Yes, as I said, the fundamental sulfur process depletes alkalinity, and if you couple that with something that adds back that alkalinity and at the same time adding calcium, the calcium will rise.
That's really no better than upping your daily dose of calcium and alk however you normally add it, but in all cases, calcium will rise unless you up the alk and not the calcium.
It's certainly a manageable problem, and is not the only reason I prefer organic carbon dosing.
BADES can not be used for managing the calcium content, it is not intended. I do not know why this should be an issue! But the calcium production is a nice side effect. I do not regard free calcium as a problem, on the contrary. But as it is an important side effect it must be covered. Alkalinity and calcium is part of the normal maintenance of a reef aquarium .
The nitrate house holding in a zero output closed marine system ( ZMAS)? We made studies of most possibilities, also carbon dosing. Of pro's and con's.
The aim was to find a method which gave us full control over the nitrogen content in a ZMAS, supporting the bio-load from low to high, growing with the system , is easily managed and safe to use.
A sulfur denitrator has no similarities with these wishes. But we started from there for our research about BADES.
Let it be clear that I have no commercial interests by promoting BADES. I do not. I just mention the facts, the results of our studies and research, which may be consulted in our wiki Makazi Baharini.
By using a BADES bio-filter the carrying capacity, the max bio-load of the system, can easily be adjusted to the demand .
A BADESSystem will support future increase of the bio load., animals grow and multiply, preventing nitrate build up at any bio-load in a mixed reef aquarium.
A BADES biofilter removes ammonia-nitrogen and nitrate -nitrogen simultaneously from the system.
In a BADESS the nitrogen removal rate can be controlled and managed easily, maintaining the nitrate level at the level as desired by the manager.
Using a BADES -biofilter or -biofilm reactor nitrate build up is prevented at all time as produced nitrate will be removed before it may become part of the total nitrogen content .
Using BADES the nitrogen cycle can be closed by effectively removing the daily nitrogen overproduction daily, every day.
A BADES reactor may become self regulating, maintaining the desired nitrate level without any human interference.
The nitrogen content in the system is never depleted.
There is nothing to dose!
The risk for Human error is minimized.
Full controllability over the nitrogen content is maid possible !
A BADESS is reliable and safe to use.
The caveats of BADES are known, controllable or automatically compensated .
A BADESS supports alk.
A BADESS produces calcium
The BADES process produces sulphate.
We can back up all the above by proper research and references consultable in our Makazi Baharini wiki.
Non of the above is true for dosing carbon!
I do not find any similarities between carbon dosing and the possibilities and certainties offered by the use of BADES .
The more research we do about carbon dosing the more we get convinced that it is not safe to use. The high human risk factor and the role of a high C:N ratio in a closed system may create a very unsafe situation in a live support system. But as with a sulphur denitrator, there should be no problem when used correctly. For carbon dosing this involves correct dosing avoiding a high C:N ratio at all times.
Anyway, carbon dosing can not be used for the purpose we have in mind. It is not a choice we have to make. To make good choices one must be informed correctly!
You prefer carbon dosing for storing nitrogen in the system and feed corals this way! . ok,
