Mega-Powerful Nitrate and Phosphate Remover Replaces Skimmer, Refugium, Everything

[NaH2O]

Actually, IMO, a refugium is different from an algae scrubber. A refugium is a "refuge", where this algae scrubber is merely a scrubber. People just happen to grow algae in a refugium, but you don't have to. It can be a simple live rock rubble area where pods propagate without predation. My coast to coast overflow is similar to an algae scrubber when it grows different algaes in the trough, but I don't believe it works as well as the turf algae that is used on the screening material.

I won't be giving up my skimmer any time soon, but I'd like it if this thread would stay on track without resorting to folks getting upset. There are pros and cons to all types of systems. The important thing is to understand the pros and cons, make your decisions, and set-up a system based on what you feel is best for you. Understanding is key. Someone once taught me all the things we put on our tanks is like a house of cards. If things start getting shaky, then the whole thing can fall apart. Each card needs to be thought through.

Anyway, my 2 cents.

 

[DonW]

After having run my screen(s) for a while, I'm noticing an interesting situation with the nitrate that might be of interest. This really on applies to other folks once they's already reduce N and P to near zero, but it might good to know for others too.

After getting N and P to zero (Salifert hobby test kits), and keeping everything the same for a few days, I notice that the N start showing again, very very slightly, starting with a barely visible tint (maybe a .1 on the Salifert color scale), then more visible pink (about a .2), and if I leave things alone for a week, it might go all the way to 3. This is happening while P remain zero (absolutely clear on the Salifert phosphate color scale).

Now, I sometimes do over-feeding tests, using massive amounts of stuff that would be considered "pollution" by some folks, and sure enough when I do this I get a small increase in N, but also in P. Then when I go back to normal feeding, the levels go back to zero. But the situation I'm talking about here is not during an over-feeding test. It's just feeding and doing everything else at normally. After about a week the N start a very slight increase, but there is NO increase in P.

So after thinking about what I learned about the relationships between N and P, I remembered that you can sometimes have one of them limiting. I reasoned that P might be limited, and without P the screen can't grow to absorb the N. I wanted to just add P but did not know how, so instead I just fed a bit more. Presto! Zero N again. And again, and again. Every time my normal feeding habbit saw a small rise in N (but not P), it was corrected every time by feeding more! Now that is a nice problem to have. It since has been explained to me why my particular tank might be limiting in P, something to do with my dripping kalk and not using a CO2 reactor. But the solution that was offered was the same: Feed more.

Now of course in order for anyone to get to the point of (possibly) experiencing this situation, you first would have to get your screen to a functioning status, and get your N and P to zero. But it's just one of the smaller points to keep in mind as you fine-tune your setup.

There is no way your depleting P enough to stop growth. N maybe but not P. I'd suggest a real lab test or even a colorimeter before making such a claim.
Adding extra food is spuring growth of the microalgae. Your leaving out bacterial bloom that quickly dumps the N down to nearly nothing. Just like sugar and vodka of yester year. Keep in mind there is more to chemistry than P and N.

Don

 

[SantaMonica]

sandollar:

You are trying to compare two totally different things so don't be rediculous here

The logic is the same: If everyone is doing it, it must be better.

They were pretty much replaced

As for turf not being currently popular, think about this: What if someone patented bubbles going through a vertical tube of water. Then he decided to sue anyone who tried to sell any such device, and, he decided to not make and sell them himself. You would not have your current skimmer today. What then would you use to skim? Would you build one? How many people actually have DIY skimmers, much less good ones? What would a newbie do, who's putting together their first or second tank? This is exactly what happened to turf. Now, if this did happen to skimmers, someone eventually would come along and say, "Why do you have to pump air through a water column? Why can't you just..." And boom, you'd have some other version that makes an air-water interface occur, but does not violate the patent by using a pump to push air through a water column. Luckily, however, nobody has a patent on the pumping of air through a water column, like they did with an Algal Turf Scrubber (ATS) (tm):

Algal Turf Scrubber, United States Patent 4333263:
http://www.freepatentsonline.com/4333263.html

harvesting algae in a refugium for nutrient export is similar to an algae scrubber in that it uses algae to perform the same function.

Turf is different from a fuge in so many ways:



o Reduces N and P to much lower levels than fuge/macro can.

o Is very quick to respond to excess nitrate and phosphate spikes (the turf "screen" always
stays the same size after it is trimmed); much quicker than refugiums/macros which have
smaller surface areas after they are trimmed.

o Traps no waste/food like a refugium or DSB does; waste/food flows right past the screen.

o Does not release strands into display, like chaeto.

o Does not go sexual, like caulerpa can.

o Is 1/2 or 1/3 the size.

o Weighs nothing.

o Cools the water.

o Much easier to clean/harvest.

o Can be hung above tank so pods drain into tank.

o Is free.

o Is portable.

o Can run two, for backup.

o Will oxygenate the tank if main return pump goes out, if the scrubber drains into the display.

Pretty hard to beat a skimmer and a fuge for simplicity and completeness.

Completeness? How does a skimmer removing plankton make it complete? How does requiring a fuge on top of a skimmer, in order to remove inorganic N and P, make it simple? How does spending $300 + $300 for both (average, compared to free) make it complete?. Skimmers have a great purpose on FO or FOWLR, but with corals they work against you, making you then buy the other items to make it complete: GFO, etc. And what about space under, behind, the tank? Algae screen do not supply many amphipods as far as I can tell, but the copepods come in swarms.

I'd like it if this thread would stay on track without resorting to folks getting upset

You should take a look at the RC thread for an example of this. Personal attacks ("you're a snot nose kid") not just on me, but on family members. And RC allows this. I could yet back, but why. The idea is to move forward.

There is no way your depleting P enough to stop growth

I sent my water to a reader who tested with the Hanna and got 0.0. I'll send it to you if you like, or to anybody.

Your leaving out bacterial bloom that quickly dumps the N down to nearly nothing

Maybe, but why when I was without the screen, and I added more food, things got worse?

 

[sandollar]

The logic is the same: If everyone is doing it, it must be better.

In some cases, it is obvious that majority rules.

As for turf not being currently popular, think about this: What if someone patented bubbles going through a vertical tube of water. Then he decided to sue anyone who tried to sell any such device, and, he decided to not make and sell them himself. You would not have your current skimmer today. What then would you use to skim? Would you build one? How many people actually have DIY skimmers, much less good ones? What would a newbie do, who's putting together their first or second tank? This is exactly what happened to turf. Now, if this did happen to skimmers, someone eventually would come along and say, "Why do you have to pump air through a water column? Why can't you just..." And boom, you'd have some other version that makes an air-water interface occur, but does not violate the patent by using a pump to push air through a water column. Luckily, however, nobody has a patent on the pumping of air through a water column, like they did with an Algal Turf Scrubber (ATS) (tm):

You can't go by "what if" here. The fact of the matter is skimmer's are on the market so there is no issue with someone not being able to use one. They have also yielded positive effects on tanks which is why many people use them.

Turf is different from a fuge in so many ways

Very true, but one use of a fuge is to use algae in it for nutrient export which is pretty much the same concept . Algae being used for nutrient export. May not be as efficient as a turf scrubber at doing it, but nonetheless does yield enough positive results for people to continue using it today (who by the way keep nitrates and phosphates un-detectable).

There are pros and cons to all types of systems

True, but hate to say it, but turf scrubbers aren't the magic bullet. A turf scrubber replacing skimmers, refugiums etc???? I highly doubt it, but will give it credit in that it can help a system just like any other method out there that uses algae for nutrient export.

 

[SantaMonica]

I'm going to be limiting my posts to helping folks who want to build one. No offence, but I think my time is better spent there.

 

[sandollar]

I'm going to be limiting my posts to helping folks who want to build one. No offence, but I think my time is better spent there.

I hope you are not offended by a good old debate. The title of this thread can be very misleading to someone who doesn't know any better or who doesn't have an understanding of things. A pretty bold statement don't you think? You can't expect to make such a bold statement and not have people question it and then get mad. Have fun with the DIY

 

[NaH2O]

True, but hate to say it, but turf scrubbers aren't the magic bullet. A turf scrubber replacing skimmers, refugiums etc???? I highly doubt it, but will give it credit in that it can help a system just like any other method out there that uses algae for nutrient export.

Playing devil's advocate, what difference does it make if someone decides to set-up their tank this way? Like I said, I certainly wouldn't choose to do it, but there are positives and negatives, and as long as you understand the limitations, there is nothing wrong with using one.

I hope you are not offended by a good old debate. The title of this thread can be very misleading to someone who doesn't know any better or who doesn't have an understanding of things. A pretty bold statement don't you think? You can't expect to make such a bold statement and not have people question it and then get mad. Have fun with the DIY

Good old debate is fabulous! Reef Frontiers has been one of the places where we were able to discuss alot of "taboo" topics that always seemed to close threads on other forums. As long as everyone keeps the conversation civil, and backs up their points with facts, then we can continue the debate. Just keep insults and inflammatory remarks to yourself, and discuss in a mature manner.

 

[sandollar]

Playing devil's advocate, what difference does it make if someone decides to set-up their tank this way? Like I said, I certainly wouldn't choose to do it, but there are positives and negatives, and as long as you understand the limitations, there is nothing wrong with using one

Why is it that you can call me the devil's advocate (insult), but you say to keep insults and inflammatory remarks to yourself, and discuss in a mature manner? Don't take the written word for what it isn't (Forums 101). Like I mentioned, good old debate.

 

[NaH2O]

Ummm.... sandollar - I was calling myself the devil's advocate, not you. I was playing devil's advocate. I was trying to look at it from the other side. I'm a big skimmer kind of girl, but I'm trying to spark some good ole discussion

 

[sandollar]

Playing devil's advocate, what difference does it make if someone decides to set-up their tank this way?

Sounded like it is directed to me, but I will take your word for it. Nothing wrong with anyone wanting to set up their tank this way (it's their tank) and never said it was a bad thing or totally wrong. Infact, I did say it is similar to refugiums which do basically the same thing so I agree that it does provide some "pros". I just however don't think it supports the bold statement that it "replaces all skimmers, refugiums, everything". Maybe it's just me.

 

[NaH2O]

I can assure you that was directed at myself (apologies for the miscommunication). I often like to play devil's advocate to discuss topics further. It is probably the reason I had a history teacher in high school encourage me to become an attorney. He said I always like to argue and debate ....although I don't think he cared for me very much, so maybe he was insulting me

Back on topic - the bold statement got your attention didn't it? I look at it as a good thing. It gets people thinking, talking, and deciding for themselves what is wrong with this statement, or perhaps why they feel the statement is true. Even if you think it is crazy to want to do such a thing, someone reading through it will learn something in the process that they didn't know before. The disagreements aren't a bad thing at all, but a good tool to get information out there.

 

[Herefishyfishy]

Santa Monica, your promotion of the idea is great. Your sketches and pictures are even better. Your documentation of the early stages are wonderful, but your level of willingness to apply the "Scientific method" and accept peer review leaves much to be desired. Though I could be wrong, you come across more as a salesman than one looking to forward the progress of this hobby.

If you think DR Adey's documented research on algal filtration was flawed and his conclusions incorrect and can correct them, excellent. But keep in mind that this type filtration isn't religion and everybody doesn't have to be a believer or be sold. An open mind is a researcher's greatest tool.

http://stason.org/TULARC/animals/aquaria/reefkeeper/2-9-Algae-Scrubbers-long.html

 

[DonW]

sandollar:



I sent my water to a reader who tested with the Hanna and got 0.0. I'll send it to you if you like, or to anybody.

Sorry but not going to happen.. Absolute 0 P simply means certain death . If its alive it requires some level of P. Just the way it is. Maybe get your own hanna colorimeter and do some experimenting with how they work and their limits.

Don

 

[Skimmy]

i know, i know, i prolly helped start this mess....imma sorry

like i keep saying too, i dont think it's a bad idea, it's kinda cool,
it would be fine for a simple softy tank im guessing...i just dont like softies

you could also have the
"incredible wonderous refugium display" method, but i dont think it would go over too well, but lemme tell ya, i had no micro algae problems....lol

(this was from like 10 years ago, the tank had no skimmer, just refugium with miracle mud...[lol...i know]...i went on vacation to mexico for 2 weeks and came back to this)

 

[trido]

(this was from like 10 years ago, the tank had no skimmer, just refugium with miracle mud...[lol...i know]...i went on vacation to mexico for 2 weeks and came back to this)

He He......The clown looks like its afraid of what might be "lurking beneath".

 

[SantaMonica]

A Reader Pulls the Plug!

"Scuba Pro" on the UR site has some good results to tell; here are his complete posts:

9/3: Santamonica after reading through the thread and instructions carefully I am going to give it a try as I like feeding my fish well, means I have bought a skimmer yet I don't like using one due to the food it takes out. I have a couple of questions though: I am going to be doing the sump design version 3. 1) Will the fact that I am not using any timers to create wave affects really affect algae growth that much?? 2) Could I split my display outlet in two and create two of these filters? My sump has four sections! Or would this cause the flow over the sheet to be too slow??

9/9: Well I have set-up the sump version 1 a couple of days ago and its already going very brown. I have decided to actually make either sump version three using a pump or a bucket version on top of my sump, just haven't got the time at the moment. I take it you mean Nitrate and Phosphate readings when referring to N and P?? Also I don't understand why anyone is doubting this. In a natural environment there are no skimmers or mechanical filtration what so ever its all done by nature itself which is basically what we are trying to achieve surely? I can't see there being any drawbacks from trying to put a naturally run filtration system on your tank. I mean Eric Borneman, who in my eyes is one of the best reef keepers and has written books which should be read by anyone looking to succesfully keep a reef aquarium, has a system set-up where by he has a reef tank connected to other tanks where sea grass and other nutrient exporters grow. Now I know this an extreme case but this is ultimately what we are trying to achieve. How people can use their skimmers and UV's and external filters and say that there could be negative effects on your aquarium using a natural fltration method is beyond me. Personally I love the look of this and can totally understand how it works and I have no doubts wether it does or not!!! Just putting my tuppence worth in, not meaning to offend anyone just my opinion.

9/10: Well here are pics of my quick bodge job!! lol. Haven't had time to do it properly. Santamonica can you tell me if it is time to use my fingers under the tap yet?? [pics were not useful]

9/14: Well I have some good news. I decided to turn off my skimmer 4 days ago and took a nitrate reading of 25. I gave the screen half a clean under the tap 3 days ago and now it has gone mental algae blooming. So i decided to take a nitrate reading today before doing a waterchange and they hadn't budged still at 25 maybe even a little lower. This is awsome. I feed very heavily in my tank and I usually have to clean the glass everyday. Since 3 days ago I havent had to touch the front glass with an algae cleaner and the sides the algae is receding. My sand is also not getting any browner either which would definetly happen if the skimmer was off usually. I upgraded my lighting though to a 18w gro light and a 60w reptile light when turning my skimmer off and this has helped greatly. I am also only using about 2/3rds of a 12x12 screen one side!!!!! WOOOHOOO Gonna do a waterchange and keep an eye on the nitrates but I am impressed so far!!

 

[SantaMonica]

Today's build of the day is another one made from a gravel vac. These are easy because you don't need a special cutting tool to cut the slot in the pipe:

 

[SeaMonster]

since my scrubber has established, my skimmer is acting funny. I used to clean the cup every 4-5 days, now its been running for 7 days straight and it does not need cleaning yet.

scrubber has anything to do with that?

my N is still @ 15 where it has been for months.

 

[SantaMonica]

Think about it: If you are doing everything the same (feeding, etc) and less organic stuff is coming out of the skimmer, and N is the same, where is that organic stuff going now that used to get skimmed?

 

[SeaMonster]

OK then, skimmer is off as of last night. I'll keep checking N in the next few days to see what happens.