part of the food chain to the next (hint: it's a lot)-there's NO such thing as an animal or a plant that's a complete 'sink'

ALL food is ultimately pollution, whether you like it or not-all animals have to pollute to use food, take food, process food, metabolize food, etc

your over simplified (and grossly incorrect) understanding of both water quality issues (do you honestly think that anyone has a good 'handle' on water quality when we only test for maybe 6 out of hundreds of organic waste byproducts/metabolites that all plants and animals produce? )

this is the point at which i tell you that you're arguin way out of your league here, and simply refusing to listen to what those who have much more experience and knowledge are trying to tell you:

you're stating personal observations as factual assumptions

you do NOT have the knowledge base to either verify or test these assumptions properly

both of the above together ALWAYS leads to improper/incorrect advice, which you insist on continuing with, btw

if you had even set up a slightly proper comparativce study (maybe 10 identical systems with the different filtration setups, equal bioloads/feeding, etc etc), THEN you could have a meaningful conversation here-presently you have nothing but your own personal opinion-please present it as such

this is the point where i remove myself from further discussing the benefits/merits/comparative differences between filtration/husbandry techniques with you

 

[Anonymous]

oh, and you're the latest recipient of the beasle award, btw

 

[Anonymous]

oh, and you're the latest recipient of the beasle award, btw

With the sheer amount of threads started on different boards, I do think he has surpassed our beloved Bbob . Of course, the factual objections raised here are identical to those posted elsewhere with the same responses from the OP so as you concluded there is little point in continuing.

 

[Anonymous]

There is a thread floating around on here that talks about the potential/actuality for Turf to damage SPS corals.

 

[Anonymous]

Thales is right, not to mention the thread has a lot of actual research papers being cited

 

[Anonymous]

oh, and you're the latest recipient of the beasle award, btw

With the sheer amount of threads started on different boards, I do think he has surpassed our beloved Bbob . Of course, the factual objections raised here are identical to those posted elsewhere with the same responses from the OP so as you concluded there is little point in continuing.

Yep... - And if you're a massive interwebs vaccuum like yours truly, you'd have stumbled into the abyss that at least one commercial turf scrubber built of a web site. - Absolutely horrid in my opinion.

Desperate times call for desperate measures I guess...........

 

[blackcloudmedia]

So not to thread hijack but since were mentioning ways of lowering nitrates and phosphates I have an INGENIOUS method of keeping my tank under control that I want to share. I first use only RODI water with my 90 dollar rodi filter, and secondly I understock my tank with fish(only clowns and small fish) and voila!!! No algae lol. No use for crazy high maintanance methods. Just do it right from the get go. Dont over feed, do use the reccommended equipment (RODI) and DONT overstock.

 

[Anonymous]

Yes, but where his teeth really whiter after that?








And he's still bald, even after the green wig you put on him