Algae Scrubber???

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ksturg
  • Start date Start date
  • Tagged users None

Ksturg

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Jan 13, 2017
Messages
457
Reaction score
238
Location
Galesburg, Illinois
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Is anyone using an algae scrubber and if so does it work well? Does it keep your display tank algae free? What equipment are people using for an algae scrubber? I’m thinking of making one but want opinions on if it will be worth it or not.
 
Is anyone using an algae scrubber and if so does it work well? Does it keep your display tank algae free? What equipment are people using for an algae scrubber? I’m thinking of making one but want opinions on if it will be worth it or not.
Algae scrubbers (while I dont use one) are absolutely worth it if you're not able to incorporate a refugium. Alot ot reefers use them with great success :) my good friend @BoomCorals uses one on his frag system and his frag tanks are always good looking :)
 
Algae scrubbers (while I dont use one) are absolutely worth it if you're not able to incorporate a refugium. Alot ot reefers use them with great success :) my good friend @BoomCorals uses one on his frag system and his frag tanks are always good looking :)
I actually prefer ATS over fuge. :)
 
Is anyone using an algae scrubber and if so does it work well? Does it keep your display tank algae free? What equipment are people using for an algae scrubber? I’m thinking of making one but want opinions on if it will be worth it or not.
A correctly designed & built Algae Scrubber will export NH3/4 NO3 & PO4 while oxygenating the water & raising & stabilizing pH. The Scrubber macroalgae will out compete display algae & cyanobacteria.

https://www.algaescrubbing.com/threads/algae-scrubber-basics.264/
 
A correctly designed & built Algae Scrubber will export NH3/4 NO3 & PO4 while oxygenating the water & raising & stabilizing pH. The Scrubber macroalgae will out compete display algae & cyanobacteria.

https://www.algaescrubbing.com/threads/algae-scrubber-basics.264/


As a general rule, for your algae filter to outcompete display tank algae, the
lights on algae filter need be brighter than lights on display tanks.. This is true for any form of algae filtration: macro refugium, ATS or Chaeto reactor.
 
As a general rule, for your algae filter to outcompete display tank algae, the
lights on algae filter need be brighter than lights on display tanks.. This is true for any form of algae filtration: macro refugium, ATS or Chaeto reactor.
Not quite. Using specifically red 660nm spectrum, in the 'ideal' intensity range, & the air / water interface created by the thin film of water flowing over the screen creates an optimal environment overall.
 
@Scrubber_steve
I would agree after we discuss “ideal intensity range of red and the air/water interface”. With red spectrum being lower energy than blue, I have found that small red diodes do not penetrate water as
easily. To penetrate deeper water with red spectrum, I use larger watt diodes and a ratio of 4:1 red & blue.
While the air/water interface in ATS may be a better mechanism for co2 exchange, the use of a calcium reactor in front of macro refugium changes the advantage.
 
WARNING!!!! NOT A POLITICALLY CORRECT POST!!!!!

No it's not worth it.
We did this back in the day, learned our lessons, licked our wounds, and moved on.
Then people figured out they could make money from it, and now ATS's are back.
People with a dissenting voice, and no real dog in this fight, like myself, have been drowned out by those making money, who have a vested interest in promoting these things.
They claim that the "new" ATS's are different than those of old. No they're not. Nothing fundamental has changed. They're still based on the exact same chemistry and biology that they always were. Growing algae on vertical surfaces, and using red LED's doesn't change this fact.
They claim that the algae can't, or won't, migrate from the scrubber to the tank, but I've never heard of anyone supplying a starter culture to their ATS. The algae simply migrates from other areas of the system to the scrubber, but they want you to believe there's some magical force field that keeps it from leaving the scrubber, and moving to the display........
They pick and choose the science that supports their cause, while ignoring the overwhelming body of evidence that doesn't. They say that ATS's provide "organic food" to the display. While ignoring the fact that this "organic food" is the same stuff that turns your water yellow, increases the overall nutrient content of our glass boxes, and enables the algae to spread and conquer new territory.
They claim that we can use GAC, mechanical filtration, and protein skimmers to remove allelopathic chemicals, dies, and solid organic particle produced by the ATS. IMHO, if we have to employ real filtration to clean up the mess produced by the ATS, maybe the ATS isn't quite as efficient as they claim it to be.
With things like this, where people are intentionally, or simply through being misinformed, promoting bad science, it's typically those of us that keep the most delicate species that see the negative effects first. This latest ATS craze has been out for a while now, and the negative effects have started to show themselves despite the loud voices of those who support, and make money from ATS's. At first, many different types of hobbyists jumped on the bandwagon and installed ATS's. Everyone from SPS keepers to FO. Now, we can go to the SPS section of any forum board like this and see that ATS's have fallen out of favor with these hobbyists. Naturally, there's still a few die hard stragglers, but for the most part, SPS keepers have once again, learned their lessons, licked their wounds, and moved on. If ATS's are the magical filtration devices they're claimed to be, shouldn't it be those that require the cleanest water that are praising them and shouting from the roof tops how great they are????
Hopefully, some day sooner than later, people will see the truth, and these things will return to the trash heap of the hobby, where they once were, along side DSB's, and the Eco Aqualizer, where they belong.

Peace
and good luck with your system
EC:)
 
Is anyone using an algae scrubber and if so does it work well? Does it keep your display tank algae free? What equipment are people using for an algae scrubber? I’m thinking of making one but want opinions on if it will be worth it or not.

Algae filters of all types each have their own specific pros & cons. It depends more on your physical layout and preference of maintenance. To make your decision, I would focus on ease of harvesting macro to be discarded.
 
@Elegance Coral, because you have repeatedly posted this exact same junk on various internet forums over the years, & persistently ignore everyone who attempts to correct your misplaced assertions, it is obvious you are, as usual, just looking for an argument, & therefore I believe I can accurately & rightly call you a troll.

You claim to have “no real dog in this fight”. This is a lie, proven by the same old passionate rant.
Why target Algae scrubbers (ATS) rather than using the term “Algae filtration” ?
Why not mention of Chaeto Refugiums, or Macro Algae Reactors ?
Seems >>ATS << is stuck in your conscience.

Julian Sprung is someone worth listening to on the matter folks

 
@Scrubber_steve,
Thank you for the Julian Spring video. I have all three volumes of Reef Aquarium series and consider them the reefkeeping bible.

BRS TV video series has covered serial types of algae filtration with the most emphasis on Chaetomorphy refugium. I consider Chaeto substandard in performance, but probably the easiest to harvest.

Do you favor ulva in your ATS? I favor ulva in air tumble culture. If nitrogen is sufficient, ulvae can outgrow Chaeto 4:1. Many fish eat ulvae. When you clean your ATS screens, what do you do with ulva:
nutrient export or nutrient recycle?
 
@Scrubber_steve,

Do you favor ulva in your ATS? I favor ulva in air tumble culture. If nitrogen is sufficient, ulvae can outgrow Chaeto 4:1. Many fish eat ulvae. When you clean your ATS screens, what do you do with ulva:
nutrient export or nutrient recycle?
Interesting thing Subsy is the ulva grew naturally (unseeded) on my scrubber screen. It was already in my system naturally but I never saw it growing anywhere at all until it appeared on my screen.
I can seed the ulva onto anyones scrubber screen easily too.
I feed some of it to the fish, use it in the garden. I fine blended some the other day to test if it can be used as a brine shrimp food? May not be fine enough for the newely hatched ?
 
WARNING!!!! NOT A POLITICALLY CORRECT POST!!!!!

No it's not worth it.
We did this back in the day, learned our lessons, licked our wounds, and moved on.
Then people figured out they could make money from it, and now ATS's are back.
People with a dissenting voice, and no real dog in this fight, like myself, have been drowned out by those making money, who have a vested interest in promoting these things.
They claim that the "new" ATS's are different than those of old. No they're not. Nothing fundamental has changed. They're still based on the exact same chemistry and biology that they always were. Growing algae on vertical surfaces, and using red LED's doesn't change this fact.
They claim that the algae can't, or won't, migrate from the scrubber to the tank, but I've never heard of anyone supplying a starter culture to their ATS. The algae simply migrates from other areas of the system to the scrubber, but they want you to believe there's some magical force field that keeps it from leaving the scrubber, and moving to the display........
They pick and choose the science that supports their cause, while ignoring the overwhelming body of evidence that doesn't. They say that ATS's provide "organic food" to the display. While ignoring the fact that this "organic food" is the same stuff that turns your water yellow, increases the overall nutrient content of our glass boxes, and enables the algae to spread and conquer new territory.
They claim that we can use GAC, mechanical filtration, and protein skimmers to remove allelopathic chemicals, dies, and solid organic particle produced by the ATS. IMHO, if we have to employ real filtration to clean up the mess produced by the ATS, maybe the ATS isn't quite as efficient as they claim it to be.
With things like this, where people are intentionally, or simply through being misinformed, promoting bad science, it's typically those of us that keep the most delicate species that see the negative effects first. This latest ATS craze has been out for a while now, and the negative effects have started to show themselves despite the loud voices of those who support, and make money from ATS's. At first, many different types of hobbyists jumped on the bandwagon and installed ATS's. Everyone from SPS keepers to FO. Now, we can go to the SPS section of any forum board like this and see that ATS's have fallen out of favor with these hobbyists. Naturally, there's still a few die hard stragglers, but for the most part, SPS keepers have once again, learned their lessons, licked their wounds, and moved on. If ATS's are the magical filtration devices they're claimed to be, shouldn't it be those that require the cleanest water that are praising them and shouting from the roof tops how great they are????
Hopefully, some day sooner than later, people will see the truth, and these things will return to the trash heap of the hobby, where they once were, along side DSB's, and the Eco Aqualizer, where they belong.

Peace
and good luck with your system
EC:)



Do you feel the same way about fuges? I have always been skeptical about ATS, however it's more from an additional equipment viewpoint as I like using a chaeto/ulva fuge. Perhaps part of my bias was at least a while back people thought of a fuge as more a component in nutrient export, but many ATS advocates would say a scrubber was all you needed and was superior to all else, but I never saw many top tier SPS tanks running scrubber only, sometimes they would have one but was supplemental or recently added.
 
Scrubbers work, but I went back to a fuge because it worked too well lol. The fuge keeps my levels higher while my scrubber would easily wipe me down to 0s and it was a bit of a pain to try to dial it back. They are great if you don’t have the space for a big sump that fits and giant fuge. I happen to have a giant 4’ sump with plenty of space for both.

The other issue I have is all the main US scrubber manufacturers have a vendetta against each other so I’m not exactly a fan of any of them by principle. If they all got along, perhaps they could make better strides but they all seem to want to tear each other down and slit each other’s throats.
 
Last edited:
Scrubbers work, but I went back to a fuge because it worked too well lol. The fuge keeps my levels higher while my scrubber would easily wipe me down to 0s and it was a bit of a pain to try to dial it back.
I just control my no3 by setting the illumination period at x hours. I can run no3 at zero, or, well, much higher.
 
I just control my no3 by setting the illumination period at x hours. I can run no3 at zero, or, well, much higher.

Yeah, I was cutting down the light schedule. I just had a lot of overkill in my tank...a giant skimmer, and huge fuge area, and an ATS. I took off the ATS and have better No3 levels and didn't see the point of paying for that extra electricity of running massive lights on a scrubber vs. my one tiny cheapo red LED on my fuge. I just have a lot of flex space in my sump and I'm aware most people don't have that. I stopped having to dose nitrates and phosphates and let it go with the fuge and it stabled out. I still have the ATS and can put it back on online if my levels get out of wack. I would definetly put it back on online if I could get a hold of that sick Ulva Sp. ya'll get @Scrubber_steve --- but I can't find it in the US :(.

Most people were telling me to just pull the skimmer, but I couldn't let it go xD.
 
Last edited:
I took off the ATS and have better No3 levels and didn't see the point of paying for that extra electricity of running massive lights on a scrubber vs. my one tiny cheapo red LED on my fuge.
I'm all for fuges, algae filtration in general & you should keep doing what you feel happiest about. But lighting per watt, a scrubber v fuge, scrubbers need a lot less light.
The light is very close & direct on a scrubber screen. Where as a fuge is flood lit.
You can get away with as little as 18watts total light to illuminate both sides of a 6" x 6" scrubber screen. That does a lot of filtering.
 
It's a new design of an old method. Sure there are those who make these & promote sales . I don't care much for ATS & prefer the old fashion " big" refugium with proper lighting. I tried using an ATO on 2 setups while they did grow HA well. I still have a large one with OK lighting in storage.
I have larger tanks & plenty of room for a large ref . I would think for those with limited space in the stand an ATO is a fine option.
 

IF YOU HAD TO TAKE A REEFING EXAM, WOULD YOU PASS?

  • Yes!

    Votes: 32 45.7%
  • Not yet, but I have one that I want to buy in mind!

    Votes: 9 12.9%
  • No.

    Votes: 26 37.1%
  • Other (please explain).

    Votes: 3 4.3%

New Posts

Back
Top