ceramic rings instead of Neo zeo media

[LISound]

Can I use those ceramic rings you get in filters for my media. I know it's not the zeo stones, but I'm having trouble getting them locally and figured this should do almost the same thing. right? I plan to run them in a phosban reactor.

[bertoni]

Maybe. They'll function as some sort of media, but it's not clear what they'll do. What do you want them to filter?

[C. Schuhmacher]

Hi

Zeo rocks works on a chemistry way and remove Amonia from water.
Normal ceramic rings works only as an media.

Better to use the zeorocks

rgds claude

[Boomer]

D^2

[Boomer]

LiSound

Evey LFS has zeo rocks. Just look for freshwater ammonia remover media or things like "Nitrate Sponge" from Kent Marine or "De-Nitrate" form SeaChem Lavbs or the stuff Claude has at Fauna Marin. Almost all Zeo's are the mineral Clinoptilolite. Their nature has nothing to with ammonia removal in seawater, as it is about nil or the same capacity as activated carbon based on lab tests. Ion exchangers just do not work in seawater as there are to many ions to exchange with like Calcium, Magneisum, Sodium, Potassium, etc.. So, what is with why are they better ? Nobody knows for sure but it is my theory from having and reading many books on the chemistry of Zeolites, that it is a surface phenomena of the Zeolites that bacteria have a liking to, combined with what we call "Void Fractions" i.e, pits, vugs or very large channels that many Zeo's have, which has nothing to do with their pore structure. It is known in the water waste water world that certain species of bacteria like to grow or will grow better on certain types of media. Ceramic stone or rings will work but they just are not as good as Zeo's.

[LISound]

great. thanks for the good info Boomer :)

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Zeo rocks works on a chemistry way and remove Amonia from water.
Normal ceramic rings works only as an media.

Better to use the zeorocks

While I don't dispute the zeorocks initially bind ammonia when first added, why do you believe that is useful or important?

The steps after the ammonia binds that I have seen some post on line are not believable to me.

[Boomer]

While I don't dispute the zeorocks initially bind ammonia when first added, where it then becomes inert in seconds, what else can it do besides having a surface texture and structure they like to just grow on :) And why would a nitrifying bacteria want to expend all kinds of energy trying to pull a ionically charged ion off a rock, when it can pluck it right out of the water column, using very little energy. This is all an old Myth, brought to you by the ZeoVit People, that I have explained in great detail on RC as to why it is just not so.

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I agree. Thanks. :)

[Boomer]

I figured where where just kinda to busy today and left that part out :)

[jlinzmaier]

While I don't dispute the zeorocks initially bind ammonia when first added, where it then becomes inert in seconds, what else can it do besides having a surface texture and structure they like to just grow on :) And why would a nitrifying bacteria want to expend all kinds of energy trying to pull a ionically charged ion off a rock, when it can pluck it right out of the water column, using very little energy. This is all an old Myth, brought to you by the ZeoVit People, that I have explained in great detail on RC as to why it is just not so.

Great explanation Boomer!!

In the "zeo world", the zeolites are regarded as godly with the thought that they bind large amounts of ammonia in addition to acting as a spectacular medium for bacterial growth. Sounds like you agree with the idea that they are a great medium for bacterial growth, but you have very contradictory evidence to show they don't bind large amounts of ammonia as claimed.

Maybe Claude can chime in from a Zeo perspective and show some evidence to support the zeo claims about ammonia binding which seem to be so readily accepted and widespread.

The zeo leaders seem to have very strong opinions about the spectacular effects of zeolites and it's all very contradictroy to your statements. Forgive me for stirring the pot a bit, but I'd sure like to hear both perspectives debated to get to the bottom of some of these claims and let the true facts be heard. Too many false claims and theories get passed on as "facts" in this hobby!!

Jeremy

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Supposing it does bind ammonia, and lots of it, why why would it be desirable to do so?

[Boomer]

I have debated this many times Jeremy on Zeovit threads here, with many Zeovit users, to inculde a ZeoVit masder I like and respect allot, G. Alexander. :) Just type in search Clinoptilolite with Boomer. You may have to use the "archives" search

but you have very contradictory evidence to show they don't bind large amounts of ammonia as claimed.

How is that, there are peer-reviewed papers on seawater and how much ammonia zeo's remove, it is old news. Their capacity is about the same as GAC in tests. I have posted these in Zeo threads before. The only ones that have no evidence are the Zeo people that make a magical claims, defying the laws of ion-exchange. Their's is just hear-say with no proof. The only ones with contradictroy remarks, based on chemistry and science are the Zeovit people. Zeovit people make claims with zero evidence. Show me one test that proves their theory one paper that proves their claim. You can't, as there are none. We have used zeo rocks in this hobby for 2 decades as Nitrate removers, it is an old thing. The Zeo people have just found a means to make it more effective by rinsing it off ever so often.

No lets try to think outside the box of the nonsense of their claim. Zeo rocks get coated with bio-films of bacteria and is why they rinse them off. There will be two layers, a inner faculative denitriying layer and a outer obligated nitrifying layer.

Question 1: What kind of magic is going to take place that the ammonia on the zeo rcok is going to come off the rock find a way to get through the layer of faculative denitriying and getting picked up by the obligated nitrifying bacteria.

Question 2: How is the ammonia in the water going to make it through those two layers once they have been established. Why on earth would a obligated nitrifying bacteria wait for the ammonia to pass through itself through the faculative denitriying to the rock and then from the rock back through the faculative denitriying again and then to the obligated nitrifying bacteria . Should I continue :)

Question 3: Bacteria give off organics and slims, all of which will end up plugging all the vugs, channels. pits etc. So, rinsing it off like they do only removes the surface layers of bio-films. Now, how is more ammonia going to make it through those plugged organics to exchange more ammonia ? This whole concept they have is sill to say the least. I could care less about their claims. So, even if it did have a use with fresh zeo it is gone once coated and plugged and has no more use for ammonia. You would have to change it almost daily. And nothing says that the bacteria are using the ammonia at all on the rock at all. And back to why would they want to pull if off a rock when it is in the water.

The zeo leaders seem to have very strong opinions about the spectacular effects of zeolites and it's all very contradictroy to your statements.

Yah, just that so called claims. We have gone though all this before here and they lost the debate. Gary White, know here on RC as Mesocosm and an expert in this field and a former ZeoVit forum moderator will tell you the same
thing I am.

There is nothing wrong with a Zeo system if that is what one wants, they show some pretty speculator results but allot has to do with additive also. The zeo rock is not magic and has little to do with ammonia adsorption as far as bacteria go. They also have no evidence what so ever that the bacteria even remove any ammonia off a zeo rock if it was adsorbed. It is all marketing hype and a myth some have to or need to buy into. I explained all this to Claude at MACNA last year in our talk on zeo media and his remark was " I never looked at it that way that kinda makes sense"

[Boomer]

I forgot, where is all this vast amount ammonia coming form that the Zeo is going to pick up. You make it sound as if the ammonia in the water has some kind of homing beacon for Zeo rock. What about all the other bacteria in the water column, on the glass, on plants, the bottom SB, etc. that are also sucking up ammonia. Just THNIK about that.

[jlinzmaier]

I think my opinion on the subject may have been mistaken.

Boomer.

I agree entirely with you and Randy. I was merely putting out an offer for a zeo moderator (Claude Schumacher) to provide any evidence whatsoever to the claims by the "zeo experts" that these zeolites have such unimaginable and unproven capabilities. I agree with each and every one of your statements and I very much trust the input you provide in regards to the chemistry and biology surrounding the subject. I have a great deal of respect for you Boomer and the factual detail you provide to so many subjects is very much appreciated.

I have used zeo in the past. I used it for almost a year before deciding to go another route for nutrient management. That decision was largely related to a few significant complications I had while running the system and when asking (on the zeo forum) for sound feedback and helpful advice (with factual backing), to help resolve the trouble I was having, I was given the aforementioned ENTIRELY UNSUBSTANTIATED claims about the magic that the zeo process produces and given (IMO) very silly and rediculous recommendations to resolve the problems. Since there really is no magic there can be no magical answer so I continued to ask for evidence of action about the zeo products and it's process. After continuing to get no factual evidence, or even any reference to any studies, about anything regarding the process, I decided it was best for me to choose another method of nutrient management.

The only reason I posted on this thread was becuase I saw Claude had posted and I was hoping he could clarify or at least give his perspective regarding the zeolites and the widespread significant ammonia binding capabilities. Claude hasn't stated anything in regards to the amount of ammonia they can bind, and there was nothing incorrect about the information he posted, but I was hoping to dig deeper into some of the silly claims about the chemistry and biology of the zeo process.

Claude.

Please don't think I'm calling you out or asking you to justify all of the silly claims that are made about what zeo does and/or doesn't do. I merely wanted to give you a chance to provide your perspective and provide what facts you know about the action of zeolites. My intention was to have a zeo expert help dispel any of the silly myths about zeolites or the zeo process.


Supposing it does bind ammonia, and lots of it, why why would it be desirable to do so?

The frequently repeated response to this question on the zeo forums, is that by binding ammonia, the zeolites will prevent further breakdown of the ammonia into other harmful substances. The emphasis is essentially that it neutralizes the ammonia and prevents it's breakdown into other waste/harmful molecules.

My apologies if I took this too far off topic. I was just intrigued by the claims of the zeo experts I've heard in the past and Claudes quick response to chime in about the zeolites ammonia binding capabilities.

Jeremy

[jlinzmaier]

but you have very contradictory evidence to show they don't bind large amounts of ammonia as claimed.

How is that, there are peer-reviewed papers on seawater and how much ammonia zeo's remove, it is old news. Their capacity is about the same as GAC in tests.

My perspective was mistaken. I didn't mean to make it sound like I didn't believe you. I was trying to entice some of the zeo experts to try and prove other than you have stated.

Jeremy

[jlinzmaier]

One of my favorite shows is Mythbusters. I very much like to make decisions about how I manage my tank based on facts. Unfortunatley there are too many false truths in this hobby. I wish there was a Reef Central mythbusting forum!!!

Jeremy

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

The frequently repeated response to this question on the zeo forums, is that by binding ammonia, the zeolites will prevent further breakdown of the ammonia into other harmful substances. The emphasis is essentially that it neutralizes the ammonia and prevents it's breakdown into other waste/harmful molecules.

If ammonia, nitrite, and nitrate are not elevated in a zeovit system, I can't see the advantage. But if true, then other ammonia uptake methods, like growing macroalgae, share the same advantage. :)

[jlinzmaier]

on the chemistry of Zeolites, that it is a surface phenomena of the Zeolites that bacteria have a liking to, combined with what we call "Void Fractions" i.e, pits, vugs or very large channels that many Zeo's have, which has nothing to do with their pore structure. It is known in the water waste water world that certain species of bacteria like to grow or will grow better on certain types of media. Ceramic stone or rings will work but they just are not as good as Zeo's.

Boomer.

Is there any literature to show that there is more bacterial colonization on zeolites vs other media like ceramic or LR rubble? If so, how much more colonization?? I know - tough question to answer, but I have to ask (more than once you guys have surprised me with answers to what I thought would be questions that have no clear cut answer).

Out of sheer curiosity, whats your take on the information in this article????

http://www.wetwebmedia.com/ca/volume_1/cav1i3/zeovit/Zeolite_Filters/Zeolite_Filters.htm

Separate the fact from fiction for me!!! A few points of interest:
Quote from you:

Evey LFS has zeo rocks. Just look for freshwater ammonia remover media or things like "Nitrate Sponge" from Kent Marine or "De-Nitrate" form SeaChem Lavbs or the stuff Claude has at Fauna Marin. Almost all Zeo's are the mineral Clinoptilolite. Their nature has nothing to with ammonia removal in seawater, as it is about nil or the same capacity as activated carbon based on lab tests.


You've made it sound like a zeolite is a zeolite, yet the article claims there to be special zeolites which work differently in seawater vs freshwater. Is there any truth to that??

Quote from the article:

They remove ammonium very rapidly and extremely efficiently. Although ammonium concentrations are never high (at least they should not be), it is a very important component in the nitrogen cycle. By removing it almost completely, all other processes will be influenced as well. Don’t forget that Zeolites are the most effective ammonium absorbers available.


What???? That makes the zeolites sound as if one of their primary actions in an aquarium is the removal of ammonium.



Is there any credibility to this explanation from the article??

The Zeolites now used for seawater preferentially absorb ammonium, but this is just one half of the story. The other half is where the biology comes in. As already mentioned, Zeolites have a very porous structure. Under the microscope, they look almost like a sponge. The larger holes are MUCH bigger than the smaller ones, about a thousand times bigger. This porous structure creates a large surface area for bacteria to settle. As the ammonium is adsorbed by the crystal structure, the bacteria living on the Zeolite get their food delivered to their doorstep. To enhance the filtration capacity, a carbon source is added, in most cases not directly into the filter, but into the aquarium. In most cases, aquaria are carbon limited.

Therefore, by adding a carbon source, all bacteria in the tank receive some additional food. But as those bacteria that sit on the Zeolite get the ammonia much easier and in much greater quantity than others in the tank, they can make much better "profit" from the carbon addition. To speed up the starting of these filters, some companies offer bacterial starter cultures, although their usefulness is debatable.



Can't wait to hear your feedback!!

Jeremy

[Boomer]

Jeremy

As I said earlier all that has been debated here on RC quite a few time to include having Jens Kallmeyer in the debated and that article. Some threads where even locked up due to the "cult' like nature of some Zeovit people and their remarks. Just do a search like I suggested Keyword = Clinoptilolite User Name = Boomer. I'm not about to spend or take all kinds of time again, for the ump'teenth time, finding it all again and dragging it all up again another time. The Zeo people make claims and have in evidence that show anything they claim. When we have asked them in the past it is all a " trade sceret" and will not give out such info. That article that Jens wrote was for ZeoVit, where are their any ref to back it up. They have you buying into cartoons :) How come it is only again, a aquarium company, selling a product, making claims, can not be found anywhere in the scientific literature to back them up but they found one that works in seawater but no Zeolite chemist or crystallographer, Ion-exchange chemist/expert has and when you ask them they just say " trust us it works as claimed. I do not buy into such hype. Neither does Randy, Habib Sheka, another chemist who has spent lots of time looking for such a product, who was also in on that debate or Mesocosm who knows more about bacteria and their needs than anybody in this hobby and lets no leave out Mike Noren of Sweden.

You need to go back and read my points 1, 2 and 3 which none of them can not answer. Why because they can't. Ask yourself how can that happen and why in God's name would any bacteria want to do that, feed on a rock when it is is right in the water passing by them? They are going to wait for it to attach to the rock. It is a silly idea.

Just one comment again which I already gave you

This porous structure creates a large surface area for bacteria to settle. As the ammonium is adsorbed by the crystal structure, the bacteria living on the Zeolite get their food delivered to their doorstep.

How the heck is a bacteria living on a Zeolite going to have ammonia delivered to its door step, as he claims, when the ammonia would have to go through the bacteria to get to the zeo rock, only then for the bacteria then to remove it from the rock. ssssh.

[jlinzmaier]

Forgive me Boomer. I had no intention in wasting your time. I didn't realize you had previously discussed that article and the claims that are made within it. I'll do a seach and find the threads you directed me towards. Sounds like the answers to my questions are waiting there for me. Truly appreciate your input.

Thanks again.

Jeremy

[jlinzmaier]

Double post

[jlinzmaier]

Wow!!! Now I see where your coming from Boomer. There is oodles of debate in previous threads. After reading a few threads and dozens of posts with reference to dozens of research papaers, I entirely understand why you don't want to get back into a deep debate about the topic. Kind of like beating a dead horse!! LOL!!!

Thanks again.

Jeremy

[Boomer]

Ok Bud :)