Not exactly sure what you’re saying is true
I feel like you’re beating yourself up over nothing! Why are you trying so hard fighting algae’s etc? Just use rodi water and do water changes! I’ve never had to deal or fight a tank besides Dino’s and they’re not the end of the world lol.. algae has never been a problem in my tanks they’re all sparkly clean.. I just added another 30 pounds of dry rock to my tank and the only issue I’ll experience is po4 dropping lol.. never seen the uglies and never will! Mix up some calcium carbonate with zeobak or mb7 and dose the tank and coat them fresh surfaces and keep on trucking!
Did Bob the builder do aquariums? He would have fixed it, lol
I build them, fix them, grow them.. lol..
How I roll and I’m not changing. Honestly. Had a bad day in the market and tired of explaining my actions because another doesn’t have the entire backstory. I’m not a newbie. Appreciate the advise but none asked.
You've got to admit though, having a failed tank, running the systems you propose as the future doesn't look good, surely. Ive done some odd stuff also but it is based upon experience (and support from Randy and co.)
Who said anything about having a failed tank?
Because floors were getting upgraded and not because it crashed. Why best ask vs assuming. Although technically it lives on outside with some water, rocks and Nassarius transferred over to a Brute 20. Now testing green water.
Because floors were getting upgraded and not because it crashed. Why best ask vs assuming. Although technically it lives on outside with some water, rocks and Nassarius transferred over to a Brute 20. Now testing green water.
It’s a test tank. Test being the operative and defining purpose.
Can we all now just stop jumping to conclusions? Feel as if I’m talking to my wife on how a sale doesn’t actually save me money.
You answered not having all the facts and no question actually asked. My comment was rhetorical.
I fail to see how any of this "zero waterchange" testing/evidence is relevant if you don't have corals or fish. You are not going to learn a lot by cooking a few rocks in a bucket. In my opinion, recycling algal growth to feed a snail has little weight in your assertion that reef tanks do not benefit from waterchanges.Because floors were getting upgraded and not because it crashed. Why best ask vs assuming. Although technically it lives on outside with some water, rocks and Nassarius transferred over to a Brute 20. Now testing green water.
It’s a test tank. Test being the operative and defining purpose.
Can we all now just stop jumping to conclusions? Feel as if I’m talking to my wife on how a sale doesn’t actually save me money.
Not all tests are to determine if change is needed and I'm not cooking rocks in a tub although they often do on a shallow flat at low water with rocks and clams attached plus my test did previously include fish and one coral. Stop assuming and it might help you understand.
The single Xenia you had died, did it not? You had an uncontrollable algae/dino problem, despite peroxide,did you not? If you consider that as success then great, that's up to you, however, you are portraying this as a success to everyone who may come across these threads. I'm pretty sure I understand what is going on here very well thank you, and none of it appears to be evidence that waterchanges do not benefit reef tanks. If you are just messing with stuff to learn for yourself, then knock yourself out, that's great. Perhaps I've misunderstood your stance on waterchanges however. I've assumed that you have concluded that waterchanges are not beneficial, when in fact you may just be on the start of the journey and are as yet undecided, hence the tests, in which case that's great also.
Here you go again. Assuming you know when in fact you don't have all the context and facts or time line of events. Making wild accusations. I've said what I've said and provided reason why it was said. I'm not going to continue this back and forth because you can't comprehend what I've said. Perhaps I'm failing to articulate myself. At this point. This horse is dead. Just leave it alone. Unless you have a specific question so that you can acquire the proper context or just wait until I make my thread on all I've learned on this experiment and it's continuation outdoors. I'll be posting it in the experimental section along with my new adventure using UV AOP to solve issues with QT, pathogen control and ultimately managing the unknown.
No idea what this refers to.
Aren't folk doing this on humble fish site already?
I'm not trying to prove you wrong, I want you to prove you are right. The comment of visual evidence being overrated is a massive red flag, to me.
No idea what this refers to.
Will do, just off to spend 30 seconds doing my daily waterchange anyway.
HumbleFish isn't using UV AOP that I'm aware of. Fact is no one I know is using UV AOP in home aquariums. Wish they were. It would help me.
This is beyond my comprehension skills. I'm a finance guy that specializes in reverse engineering processes for efficiency and accuracy and not a biologist or chemist therefore getting into the weeds for me futile.I've dug into Advanced Oxidative Process a bit more and have to disagree with it's use to eliminate water changes. A major portion of the DOC in a system is refractory meaning it's resistant to degredation. The problem with adding labile DOC to a system is it allows heterotrophic to utilize refractory DOC as food source and proliferate. You're correct AOP will break down both the DOC as well as any microbial stuff. But it doesn't seem to be s effective as you assert with this paper only achieving 50% reduction at the optimal dosing. (Did you actually test for DOC or TOC in yor experiments?) While the process does break down DOC into water, CO2 there are also BIODEGRADABLE molecules left in the water. If those biodegradable molecules are returned to the tank that's only going to promote additional microbial growth so i don't see how AOP can be considered as a viable alternative to water changes.
(Table 4 from this paper was interesting comparing the cost to remove 40% of teh DOC from RO effluent in wastewater treatment:
)
