Reef Central Online Community

Go Back   Reef Central Online Community > General Interest Forums > Lighting, Filtration & Other Equipment
Blogs FAQ Calendar Mark Forums Read

Notices

User Tag List

Reply
Thread Tools
Unread 09/04/2008, 09:52 PM   #276
2_zoa
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,840
jglackin,

I would agree I like things to be simple. The surge is a simple design and does not require and additional pumps but it is one more component.


2_zoa is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09/04/2008, 10:19 PM   #277
SantaMonica
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Santa Monica, California, USA
Posts: 2,511
Servicky: Yes, a turf algae screen solves the exact purpose that you seek. It's main function is to remove Nitrate and Phosphate from your water, which will kill the algae in your tank. There are other ways too, but if you want to target the problem algae directly and wipe it out within 4 weeks, and do it for basically free, with no risk, then a 5-gallon sized turf bucket will do it for you. And although your tank is a 150, a 5-gallon bucket will hold a 144 square-inch screen, which is fine. Just use the recommended lighting or stronger. See the first page of this thread for the building instructions.

jglackin: Putting strip lights along the sides of the screen basically get you this, which I am building now:




SantaMonica is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09/05/2008, 06:35 AM   #278
Rngrdave
Registered Member
 
Rngrdave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Johnson City, TN
Posts: 26
I've redone that fixture... No those wires aren't exposed. They are covered in a fiberglass insulation. All the ends are sealed with silicon and the base where the bulb screws in is wrapped tightly with many layers of electrical tape. There is no exposed metal. The unit is also grounded and hooked up to a GFCI switch. All wiring connections are soldered. Do you think this will be sufficient?


Rngrdave is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09/05/2008, 09:18 AM   #279
2_zoa
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,840
Rngrdave,

I don't know if fiberglass is rated to be a contact material. In my house i have some can light fixtures that are rated for direct contact with insulation and some that aren't. ( I don't understand why I am not an electrician ) Also is there any way for the insulation to absorb moisture causing it to become wet or like a wet rag? I think the best way to be sure of any thing is to remove the doubt in the situation... ie. moving the fixture to a dry area, I know it involves more time and money but nobody can put a price on safety...............??Can they??


2_zoa is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09/05/2008, 10:39 AM   #280
SantaMonica
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Santa Monica, California, USA
Posts: 2,511
Part 1 of 2



2 Weeks Overload At the LFS!

One day I was in my LFS, and he was complaining of N and P being "crazy high" in one of his FO retail displays. I looked at what he was currently doing for filtration... G4 skimmer, bio balls, Phosban reactor, 2 Ocean Clear mechanical filters, and a UV on a 300 gal FO display, and he is feeding 16 cubes a day. He is currently building a custom acrylic waterfall box turf filter like I outlined in the first page of my RC post, but it's not finished yet. He says he has to keep N and P under control by changing 100g every two weeks. The bio balls seem mostly under water; to me, that would reduce their power. Also he thinks he might need to remove the mechanical filters.

Since my bucket-build thread was done, and since I completed the pics of it for the first week, I thought it was wasting its potential trying to filter my 90 since my 90 also has the original pre-grown turf bucket already working. So I asked the LFS guy if he'd like to borrow my bucket. He said yes, so I went right away to get it, and told him to measure N and P meanwhile. I had to wrap the screen in wet towels to keep it from drying out, but otherwise the whole bucket was light and easy to carry in the car. When I got there he showed me his test (Red Sea, I think), and they were deep dark colors. But I wanted to use Salifert so they'd correspond with my tank, so I used my kits to measure: N = 50, P = Off the chart (very deep dark blue). His main goal was to stop the daily rise in N and P, especially N, which had been rising an average of 1 per day.

So we set the bucket on top of his sump so it would just drain down, and hooked up one of his pumps to the waterfall pipe (no wavemaker timer), and hooked up the lights to one of his timers (18 hours on), and away it went. Here are the day-by-day measurements:


....................N...........P.............Comment
.
day 1..........50...........1.5+............
day 2..........50...........1.5+............
day 3..........50...........1.5+............
day 4..........50...........1.5+.........Cleaned; Iron added
day 5..........*............*...............Not measured; Original diatoms gone
day 6..........*............*...............Not measured; Waiting for WC
day 7..........*............*...............Not measured; he did 100g WC
day 8..........50...........1.5+.........WC did almost nothing, N and P same
day 9..........45?..........1.5+.........Screen about 75% full
day 10.........45...........1.5+.........Screen about 80% full
day 11..........*............*..............Store Closed Labor Day
day 12..........*............*..............Store Closed
day 13.........40?..........1.5+........95% full; bottom completely full
day 14.........35!..........1.5+........Starting to develop spots; Cleaned


And here are the pics. Note that the in-bucket pics were done with the water still flowing, since after crawling under wooden beams to get to the bucket, I had forgotten to unplug the pump; so thereafter all pics needed the pump running so they would match:

First, here is the left half of the display, and the right half (all are one system connected together):

. . . .


Here's the bio balls in the sump; Note high water level:

[pic limit]
Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/LFSbioBalls.jpg


His G4 skimmer and Phosban reactor:

[pic limit]


His mechanical filters:

[pic limit]


Here's the bucket as delivered, with screen wrapped to stay wet:

[pic limit]


The bucket was put behind the wood shelves, on top of the sump, between the tanks:

[pic limit]


Day 0: This is the screen as delivered, after the one-week test thread was finished:


Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/LFSscreenDay00.jpg


Day 1, Cleaned bottom of bucket:


Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/LFSscreenDay01.jpg


Day 2:


Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/LFSscreenDay02.jpg


Day 3:


Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/LFSscreenDay03.jpg


Day 3, Removed:


(hi-res was blurry)


Day 3, Cleaned:


Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/LFSs...y03cleaned.jpg


Day 4:


http://www.radio-media.com/fish/LFSscreenDay04.jpg


Day 5: Skip
Day 6: Skip

Day 7:


Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/LFSscreenDay07.jpg


SantaMonica is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09/05/2008, 10:42 AM   #281
SantaMonica
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Santa Monica, California, USA
Posts: 2,511
Part 2 of 2:



Day 8:


Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/LFSscreenDay08.jpg


Day 9:


Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/LFSscreenDay09.jpg


Day 10:


Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/LFSscreenDay10.jpg


Day 11: Skip
Day 12: Skip

Day 13:


Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/LFSscreenDay13.jpg


Day 14:


Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/LFSscreenDay14.jpg


Day 14, Removed (flash); Removed (no-Flash):


Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/LFSs...y14removed.jpg


Day 14, Closeup of spots:

[pic limit]
Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/LFSs...y14closeup.jpg


Day 14, Cleaning:


http://www.radio-media.com/fish/LFSs...14cleaning.jpg


Day 14, Cleaned:


Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/LFSs...y14cleaned.jpg


Day 14, reinstalled:


Hi-Res: http://www.radio-media.com/fish/LFSs...einstalled.jpg


Results:

[pic limit]



Now, this bucket is way undersized for this application. It's only 144 sq in, with just average CFL lights, and the lights are not right-up-next to the screen (due to bucket design) the way they should be for optimum performance. His tank is 300 gallons, highly fed, with no rock and no sand. But the idea is not to see if N and P can be reduced; instead it's to see how fast a screen can grow with basically unlimited nutrients. Secondarily, yes, I'd like to see how much of a dent an undersized screen can make in N and P, as long as it is cleaned properly. (The acrylic box he's building is 300 sq in, and is only 4 inches thick... he's going to place several 150 watts along the vertical walls.)

P was always off the scale, although it was indeed getting to be a lighter blue. But since blue blocks a lot of light, you cannot tell how much off the scale it is because it starts looking gray.

In the first few days of the bucket test, there was major green growth. And the growth was in clumps, as opposed to how it grew in my system, which was more of an even film of brown and green. My guess is that since nutrients are so high in his tank, once a single spot of green starts on the screen, that algae is no longer limited by trying to attach itself; it now is only limited by how fast it can multiply (which with unlimited nutrients, is astronomically fast). I can only imagine if the bucket had proper lighting (like his new acrylic box will), how fast/much it would grow.

His main objective (not mine) was indeed N and P reduction. So on day 3, I figured I'd clean the screen even though it still had bare spots on it (it had only had a week to grow on my tank). The screen is not his only filter, so I did not have to clean just one side. Pulling out the screen, it was apparent that the stronger growth was on the upper part, near the light, showing once again the importance of strong light. I cleaned both sides and put it back; for some reason it cleaned all the way down to the bare screen, not leaving much behind. I used a toothbrush, but didn't scrub that hard. We also added some iron for the first time ever in this tank.

Disappointment on Day 5. Hardly any growth. I think what happend was the the base-growth that was on the screen when I brought it was from the one-week test on my 90, which means it would be a certain type of algae (diatoms, I believe). However his tank has different chemistry and as you saw in the pics started off with green hair clumps right away. So the base of brown diatoms died, and thus the screen basically went back to brand new in his tank.

This being the case, he could not wait any longer and said he needs to change water to get the numbers down. He did a 100 gal change (on 300 total volume) on Day 6, and I came back on Day 7 to measure: Almost no change! I think he's got detritus in the bio balls or the mechanical filter, or somewhere. Nevertheless, it's still a good nutrient source for my growth test.

Growth is solid again by Day 8. Have not seen this type of growth before... big clumps of dark brown slimey stuff, right next to areas of empty screen. Mine had always filled in evenly, but this is doing it in clumps. Almost looks like someone threw mud on the screen. Regardless, the flow goes right over the clumps with no problem. This time, I'm going to let the screen fill up before I clean it, otherwise only the same areas will start growing. Only after previously-grown areas fill up will the empty areas start growing.

By Day 13, the bottom of the screen was packed, and the top had only a few empty places left. The N test looked like it was coming down, but I did not really expect it too since the tank was so heavily loaded. I wanted to clean the screen that day, but the LFS guy was impressed that the N was not rising like it usually does, and even possibly dropping. Day 14, the end of two weeks, the N actually tested about 35. He was amazed, since it normally goes up every day. He wanted to keep it as-is, but I could see some spots developing on the screen from the pods, so I said we better clean it now.

After pulling the screen out, it was easy to see the spots. It had been 10 days since cleaning; way overdue. Definitely time to clean under tap water. The feel of the algae was amazing... like tar spilled on the beach that had been drying for a while. The screen seemed to weigh a full pound. I put it in the sink and just pushed the algae off the screen with my fingers (not fingernails). This was not turf, but it was thick and heavy. There is no timer on this setup, just constant flow, so I'm not really expecting turf to develop anyway.

So I put it back into operation. He's still waiting on his custom acrylic box to be delivered, so until then this bucket will have to work alone.


SantaMonica is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09/06/2008, 01:18 PM   #282
SantaMonica
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Santa Monica, California, USA
Posts: 2,511
Today's screen of the day is the simplest one so far, complete with postitive test results. He says:

"After 4 days running, i has a green hair algae growth around 3-4 cm... and i didn't see any brown diatom algae. i use OSRAM 23W tornado day light. in the picture...this is 6 days result... the algae is a brown color... but the real is a green hair algae.... and this is just a test... so i use a small screen.. but i already see the result here. i didn't rub the algae to start... just has 24/7 lightning time. i just check my N yesterday [Day 10]... it's down greatly.. from 50 ppm become 35 ppm... and my P remover has work slower.... i always change the P remover once a week.... but it's already 2 weeks i didn't changed."




SantaMonica is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09/06/2008, 06:55 PM   #283
Rngrdave
Registered Member
 
Rngrdave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Johnson City, TN
Posts: 26
Quote:
Originally posted by 2_zoa
Rngrdave,

I don't know if fiberglass is rated to be a contact material. In my house i have some can light fixtures that are rated for direct contact with insulation and some that aren't. ( I don't understand why I am not an electrician ) Also is there any way for the insulation to absorb moisture causing it to become wet or like a wet rag? I think the best way to be sure of any thing is to remove the doubt in the situation... ie. moving the fixture to a dry area, I know it involves more time and money but nobody can put a price on safety...............??Can they??
No. And I agree with you completely. I've given it some thought and still haven't decided what I want to do. Right now I only use the algae scrubber when I'm home and I have installed a smoke detector and a fire extinguisher in that room. The whole setup seems to be very water tight and I've though over several scenarios to where the fixture actually might get wet. As it sits now there is no water that gets on the bulbs even though they are down in the trashcan. There might be a little salt mist but this gets on my main tank lights as well and hasn't caused any problem other than blocking out some of the light.

I'm considering putting a titanium ground probe in the trashcan and hooking it up to a dedicated GFCI circuit. This way if there is ANY electricity going to the water from the bulbs then it will trip the power before it caused a problem. I also calculated that the bulbs pull a combined 0.4 amps including startup. I will probably put a fuse on this line so that if there is any short in the circuit that the GFCI doesn't catch, then it will blow the fuse instead. Kind of like a safety backup.


Rngrdave is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09/06/2008, 07:09 PM   #284
aqua180
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 54
do you all realize it takes one sq ft of screen for every 100gal?


aqua180 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09/06/2008, 07:13 PM   #285
One Dumm Hikk
Moved On
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Phenix City Alabama
Posts: 739
aqua, probably not but they haven't realized the other drawbacks to an ATS yet either. I have asked SM - repeatedly - about drawbacks and he simply ignores me.


One Dumm Hikk is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09/06/2008, 07:31 PM   #286
SantaMonica
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Santa Monica, California, USA
Posts: 2,511
Correct... about one square inch per gallon, or one square foot (144 sq inches) per 144 gallons, if the screen is lit on both sides brightly. Brightly means at least one equivalent watt per square inch each side. So a 25 watt CFL, with a 144 watt equivalent output on each side, would be minimum. I'm currently using two on each side.


__________________
Inventor of the easy-to-DIY upflow scrubber, and also the waterfall scrubber that everyone loves to build:
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1424843
SantaMonica is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09/07/2008, 01:08 AM   #287
RonMidtownStomp
You can edit this?
 
RonMidtownStomp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orangevale (Sacramento Area)
Posts: 3,993
So what are the drawbacks?


__________________
Back in a hobby with an island 4-side viewable 4' cube with center overflow. Old school SPS dominant with a nice zoa collection and a few chalices.
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t
RonMidtownStomp is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09/07/2008, 01:15 AM   #288
shiromeda
Registered Member
 
shiromeda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Roseville
Posts: 65
RonMidtownStomp if you proceed with building this turf algea filter, please let me know, I would love to know your first hand experience with it as I am fairly new to salt water ( my 2nd month so far) and I would certainly love to get rid of the small amount of green algae I have in my tank.

thank you.


shiromeda is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09/07/2008, 01:23 AM   #289
Michael
NTTH Rookie Help
 
Michael's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Gloucester, England,UK
Posts: 7,808
Blog Entries: 6
wow what a read this thread is, i have to say that the information provided is more than adequate, seems like a good idea, i dont like the enclosed bucket type due to 2 factors, 1 electrical items not getting air around them and 2 i cant see whats happening inside, apart from that i think its a superb idea, and just a case of trying to think of a design that would work for me, i may well try it yet


__________________
Don't be afraid to ask questions, we in the new to the hobby are here to help you
[For My Tank Spec,Photo Album,Articles and website, click on my name]

MY Very Kindest and Warmest Regards ,
MIKE

Current Tank Info: I have a 92 gal Corner Tank, and way too many pieces of equipment to list really, (proud member of the reef central corner club)
Michael is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09/07/2008, 01:27 AM   #290
RonMidtownStomp
You can edit this?
 
RonMidtownStomp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Orangevale (Sacramento Area)
Posts: 3,993
My first reaction is that there are probably easier ways to go about doing that. Either my sailfin tang or my blue tang would probably trip over each other trying to eat it. I think emerald crabs eat it, too? Sounds like free fish food to me.


__________________
Back in a hobby with an island 4-side viewable 4' cube with center overflow. Old school SPS dominant with a nice zoa collection and a few chalices.
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t
RonMidtownStomp is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09/07/2008, 01:36 AM   #291
One Dumm Hikk
Moved On
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Phenix City Alabama
Posts: 739
Quote:
Originally posted by RonMidtownStomp
My first reaction is that there are probably easier ways to go about doing that. Either my sailfin tang or my blue tang would probably trip over each other trying to eat it. I think emerald crabs eat it, too? Sounds like free fish food to me.
It is. Research ATS'es and most public aquariums use them. But, they also use skimmers, carbon (for yellow water). The ATS does not replace them (in contrast to what SM claims). As the bacteria layers die off, they release agents that cause the yellowing effect in the water. Carbon removes them but new algae can't.

Phosphate reactors, macroalgae (refugium) are a lot better at filtering than an ATS is.


One Dumm Hikk is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09/07/2008, 01:51 AM   #292
SantaMonica
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Santa Monica, California, USA
Posts: 2,511
Concerning yellowing, this has to do with when and how the algae is scraped ("harvested"), and also what type of algae is growing. It's also something that folks years ago (along with all public aquariums) experienced, but most folks nowadays don't.

It's pretty well known that if you just leave the algae to grow and grow, that you'll definitely get yellowing. After all, the yellowing is coming from the chlorophyll's which are green-plant based. And if you don't harvest, the green algae will overtake the brown/red. But the actual turf we want is not green, it's brown/red. So this is why the current group of turf users get very high filtering (not needing any help), and no yellowing.

However another discovery has come about, resulting from the physical size of the unit. The units of the public aquariums are big and bulkly and not easily disassembled, and thus they just scrape the turf while in-place. Well, it looks like this causes a rupturing of algal cells, allowing the contents to be reintroduced to the tank water. The current batch of small scrubbers, including my turf bucket, requires you to take the screen off and clean it in the sink with running tap water. So this problem is solved. I know I have zero yellowing in mine, and I have heard of zero current yellowing in others. But if yellowing did occur for whatever reason, a monthly dose of carbon (that you need anyway to remove allelopathics) will fix it up.


__________________
Inventor of the easy-to-DIY upflow scrubber, and also the waterfall scrubber that everyone loves to build:
http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1424843
SantaMonica is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09/07/2008, 07:11 AM   #293
aqua180
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 54
I have been using a flatbed ats for a while now with no yellowing, santa is correct, you must remove the screen and harvest the algae every week then rinse the screen well with saltwater before you replace it.


aqua180 is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09/07/2008, 09:40 AM   #294
Tang Salad
Algae skeptic
 
Tang Salad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 78702
Posts: 3,098
Quote:
Originally posted by RonMidtownStomp
So what are the drawbacks?
The main one is that a system with growing algae will never have Zero Nitrates or Zero Phospates, no matter what the test kits say.

If the alage is growing, then the water is, ipso facto, high in nutrients. A skimmer does a far better job at removing undesirables than any algae, turf or otherwise. Santa Monica cannot address this point, so he simply ignores it (on this and the other dozen reef boards he has posted this on.)


__________________
Your algae is not special.

Current Tank Info: TBD ADA 120-P SPS NLPS
Tang Salad is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09/07/2008, 09:50 AM   #295
Tang Salad
Algae skeptic
 
Tang Salad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 78702
Posts: 3,098
Quote:
Originally posted by shiromeda
RonMidtownStomp if you proceed with building this turf algea filter, please let me know, I would love to know your first hand experience with it as I am fairly new to salt water ( my 2nd month so far) and I would certainly love to get rid of the small amount of green algae I have in my tank.

thank you.
Hi Shiromeda-
If you're new to saltwater, then I'd suggest you stick with the current tried-and-true methods, rather than hop aboard Santa Monica's resurrected ghost train.

Make sure your protein skimmer is working well, don't overfeed or overstock your tank, and do regular water changes. The algae will die off on its own, and you'll end up with cleaner water than you would with this turf algae method.

Also, keep in mind that every new tank goes through several phases of algae. So you're not alone!

If you want to post pictures or more details of your setup, then we could give you more specific advice. Good luck!


__________________
Your algae is not special.

Current Tank Info: TBD ADA 120-P SPS NLPS
Tang Salad is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09/07/2008, 10:07 AM   #296
Rngrdave
Registered Member
 
Rngrdave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Johnson City, TN
Posts: 26
Quote:
Originally posted by Tang Salad
If the alage is growing, then the water is, ipso facto, high in nutrients. A skimmer does a far better job at removing undesirables than any algae, turf or otherwise.
This is partially true... I agree about the part regarding "0" nitrate and phosphate... the simple fact that there is still algae growth shows that there are still nutrients being consumed from the water column.

However a skimmer can not remove these things. It simply removes dissolved organics which can lead to nitrate issues. I've used a refugium with mangroves and chaetomorpha algae for years. While it does not completely filter the tank on its own, it does a good job of lessening the amount of algae that grows in my display tank. By providing an ideal environment for algae to grow, you create a situation where the algae in the tank is competing with the algae in the scrubber. Since you provide the ideal environment for algae in the scrubber, then you will effectively reduce or eliminate any algae in the tank...

Most of our filtration processes mimic something already found in the ocean. A DSB mimics the sand beaches absorbing nutrients from the ocean. A skimmer mimics the waves crashing, creating foam which filters the water of organic compounds... And an ATF mimics natural algae growth along the shoreline. All of these are natural processes and all of them are part of the big picture when it comes to the oceans maintaining themselves...

I see nothing wrong with supplementing a system with an ATF... But I don't think it's the "final solution" either.


Rngrdave is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09/07/2008, 10:47 AM   #297
SantaMonica
Registered Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Santa Monica, California, USA
Posts: 2,511
Aqua:

Quote:
rinse the screen well with saltwater before you replace it.
I've been washing with tap water, for the purpose of killing the pod population that will consume the algae (see pic of spots on the 2-week LFS trial above). IA recommends FW too. Adey, of course, scraped in-system and did not have a FW option. I've not done a comparisoin of tap to RO, but the tap results have been so good that I'm not motivated to think more about it yet.

Salad:

Quote:
The main one is that a system with growing algae will never have Zero Nitrates or Zero Phospates, no matter what the test kits say
The goal of this thread is to get N and P to measure zero on test kits. I think you're smart enough to know that. It is for the average new aquarist on their first or second tank, who probably doesn't even have test kits, and has green all over their rocks and glass. Nobody cares about true absolute zero.

Quote:
If the alage is growing, then the water is, ipso facto, high in nutrients
Correct. Although the nutrients are being lowered as it grows.

Quote:
A skimmer does a far better job at removing undesirables than any algae
If you are including NO3 and PO4 as the "undesireables", then you are wrong. Skimmers do not remove inorganic N and P at all. Not at all. That's why a skimmed system needs additional devices to take the inorganic N and P out.

Quote:
Santa Monica cannot address this point
How is this entire thread, which has covered your simple question many times, not addressing the point?

Quote:
so he simply ignores it (on this and the other dozen reef boards he has posted this on.
You're kidding. This thread, as well as others, were created for the sole purpose of showing how an algae filter brings down inorganic N and P.

By the way, what skimmer manufacturer/distributer/retailer do you work for?

Quote:
rather than hop aboard Santa Monica's resurrected ghost train
If you mean that algae-filtering has been around for a long time, you are correct.

Quote:
you'll end up with cleaner water than you would with this turf algae method.
Post proof.


SantaMonica is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09/07/2008, 11:04 AM   #298
miwoodar
Likey the bikey
 
miwoodar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Colorado
Posts: 3,371
Quote:
Originally posted by Tang Salad

If you're new to saltwater, then I'd suggest you stick with the current tried-and-true methods, rather than hop aboard Santa Monica's resurrected ghost train.
+1

If you're new to saltwater, you've got so much to learn already. Don't overcomplicate your learning curve.

I ran an ATS in 97/98...haven't felt the need to run one ever since.


__________________
Mike

On hiatus. I'm either out riding my bicycle, playing with my family, or throwing ferts in my planted tank. Or working. I hope I'm not doing that though.

Current Tank Info: 140 DIY Cube
miwoodar is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09/07/2008, 11:31 AM   #299
One Dumm Hikk
Moved On
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Phenix City Alabama
Posts: 739
Quote:
Originally posted by SantaMonica
I've been washing with tap water, for the purpose of killing the pod population that will consume the algae (see pic of spots on the 2-week LFS trial above). IA recommends FW too. Adey, of course, scraped in-system and did not have a FW option. I've not done a comparisoin of tap to RO, but the tap results have been so good that I'm not motivated to think more about it yet.
Wait. In the beginning of this thread you said that everything skimmers, etc. were pulling out was food for something in the tank and thats bad, and now you are intentionally killing/removing that food? And you don't find that contradictory?

And, the aspect of using RO water versus tap water is a no-brainer. I bet the chlorine and chloramine you are adding to the tank is good for your corals though.

Quote:
Originally posted by SantaMonica

The goal of this thread is to get N and P to measure zero on test kits. I think you're smart enough to know that. It is for the average new aquarist on their first or second tank, who probably doesn't even have test kits, and has green all over their rocks and glass. Nobody cares about true absolute zero.
Only if they don't know better. And anybody that knows then they know they don't want zero readings and they know why. I have alluded to that in the past by asking about the effects of true zero nitrates on some softies (zooanthids).

Quote:
Originally posted by SantaMonica


Correct. Although the nutrients are being lowered as it grows.
And removing "food" in the process. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Quote:
Originally posted by SantaMonica

If you are including NO3 and PO4 as the "undesireables", then you are wrong. Skimmers do not remove inorganic N and P at all. Not at all. That's why a skimmed system needs additional devices to take the inorganic N and P out.
N and P are part of the "food" you claim that is being removed from the tank and is so detrimental. Contradictory to say the least.

Quote:
Originally posted by SantaMonica
How is this entire thread, which has covered your simple question many times, not addressing the point?
It hasn't even come close to answering my questions. I have asked them repeatedly on another site where you proclaimed this bucket the savior of the newbes and you still haven't answered them. NOT A ONE.

Quote:
Originally posted by SantaMonica


By the way, what skimmer manufacturer/distributer/retailer do you work for?
Is that your common defense? To accuse anyone who disagrees with you of working for a company that would want to quash ATS'es? You have accused me of the same thing and its getting quite old.

So, let me ask YOU. What Turf manufacturer/distributor/retailer do YOU work for?


One Dumm Hikk is offline   Reply With Quote
Unread 09/07/2008, 11:46 AM   #300
Tang Salad
Algae skeptic
 
Tang Salad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: 78702
Posts: 3,098
Well SM I don't feel I need to respond to your points above, as others have already responded. They've responded here in this thread and in the multiple clones of this thread that you've started on other boards. If you'd spent any time reading here on RC (or other boards) you'd know these answers yourself.

It's interesting to me that the ONLY contribution you've made here at RC is to repeatedly exaggerate the glories of this outdated method. If you really know so much about the fundamentals of reefkeeping, why haven't you contributed to ANY other threads?


__________________
Your algae is not special.

Current Tank Info: TBD ADA 120-P SPS NLPS
Tang Salad is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:45 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2024 Axivo Inc.
Use of this web site is subject to the terms and conditions described in the user agreement.
Reef CentralTM Reef Central, LLC. Copyright ©1999-2022
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.