Ok, been busy today...where to start. First I think that reedman made a good point to waterdog's comment, although maybe somewhat bluntly. I think waterdog made a statement that he wanted clarity on. However, that statement was based on heresay and not on evidence. I think it perfectly appropriate to question unfounded statements. One of the primary rules of debate..."recognize statements of rational proof from those of persuasion".
However, to the implicit question. Will Alk boosted with A&H last longer than the fancy stuff bought at the LFS? A very good question. A few points first:
1.) Alk chemistry (even in an aquarium) is really not very complicated in the grand scheme of all chemistry. One does not need to be an aquarium Guru to understand it from a chemical perspective. A chemist maybe who spends some time to understand, but nothing more.
2.) I have learned a lot myself from reading Farley's articles. They are well referenced and it is obvious that he spent much more time than I in looking into it. However, that is the basis of science. We don't need to re-invent the wheel all the time. That is why we quote references. The articles seem sound and the chemistry is largely correct, accounting for a lay audience.
3.) Somebody made another excellent point. I personally am not selling anything here. I do it for fun in my spare time because I enjoy aquariums, learning from others, debate and teaching what I know to those that are interested.
4.) Why aren't the ingredients of the LFS bought Alk booster not on the label? Simple, because the formulation is not patentable and the manufacturer seeks to protect his work by trade secret. A perfectly legal and legitimate position. They would seek to protect it mainly because, unfortunately (for them), the ingredients are made of common household or easily available ingredients that any of us could throw together in a matter of minutes if we knew how!
5.) Statistical certainty.... I don't believe anything anyone tells me (especially about aquariums) if they say something to the effect of: "I did so and so to my aquarium and I saw this, so it must be true". Effect does not imply cause! Only by using detailed experimentation, grounded in sound science with appropriate controls can one unravel complicated phenomenon. Then many repititions must be done to prove the hypothesis with statistical certainty. For instance, we hear that "boosting alk with A&H doesn't last as long as with store bought stuff" (and I am not picking on anybody, we are all guilty of doing such things and the question, or statement that implies it in this case, is a very good one and I myself can't offer any proof one way or the other). We can immediatly ask? How did you time it? Was the temperature the same in each case? Did anything else vary during the comparison? How closely in time did you measure the LFS stuff trail and the A&H trial? How many times did you repeat the trails? What were the average times of each and their standard deviations? Were the two times different at the 95% confidence interval? and so on.... Point is that almost certainly all these questions can't be answered. This is the problem with aquarium science. It makes for costly and time consuming experiments that most people don't have the occasion, budget or reason to perform. Thus we are left with a bunch of voodoo and heresay.
So now...enough of my philosophical rambling. What do I believe we are really concerened with.
1.) Q: Is the high price of commerical Alk boosing formulations worth the extra money we pay for them if we can use pickling lime and baking soda (A&H).
A: IMHO...NO!
2.) Q: Will using these off the shelf ingredients hurt my animals?
A: IMHO...NO!
Let me quote a link I found helpful in my studies:
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2002-04/rhf/feature/index.htm
Ok, now to paraphrase... A & H is basically bicarbonate of soda with some carbonate of soda (aka a mixture of sodium bicarbonate with a little sodium carbonate).
Commercial alk booster is most likely A&H mixed with a little borate. Both are bases and contribute to total ALK.
Borate is a stronger buffer than is A&H but will not be consumed to the animals at near the rate, if at all. Let's imagine two not very realistic but extreme cases. Let's assume borate is not consumed by our aquarium at all but that carbonate is. Now lets imagine our Alk booster is 100% borate. We adjust our ALK with pure borate and watch the alk change over time. Since it isn't really consumed, the alk won't change very fast, if any at all. Now the other case. Lets adjust ALK with 100% A&H...it will change as the corals deposit calcium carbonate. If we use a commercial mixture of these two we have an intermediate case... Thus it is possible and maybe even likely (remember, I have no proof of this but it makes sense) that a commercial brand does maintain ALK slightly longer than A&H. However, does it matter...No, probably not because the corals need ALK and not borate. If anything I would guess that we are better off to use pure A&H and not commerical brands because over time we don't want our borate to get unbalanced and make up to much of our ALK. Borate on the other hand will prevent the pH from changing, INITIALLY, as quickly so it perhaps more error tolerant if we aren't careful people when adding it. Of course if one does timely water changes, the borate won't get very unbalanced anyway so it really doesn't matter either way. I personally don't want to pay 15 or 20 bucks when I can pay 2 or 3 for the same thing effectively.
Hope this helps...Good questions and responses. Is there anything I can clear up specifically?..I tried to cover a lot of ground here and am not sure I got everything.
Sincerely...Collin
