WOW - No water changes on this beast of a tank

Good for you guys do what works for you. I will do my ten percent waterchange per week, run an oversize skimmer and dose nopox. I also am using a phosphate removal resin to pick up excess phosphates. I also dose bacteria to keep myself happy. Do what works for you! There is no right and wrong if your livestock benefits from what you do
 
RiaanP said:
Instead of 0.1ppm of PO4 a day, what happens if it is 1.1 per day?
Click to expand...

Well that means after a week you will have 7.7ppm of PO4. Do a 20% water change and that will reduce your PO4 to 6.16ppm (7.7 * 20%=1.54-7.7=6.16). Therefore, on week two you will have 6.16ppm PO4 + 7.7ppm (1.1 * 7=7.7ppm) = 13.86ppm. Week three, do a 20% again and you will end up with 11.088ppm PO4

We can even change the numbers around a bit. Let's say in the first week you have 7.7ppm of PO4 then do a water change of 50% you will still have 3.85ppm, then you remove most of your fish at the beginning of the second week and so your PO4 only increases by 0.1 per day at the end of week two you will have 4.55ppm of PO4. Then do another 50% WC, that's 2.275ppm of PO4 left.

What Dallas is advocating, and which I support is that doing water changes (unless you do a 100% wc a week, NOT FEASIBLE and very unstable), to reduce nutrients is a very inefficient, unproductive, and expensive if you have a very large system.

Yes, smaller water changes of maybe 2-5% a week to replenish some trace elements could work, but I also believe this might not be sufficient.
That is why the man from Holland replenishes with good trace elements.
 
Also, before we actually all start to argue and give negative remarks, go and read the thread. @dallasg, I am sure, didn't start this thread to convince, convert or even wave a finger at the water change brigade. If we all decide to stop researching, reading and learning we might as well stop the hobby.
Remove the shades and the sun might actually shine.:)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
carlosdeandrade said:
Also, before we actually all start to argue and give negative remarks, go and read the thread.
Click to expand...
I did not give negative remarks. Check his system, trying to understand how he does it. One thing I noticed is his fish load. Mentioning that observation and its gets dismissed as irrelevant.

Compared to my tank, and most others I know, he does not have a lot of fish in it. My little bit of observation. If that is the key, I doubt it. But that does form part of his key to success. Having to add phosphates to his system manually, just proofs more that the filtration can handle easily the waste generated by his fish and or uneaten food.


carlosdeandrade said:
If we all decide to stop researching, reading and learning
Click to expand...
Exactly what I did.
Who else saw anything of value on his system? He got a small DSB, although not sure if he must keep it or remove it. I would leave it, system is stable, and even if it does something partially, it is still something done partially. Anyway, for the anti-DSB people out there, he got one in there... Also the bigger DSB is better guys (me included), his is too small by our own standards.

But still, his system is successful.
 
dallasg said:
i see here Randy Holmes Farley says that water changes dont really remove nitrate
Aquarium Chemistry: Nitrate in the Reef Aquarium Advanced Aquarist | Aquarist Magazine and Blog
Click to expand...

:eek: No, not Randy too. :D Did you see when the article was written? AUGUST 2003. The shock and horror!
Great find!
 
@RiaanP, I wasn't referring to you bud! Why so protective over a DSB, I have never slated them, and yet you refer to them in your post as if I attacked them directly.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
But dallasg is 100 percent right ! Water changes is to replace trace elements if you doing water changes to drive down nutrients @10 %pm is not doing much , you need to start at the source of the problem which is bio filtration!
@carlos those NASA formulas and adv mathematics was hectic lol :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
RiaanP said:
I did not give negative remarks. Check his system, trying to understand how he does it. One thing I noticed is his fish load. Mentioning that observation and its gets dismissed as irrelevant.

Compared to my tank, and most others I know, he does not have a lot of fish in it. My little bit of observation. If that is the key, I doubt it. But that does form part of his key to success. Having to add phosphates to his system manually, just proofs more that the filtration can handle easily the waste generated by his fish and or uneaten food.



Exactly what I did.
Who else saw anything of value on his system? He got a small DSB, although not sure if he must keep it or remove it. I would leave it, system is stable, and even if it does something partially, it is still something done partially. Anyway, for the anti-DSB people out there, he got one in there... Also the bigger DSB is better guys (me included), his is too small by our own standards.

But still, his system is successful.
Click to expand...
Also, in terms of fish load, I have a overstocked system and my nitrates are at 0.5ppm and I have undetectable phosphates (measured with salifert test kits), oh goodness, does that mean that ORCA CUBES actually work??. The fact that his fish load wasn't maybe mentioned was because those in the know actually believe it might be irrelevant.
Gone are the days were we live by the rules of 1 inch of fish to 1 gallon of water, what century do we live in?
 
carlosdeandrade said:
I wasn't referring to you bud! Why so protective over a DSB, I have never slated them, and yet you refer to them in your post as if I attacked them directly.
Click to expand...
read what I said. Its to small to the size we tend to advocate. So I'm slating (attacking) myself. yeah.
So what is the smallest in relation to display tank?
But again that is related to his bioload.
 
carlosdeandrade said:
Also, in terms of fish load, I have a overstocked system and my nitrates are at 0.5ppm and I have undetectable phosphates (measured with salifert test kits), oh goodness, does that mean that ORCA CUBES actually work??. The fact that his fish load wasn't maybe mentioned was because those in the know actually believe it might be irrelevant.
Click to expand...

OK, he does not have ORCA cubes. And YES I do believe it works.

Now, please give your opinion as to why his phosphates are so low that he needs to manually add phosphates to his system. Your opinion. I gave mine, so, now its your turn.
 
Maybe this figure will help.

phosphate_graphic_4_square_original.jpg
 
Im confused as to whats getting debated here (perplexed face smiley).
He doesnt do water changes and has a very healthy tank. What have i missed?
 
RiaanP said:
Your opinion. I gave mine, so, now its your turn.
Click to expand...

If you read the article he also uses carbon dosing and a the Dutch synthetic reefing system.
 
459b said:
Im confused as to whats getting debated here (perplexed face smiley).
He doesnt do water changes and has a very healthy tank. What have i missed?
Click to expand...

I am also confused, best ask @RiaanP. The article explains everything in detail. (confused smile face)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
@459b . whether one needs to do a water change or npt and for those that do does it actually benefit the tank in reducing nutrients
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No connection between stocking levels and total phosphates?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom