But they reach an end, can’t be recharged, and is like doing auto oil changes by paying jiffy lube for the labor and the costs but instructing them to never replace the oil filter. It’s paying more, for removing less than just a simple bare bottom setup would allow.
I only think they’re a total waste in bedded systems. If someone does not want to use a siphon hose in a bare bottom tank to export / waste the catch material it’s no different than the twenty six million hob pads we’ve all changed out from a freshwater tank.
the design shortcutting irks me…don’t store up the detritus in the total obvious ways by paying to remove a trace of what gets into the water.
Lets be more specific please. Im not clear on the argument you are making.
The original argument the Op made was environmental. I believe there is sufficient evidence to argue that its highly doubtful there is a significant difference b/w rollers and socks when it comes to environmental waste. This is for the following reasons:
1) Washing and drying your socks in a washing machine and drying machine use a huge amount of resources. In addition, residue is often left on the socks. This can lead to issues of spikes in phosphates and other foreign material getting into the tank - which then leads to....more dosing and treatments. That's expensive environmentally.
2) Socks are often not cleaned regularly - which leads to extra nutrients getting back into the tank. This can and does happen and leads to outbreaks/blooms and in some cases damaged/dead coral and in some rare cases dead fish. The consequence of this is that it leads to panic, more treatment, dosing and all sorts of outcomes. That is all environmentally very expensive.
In addition, since rollermats are much more efficient, a skimmer does not need to be run as often. This saves on power.
3) Its early days for rollermats. I havent investigated recyclable fleece, so I cant comment on it - but there is a high likelyhood that this product could be developed very easily, and if there is enough demand, it will be.
I wont even get started on the implications of reefing in general in relation to environmental concerns. If you're really worried about the environment, its probably best not to have a reef tank in the first place.
Regarding your second argument - that its a waste if you have a bed. There is significant evidence that points to the fact that is not necessarily the case - it would depend on how the user has it configured. If you want to be logical/scientific in your approach as Ive seen you advocate in many other threads - do it here as well.
i) As i pointed out above - fleece's can and do operate on a timer and/or on a water level. This means that the user can filter as much or as little as they'd like - and make sure its a consistent removal of detritus from the water
ii) Rollers can use a variety of 'fleece' - there is light, medium and thick - this means that again - the user can remove what they want to from the system. I agree - its a bad idea to remove everything. Just like anything else in this hobby it has to be tested, analyzed and then implemented. If a user also has a sandbed - this is not a problem. Sandbeds arent just for functionality - in some cases, they are also for aesthetics.
If cost is your argument - that one is 'paying to remove from the system' - we're doing that all the time, in different ways.
Whats the difference between this way and that way? We use carbon, we use GFO - these are constantly replaced, we use CUC's - in some cases we know they are going to die, but we put them in anyways. We dose knowing that we're just dumping in nutrients because something else is not right with the system but we're patching it to make it work.
Who are you to decide what one should 'pay to remove from the system'?
While Im on the paying topic - I would argue that again - its likely rollermaters are more responsible and more efficient dollar for dollar than many of the other systems we put in to 'remove from the system'. See the above arguments for the same reasoning. Its stable, predictable, and efficient.
