lduncan

Nope, that was all of 5 min searching this morning. I didn't have to look hard. I wasn't doing that. I wasn't even demonstrating how UV makes a tank better (you clearly still can't read). Just that it's more common than people might think.

Yip, massive increase in skimmer output overnight. Will be interesting to see what effect it has on nitrates, which are just over 5 at the moment.

You mean carbon which leaches stuff (no matter what source)? Carbon which you have to replace? Carbon which doesn't actually remove the stuff from your system and just traps it, until you replace it? UV seems better to me. That's what I got it for, so I don't have to use carbon. Yip wasp, that one that said ozone next to it. I was really just using those to illustrate that UV isn't that uncommon, not as a example of how it makes a tank better. Layton

It's not only possible it's probable. Ozone will oxidise bromine compounds to hypobromic acid if it bumps into it. It's almost as nasty as chlorine bleach. (Bromine is also used in pools as a substitute for chlorine). Don't really want that being created in my tank, even in small quantities really. It may not be catastrophic, but it's not going to do much good either. There is a good alternative in UV. I guess to me UV is more fool proof. But of course heaps of people use ozone with great success. I prefer UV though. Layton

Compared to what? What easier and cheaper ways are there to achieve what UV does? Layton

Doesn't he have over 20 fish? Don't think it's quite as big as 500 gallons. Also a 500 gallon tank with no fish can get pretty dirty too.

Not trying to imitate bomber for the sake of it. It sounds a very good idea. It's not my fault the guy has so much experience and knowledge. Layton

http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2005- ... /index.php http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2005- ... /index.php http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2005- ... /index.php (ozone, but similar) http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2003- ... /index.php http://www.oregonreef.com/ Bombers tank. I think it is a bit more popular than you think. Probably gets a bad rep (undeservedly) because it kills bacteria. Layton

I knew someone would say that Is a skimmer a bandaid? You say carbon is all that's needed, is that a bandaid? All i'm doing is replacing carbon with UV, so that rather than have stuff absorbed by carbon, and have it still sitting in the water, leaching the crap that virtually all carbon does (by way of where it comes from), get it to the skimmer for it to do it's job more effectively. I think of bandaids as things which treat secondary problems which could be solved further up the "chain". If you want a tank which has corals, you can't tell them not to produce the chemicals that they do. UV attacks the root cause as high as possible to me by breaking these chemicals down to make them more accessible to bacteria. Just my opinion. Layton

He can even make cold water marine look cool... http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showt ... did=722059 Steve Weast has to be the man after this latest project. That tank is running at a chilly 15 degrees. Layton

Ozone has the potential to kill your tank. UV can't. Ozone produces bleaches (closely related to household chlorine bleaches)from element in saltwater. Probably most notably is hypobromic acid. (Hypoiodic as well, but there's much more bromine in saltwater than iodine). Ozone is generally less expensive, but isn't fool proof like UV. It's effects are similar to that of UV. Downsides of UV are really just maintenance. Calcium deposits on the internal quartz sleeve, bulb replacement etc. Apparently UV bulbs have a steep drop off in output early in their life, but after that output is meant to be fairly constant, so if you oversize your UV then the bulbs have a longer useful life, dunno how general that is though. If your after water clarity, ozone will be more effective. If your after waste removal UV is going to be better. But like Brian said ozone has potential to cause damage, should be used with carbon as well to remove residual O3, you should have air dryers, and ORP control.

ask reef, he may not have any left.

Nope, nothing off trademe. UV sterilizers should contain a bulb with produces purely UVC raditation. It is a very specific wavelength (energy) which is required to break the chemical bonds which makes UV so useful in waste export. Brian Got it from reef, rated at 2000 l/h. I'm running it at just under that on the return to my 4' tank, which is plumed in with the 6'. I think it you hook one up, you really want it on a closed loop, as they are not maintenance free, they need to be cleaned every few months to be running optimally. here's the info on the unit if your interested. http://www.deltecaquariumsolutions.com/ ... ctions.php Layton

The UV spectrum is split into three sub bands in order of decreasing wavelength: A - Blacklight B - Causes tanning and burning. C - Causes cell mutation and death. This is the type used in all sterilizers. Also known as germicidal lamps. Got Deltec branded UV. Less expensive than any of the "cheap" asian brands in the pet stores down here, or importing from the states or Singapore too.

I try to give people info which is accurate. Sometimes it's what they want to hear. Other times, they don't what to hear it. It's noting to do with being positive or negative.

Well last week I hooked up a 40 watt UV to the tank. The idea behind it was as a replacement for using carbon. Rather than absorb the multitude of organics produced by corals (leathers in particular) using carbon and have it sitting in the water as yet another unnecessary source of phosphate, why not use UV and a skimmer to remove it from the water asap? UV C is very good at breaking carbon carbon double bound ( C=C ), typically large organic molecules contain a number of these bonds, so the UV splits the molecules into smaller ones. Bacteria are far more effective at utilising these smaller molecules. So you get an increase in bacteria production, which results in higher skimmate production. But doesn't UV kill bacteria? Yip, It kills water borne bacteria, but who cares? It gets skimmed out whether it's dead or alive. Perhaps surprisingly, UV can increase populations of the bacteria you want (denitrifying) in the tank by splitting large molecules providing more carbon based "food" for them. So it will be interesting to see in nitrates drop over the next few weeks. They are hovering just over 5 and have been for a while. Of course there are also the parasite killing side effects, but that's not really an issue for me. Layton

Aluminium sulfate has long been used as a focculant. I think that is what produces the increase in clarity. I've just added UV to boost good bacteria levels, so should be interesting to see what happens to nitrates over the next few months. Skimmer immediately produced much more skimmate too. UV is a much underated form of nutrient export I think. Plus you get the side-effect of parasite control as well, if that's a problem in your tank. Layton

That's one of Randy's best articles I think. Definitely required reading. Layton

A lot of ASW is low in magnesium. Red Sea it one that comes to mind. Instant Ocean is often low (lower that I prefer) in alk and calcium. Calcium levels of 390 aren't particularly bad. Around 350 is apparently the limit to where it becomes the limiting factor in calcification (alk usually is). I stick with either Red Sea, or Instant Ocean. I'd use IO if I could get it in 40kg boxes for the same price as Red Sea. Layton

Yeah, it was an unbelievably fast grower... until it was eaten by nudibranchs! Luckily I spread some frags around. Thanks Tim! The bali M. foliosa are also fast growers, just got a frag of a purple cap too, so I hope it's growth rate is similar to the others. Layton

I've never seen any real complaints about the becketts either. (Other than Steve Weast's post, and a few others about becketts blocking) He also doesn't like needlewheels (deltec's). I disagree with him on that point. I think his has also been modified to skim "better" if I remember correctly. I don't think it was as "plug and play" as a skimmer should be. Layton

I think that's true. Reef has a tank too, so naturally he is going to want to run the best equipment on it. He obviously tries a lot of different equipment and products, to see which is the best. Layton

Alkalinity is the pH stabiliser, not rock or sand. Layton

:lol: too slow

Steve's response is interesting: I've also wondered what the becketts are like. They are meant to be easier to stabilise for really wet skimming. I'm very happy with my deltec though.