Correlation of 2-Part, Salinity and Trace elements?

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

I use TM pro reef and I’d like to stick with it because of the quality of it. I think I’m either going to just go to the parameters that it is at and let the cal reactor maintain those levels or dose the new saltwater with something that will not raise the salinity once the corals start to use the elements to build their skeleton. Or is the whole “salinity rises, add RODI to bring it down which then dilutes the trace elements” blown out of proportion by Lou Ekus?

it is a fact that is true if you just use calcium chloride and sodium carbonate. It is not a fact that applies to many commercial two parts that are designed to take this exact effect into account.

Lou sells a product that gets around it by adding the Balling Part C as a third part. Other companies get around it by putting these same ingredients into the two part itself.

 

[Lou Ekus]

@jlts21 @Randy Holmes-Farley @W1ngz

As I have said many times before, I don't believe that any of the 2 Part methodologies account for all 70 of the trace elements found in natural sea water. Any of the ones that are left out, will be "depleted" over time due to the ionic imbalance created. This is something that Randy and I have always disagreed about. And it is no different now. One could certainly make the argument that once most of them are accounted for, like in a "better" two part formula, the remaining imbalances are so small as to not matter. I can't dispute or condone that argument, as the research on that has never been done. But the imbalance will exist for traces that are not included. I still think it is very misleading to say, as Randy does, "A perfectly designed two part has exactly the right elements (major, minor and trace) to exactly offset the salinity rise and necessary dilution.” If a trace is not included, it will be depleted in time. However, I do agree with his statement that “in actuality, the effect is much more important for Major and minor elements such as potassium or sulfate where this might be a major sink, compared to trace elements where this effect is likely much smaller than actual consumption.” No argument from me there!
The only way to avoid this imbalance totally, with additive supplementation of Ca and alkalinity as opposed to a calcium reactor, is either with the true Balling Method (not imitations like other products named Balling which are not Balling at all!) or an additive that does not form residual NaCl like Carbocalcium or calcium hydroxide.

The statement that W1ngz made is also very true when he said about my presentation “I get the sense that his percentages are somewhat exaggerated to make it more digestible for the audience with nice big round numbers. You won't jump from a 70-30 ratio to 80-20 in a week, and no one is pouring gallons of RODI into their tank to reset their salinity because of their 2-part dosing.” I have not been able to do the actual numbers on this. But the numbers I use in the lecture are to help make the point of this issue. It would be much less dramatic and understandable if I said that the ratio of 70-30 moves to 71-29. I just use the numbers as a teaching tool and concept.

 

[W1ngz]

Thanks for the confirmation @Lou Ekus , it's nice for us lay-folk to know that the partial understanding we get from those of you providing the science was correctly understood.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley Verified Community Expert]

@jlts21 @Randy Holmes-Farley @W1ngz

As I have said many times before, I don't believe that any of the 2 Part methodologies account for all 70 of the trace elements found in natural sea water. Any of the ones that are left out, will be "depleted" over time due to the ionic imbalance created. This is something that Randy and I have always disagreed about. And it is no different now. One could certainly make the argument that once most of them are accounted for, like in a "better" two part formula, the remaining imbalances are so small as to not matter. I can't dispute or condone that argument, as the research on that has never been done. But the imbalance will exist for traces that are not included. I still think it is very misleading to say, as Randy does, "A perfectly designed two part has exactly the right elements (major, minor and trace) to exactly offset the salinity rise and necessary dilution.” If a trace is not included, it will be depleted in time. However, I do agree with his statement that “in actuality, the effect is much more important for Major and minor elements such as potassium or sulfate where this might be a major sink, compared to trace elements where this effect is likely much smaller than actual consumption.” No argument from me there!
The only way to avoid this imbalance totally, with additive supplementation of Ca and alkalinity as opposed to a calcium reactor, is either with the true Balling Method (not imitations like other products named Balling which are not Balling at all!) or an additive that does not form residual NaCl like Carbocalcium or calcium hydroxide.

The statement that W1ngz made is also very true when he said about my presentation “I get the sense that his percentages are somewhat exaggerated to make it more digestible for the audience with nice big round numbers. You won't jump from a 70-30 ratio to 80-20 in a week, and no one is pouring gallons of RODI into their tank to reset their salinity because of their 2-part dosing.” I have not been able to do the actual numbers on this. But the numbers I use in the lecture are to help make the point of this issue. It would be much less dramatic and understandable if I said that the ratio of 70-30 moves to 71-29. I just use the numbers as a teaching tool and concept.

lol

A perfectly designed two part can accomplish EXACTLY what a perfectly designed Balling system does.

Whether any of the commercial two part or Balling systems approach that perfection is not generally known since I do not think any published analyses of any of them exist.

As a secondary question, one can legitimately ask what ions are useful to incorporate at exact seawater concentrations, and for that matter, what seawater would one use for ions that vary greatly by location and depth (e.g. iron). Is incorporating uranium useful? Lead? Mercury? Gold? Likely not.

so someone at each company, including Tropic Marin, is deciding what to match to what type of seawater.

Are there functional apparent or important differences between, say, ESV B-ionic and Tropic Marin Balling? No one has publicly available comparative data of both to say.

I actually trust both of those companies to do a good enough job that I doubt there is a functional difference. I do not trust many other companies in that same way, and so use of any of these products boils down to how much you trust the chemical skills and business ethics of the company in question.

 

[Lou Ekus]

lol

A perfectly designed two part can accomplish EXACTLY what a perfectly designed Balling system does.

Whether any of the commercial two part or Balling systems approach that perfection is not generally known since I do not think any published analyses of any of them exist.

As a secondary question, one can legitimately ask what ions are useful to incorporate at exact seawater concentrations, and for that matter, what seawater would one use for ions that vary greatly by location and depth (e.g. iron). Is incorporating uranium useful? Lead? Mercury? Gold? Likely not.

so someone at each company, including Tropic Marin, is deciding what to match to what type of seawater.

Are there functional apparent or important differences between, say, ESV B-ionic and Tropic Marin Balling? No one has publicly available comparative data of both to say.

I actually trust both of those companies to do a good enough job that I doubt there is a functional difference. I do not trust many other companies in that same way, and so use of any of these products boils down to how much you trust the chemical skills and business ethics of the company in question.

Randy, this is always a funny discussion for us to continue having. I will say this though...as you might imagine, the only statement that I have any issue with at all, in your last post is "A perfectly designed two part can accomplish EXACTLY what a perfectly designed Balling system does." And I will probably always passionately dissagree with that concept. That being said, I agree totally with everything else that you have said in this post! We will meet again about this in some other thread, I'm sure. Until then.....well said!

 

[Lou Ekus]

well I’m more concerned with the trace elements depleting not the salinity rising, but think I’m just overthinking the whole process. At 17:45 in the video that Larry posted he talks about what my concern is

If the trace element depletion is truly a major concern for you. Then you will probably want to use a supplementing system that either contains the full compliment of ALL 70 trace elements found in NSW (the only one that I know of that does this is the true Balling Method formula, only produced by Tropic Marin) or a form of supplementation that does not produce excess NaCl like Kalkwasser, Carbocalcium or a reactor.
@Randy Holmes-Farley I really am sorry that I keep bringing this up in your forum. But I truly believe, it is "misleading" to suggest achieving a total ionic balance, from using a method that does not account for ALL of the compnents of the ionic imbalance. I'm not saying that it can't or doesn't work! I'm just saying that it isn't correct to suggest that a full and total ionic balance is achieved without accounting for ALL of the 70 traces.