Vertex Pro Pellets (solid Carbon dosing)

[Will]

I have gotten a couple of PM's in the past couple of days asking me about what kind of solid carbon dosing I am using, so i thought i would just go ahead and make a thread.

I am using Vertex's Pro Pellets (250ml in about 50 gal total water volume) and so far have seen nothing but good results (and really nasty skimmate)

Day 1: no change in tank conditions (added about 150 ml of pellets)

Day2: water was a little cloudy (minor bacterial bloom, common when starting carbon dosing)

Day3: water completely clear (added another 100ml of pellets), skimmer pulling out some really nasty stuff.

Day4: water clear and any algae i have is turning clear and dieing, my halimidia is showing signs of stress

Day5: had to go to Horseshoe bay to work, will not be back until tuesday

Day6: today (8/2/10) haven't seen tank yet, but room mate says it looks ok.

I have my pellets in an old fluidized bed filter powered by a maxijet 900. i have the output of the reactor covered in a nylon mesh bag to catch any pellets in case they somehow get out of the reactor. the output also is placed next to the input of my skimmer.

Here is an RC thread on the Pellets http://reefcentral.c...d.php?t=1869108

My nitrates were undetectable before (api test kit) and have not become detectable, i dont have a po4 test kit, so i have no clue what that is at, but my halimida (which i use as an indication of how much po4 is in the water) has showed severe signs of stress (which i take to mean that po4 has gone down).

[Mike M.]

Will,

There will be a lot of us interested in the progression or even transformation of your tank with the changeover. Please, stop what you are doing ASAP and take some photos of your tank prior to letting this carbon source system run for 4-6 weeks. That will give us a point of comparison on growth and color.

This is a very intriguing method and I predict it will make all of us stop using Vodka, Zeo, Polyp Lab, and Brightwell in favor of this what appears to be great way to control phosphate and all the other junk that make it tough to prevail with our corals.

Thanks for being a pioneer!

Mike

[Will]

Will,

There will be a lot of us interested in the progression or even transformation of your tank with the changeover. Please, stop what you are doing ASAP and take some photos of your tank prior to letting this carbon source system run for 4-6 weeks. That will give us a point of comparison on growth and color.

This is a very intriguing method and I predict it will make all of us stop using Vodka, Zeo, Polyp Lab, and Brightwell in favor of this what appears to be great way to control phosphate and all the other junk that make it tough to prevail with our corals.

Thanks for being a pioneer!

Mike

anybody have a hannah po4 meter that they want to let me check my po4 with? as i would love to establish a base level of po4 (i was waiting on the group buy to buy one but it fell through). i also need to buy a better nitrate test kit (elos or saifert?) as i dont want a UULNS (i also like LPS and softies).

From what i have read, the science behind SCD (solid carbon dosing) is pretty solid and it seems to be a much more efficient way of exporting nutrients than a fuge (although i would have one if i was not limited by space). I also detest using chemical media for filtration (AC and GFO) as i feel that they are both wasteful and unnecessary way of removing nutrients (the only time i will run carbon, which i keep on hand, is if something goes horribly wrong in my tank). there are no filter socks (i do use a modified media bag to screen out large particles from my overflow) or sponges in my system either.

[Mike M.]

You are welcome to borrow my Hanna meter. I find it to be a very frustrating insturment and wouldn't mind it living somewhere else for a few days/week.

Mike

[offroadodge]

it will be interesting to see the tansformation. Hopefully the sump doesnt get pilled up with gunk on the bottom due to not having any kinda sock to filter out the big debree. Also the return pumps will eventually take a hit as well gettn build up inside. If regular maitnenance is done on them NO big dealeo. Also if you are running a chiller all the gunk will end up clogging the chiller coils up unless you plan to back flow the chiller every once in awhile. This will be neat to follow.

[Will]

it will be interesting to see the tansformation. Hopefully the sump doesnt get pilled up with gunk on the bottom due to not having any kinda sock to filter out the big debree. Also the return pumps will eventually take a hit as well gettn build up inside. If regular maitnenance is done on them NO big dealeo. This will be neat to follow.

all of the stuff in my sump is elevated about 1 inch off the bottom and i have a k2 that blows on the bottom of my sump. i try to take a turkey baster to all of the other parts of the sump once a week as well. the media bag that i use will catch uneaten food, but will allow detritus to pass through

http://www.bigalsonline.com/BigAlsUS/ctl3684/cp18431/si1381188/cl0/hbhaquapurefiltermediabag12x4 is what i use.

[caferacermike]

I also detest using chemical media for filtration (AC and GFO) as i feel that they are both wasteful and unnecessary way of removing nutrients (the only time i will run carbon, which i keep on hand, is if something goes horribly wrong in my tank).

HUH? What?

Wait, I'm not the smartest kid at the beach but........

Did you just say that

A: activated Carbon is a chemical and that

B: you hate running activated carbon because it is a chemical, thus

C: You are carbon dosing but hate carbon?

I'm just calling a spade a spade for the sake of clarity, not trying to pick a fight. Seriously though, I'm ultra confused. Your version of carbon is actually leeching into the water stream causing a chain reaction of events within the tank that are now out of your control. Carbon pellets as we all know them, instead attract and remove waste particles that can then be removed from the tank. Adding carbon pellets to the water does not cause a chain reaction within the tank. Activated carbon is no more a chemical than any carbon. It is nothing more than carbon that has been super heated, or ground into a powder, so that it becomes more porous thus allowing it to remove even more particulate waste per pound of product.

Then, you claim that you don't add chemicals yet you just picked up several cups of Kalk from me per this thread here, Will wants Lime . That was a whole thread about adding chemicals to your tank, including experimental versions.

I am also wondering why you swear off filter socks, thus giving the impression to others that they are somehow bad. I love mine. I have about 10 of them that I switch out about every 4-5 days and store until ready to run through the washing machine. They do an excellent job of removing tiny particles from the water and really making it shine. They are an excellent tool for reefers to use and have been proven to be so. However, like everything in this hobby, those that are to lazy to change them out when dirty have problems. That is not the fault of the filter sock so much as that of the keeper.

These are just questions that were raised in my small mind as I read the thread. The thread is about a newer concept within our hobby and is still kind of controversial and the final judgment is still out. I know that with these types of threads that typically a handful of others will immediately call their favorite vendor and ask for these products in a rush to rid their tanks of unsightly algae, make their SPS more brightly colored, cure cancer, or whatever else they take from the thread. I've already witnessed one thread from a person asking where in town can they purchase Bio-Pellets, let the experimenting begin. Threads like these can often times seem like the magic bullet to some that read them, not saying it won't pay out in the end, but I'm interested in the questions I've raised to help others decide if they fully understand the big picture of all this and whether trying this method has been fully explained and is right for them and their tank.

[offroadodge]

Thats cool Will, i thought that u didnt have any kinda filtration on the downpipe, I to use just a plain old plastic mesh style sock so that it catches the big stuff but lets small stuff go. Sorry if i sounded critical, i didnt mean to.

[Will]

I also detest using chemical media for filtration (AC and GFO) as i feel that they are both wasteful and unnecessary way of removing nutrients (the only time i will run carbon, which i keep on hand, is if something goes horribly wrong in my tank).

HUH? What?

Wait, I'm not the smartest kid at the beach but........

Did you just say that

A: activated Carbon is a chemical and that

B: you hate running activated carbon because it is a chemical, thus

C: You are carbon dosing but hate carbon?

I'm just calling a spade a spade for the sake of clarity, not trying to pick a fight. Seriously though, I'm ultra confused. Your version of carbon is actually leeching into the water stream causing a chain reaction of events within the tank that are now out of your control. Carbon pellets as we all know them, instead attract and remove waste particles that can then be removed from the tank. Adding carbon pellets to the water does not cause a chain reaction within the tank. Activated carbon is no more a chemical than any carbon. It is nothing more than carbon that has been super heated, or ground into a powder, so that it becomes more porous thus allowing it to remove even more particulate waste per pound of product.

Then, you claim that you don't add chemicals yet you just picked up several cups of Kalk from me per this thread here, Will wants Lime . That was a whole thread about adding chemicals to your tank, including experimental versions.

I am also wondering why you swear off filter socks, thus giving the impression to others that they are somehow bad. I love mine. I have about 10 of them that I switch out about every 4-5 days and store until ready to run through the washing machine. They do an excellent job of removing tiny particles from the water and really making it shine. They are an excellent tool for reefers to use and have been proven to be so. However, like everything in this hobby, those that are to lazy to change them out when dirty have problems. That is not the fault of the filter sock so much as that of the keeper.

These are just questions that were raised in my small mind as I read the thread. The thread is about a newer concept within our hobby and is still kind of controversial and the final judgment is still out. I know that with these types of threads that typically a handful of others will immediately call their favorite vendor and ask for these products in a rush to rid their tanks of unsightly algae, make their SPS more brightly colored, cure cancer, or whatever else they take from the thread. I've already witnessed one thread from a person asking where in town can they purchase Bio-Pellets, let the experimenting begin. Threads like these can often times seem like the magic bullet to some that read them, not saying it won't pay out in the end, but I'm interested in the questions I've raised to help others decide if they fully understand the big picture of all this and whether trying this method has been fully explained and is right for them and their tank.

Ok, let me try to answer some of your questions.

A. Most things that we put in our tanks can be classified as a chemicals ( http://www.merriam-w...ionary/chemical ) Since AC is created by chemistry it would be classified as a chemical.

B. I do not hate activated inorganic carbon, I think it can be very useful at trapping unwanted contaminates in its trillions of tiny pores. It is a good place for bacteria to colonize and provides one of the highest amounts of surface area per gram of anything we can put in our tanks. I personally do not like to use it as a primary means of filtration due to the fact that it is too good at removing things from our tanks, including trace elements. It is my personal opinion that carbon should only be used when it is truly needed, not just as an insurance policy in case something messes up. Second, in order for AC to be utilized correctly, it should be replaced no less than every 2 weeks (some one say one week) in order for it to remove pollutants without releasing them back into the tank (AC does not chemically change anything that it traps, although some bonding, mostly hydrogen bonding, will occur). It is because of the method that carbon removes pollutants and it's need to be constantly, if not frequently, replaced that I prefer not to use it. As mentioned in my previous post, I do keep quite a bit on hand in case of emergencies and recommend that most reef keepers do the same.

C. As stated above I do not hate carbon, as it is hard to hate an element. There is a key difference between elemental inorganic carbon © and organic carbon (alcohol for example CH3CH2OH). Inorganic carbon molecules are bonded to other inorganic carbon molecules by nonpolar covalent bonds that have a very low energy and posses very stable lattice structures, therefore it is almost impossible for most organisms to convert inorganic carbon © into organic carbon. Organic carbon molecules ( http://en.wikipedia....rganic_compound ), on the other hand, are comprised of carbon molecules that are bonded to themselves and other molecules, H and O, being the most common. These compounds have bonds that are much less stable (ie. much higher energy), and the breaking of these bonds can release this energy. Now, to my point...... bacteria in our aquariums convert organic carbon molecules (vodka, sugar, biopellets, corn, hamburgers, rice, oil, ect.... please do not put the last 4 in your tank) into energy (ATP), which they use to multiply. They do this by using a ReDox reaction that breaks carbon bonds (search the citric acid cycle and the electron transport chain on wikipedia). The bacteria also take up phosphate (PO4) when they make Adenosine Tri-Phosphate (http://en.wikipedia....ne_triphosphate ) and NO3 when they create amino-acids and nucleic acids.

The key part of organic carbon dosing is that you have an oversized skimmer to remove the growing bacterial biomass from your tank, therefore removing the compounds that they have incorporated into themselves.

Mike, I first want to thank you for asking these questions, as I feel I did not explain enough in my previous posts. I also want to thank you for the Kalk you gave me.

When I stated that I hated using "chemical media," I was referring to AC and GFO, which are both used to trap pollutants, with those pollutants being finally removed when the media is removed (manually). It may have been better to refer to them as chemical media that mechanically removes pollutants from the aquarium. This is different from organic carbon media which is broken down, converted into bacteria, and then skimmed out of the tank by your skimmer at a constant pace. Thus, requiring no changing of media, only replacement after 6+ months.

On to filter socks (250 microns or less). I believe that while they do polish the water to upmost clarity, they also remove alot of beneficial organisms from the tank, and in my personal experience, become a pod graveyard. I also hated cleaning mine every 3-4 days, as one should, to prevent nitrate buildup. I also would prefer that my skimmer remove the things that the filter sock would normally remove.

On to whether or not solid organic carbon dosing (little more than biodegradable plastic) works. I will let you decide.

Here are some links that I recommend you read before you decided to jump on the band wagon. Warning, it's a lot.

Poll on use: http://reefcentral.c...d.php?t=1886163

Vertex pellets: http://reefcentral.c...d.php?t=1869108

Rice: http://reefcentral.c...d.php?t=1878307

Solid vodka dosing, n/p reducing pellets (one of the oldest threads)

http://reefcentral.c...d.php?t=1694529

Warner marine Eco-Bak: http://reefcentral.c...d.php?t=1847060

I have more if you like, just pm me, check out RC's reef chemistry forum, or the advanced topics forum. There are many, many threads about all of the things that I have mentioned.

[Will]

An update on tank conditions:

all corals look good (not much of a difference yet)

bryopsis is gone,

And after three days of not cleaning my glass, there is no green film.

I trimmed most of my halimida down to day as it was starting to die off, but left some.

water appears clearer than normal.

My skimmer appears to be pulling out a black tar like substance that smells absolutely awful.

[Will]

Update:

Not getting as much skimmate as i was before.

fish and coral all look happy. sps seem to be coloring up a little.

plan on doing a water change tomorrow.

Also, im new to using Kalk and the water in my ATO reservoir is starting to smell bad, is this normal?

[Toxiq Reef]

I've not experienced this, you keep it stirred?

[caferacermike]

Will thanks for answering and helping to clear some things up.

I noticed that I misinterpreted your first bit as that you didn't like adding any chemicals to a tank, I have since caught the part about not wanting chemical filtration. That was my bad. The Kalk had no reference after that.

You've done a great job of explaining how the carbon dosing is different than carbon filtration and have since clued me in on a few points I had not read elsewhere. I am still unclear how carbon can be converted into a pellet and told to use that it will leech into the water to feed bacteria, however the extremely fine powder from activated carbon cannot do the same thing when we add it to our tanks. If we can get a diatom bloom from stirring our sand bed due to it causing us to release silica into the water, I'm baffled why this wouldn't be the case when we refresh our activated carbon.

I'm not sold on the whole concept, probably won't ever be. Should I consider it, you've given plenty of good stuffs to read.

I'm a little puzzled still that you would consider adding small amounts of AC to your filtration for upkeep purposes. I'm not saying you need to add a Hyatt reactor (anyone remember how awesome those were 4 years ago?) and bomb your tank with 10 lbs of AC all at once but what's wrong with 2 tablespoons a week? The amount of trace elements that could be affected would certainly be replenished with regular water changes, or as most of us do, when we dose our 2-parts (or such). Your skimmer (and you've been bragging about it's performance) removes more trace elements than a few tablespoons of carbon would. I use a small amount and do change it weekly. I don't find it difficult but I do agree that it is in poor taste to leave it in the tank for extended periods of time. That's called being lazy and having a reef tank might not be right for that person anyways.

I don't think filter socks are some kind of "Pod Exterminator" (who here wouldn't watch that as some new Discovery Channel reality show) as you kinda mentioned. They may collect a few but it's all in how you use the product. I've found thousands of them over the course of my years in the hobby in my skimmate, there I go mentioning how skimmers will pull stuff from the water again. I still use my skimmer. For the few that could get caught, a healthy tank will certainly keep a steady supply of pods. Now I can make a good argument here about them catching pods, if they are maybe you ought to try something a little different. I have never used a filter sock under my suction tube. I have always ziptied them to my skimmer output piping. I'm just polishing that little bit that makes it passed the skimmer. They seem to last a little longer that way. Now any pods that would have made it to the skimmer, have been dealt with long before they would have died within the filter sock. So for one view about how they can collect pods, I'll tell ya how to do it so they don't. Again I will agree with you that they need to be cleaned and not left to stagnate within the tank. Doing so is a sign of laziness and that person maybe shouldn't keep a reef tank. I don't worry about cleaning mine and the hassle it creates. As I mentioned before I bought several so that they can be swapped out over the course of a month and washed all at once, never placing me in a bind.

I guess in the end I'm going to continue to use small amounts of activated carbon to polish my water, it's a tried and true method that dates back to the beginning of keeping tanks. It's a proven winner. I'm going to keep using filter socks and keep changing them out weekly for a fresh one. I may consider the use of carbon solids as a method of lowering nitrates due to your explanation. But I will stand by the fact that all of this in the end boils down to the fact that anything we do to our tanks must be watched and attended to correctly or any method will have it's own repercussions.

[+mcallahan]

The funny thing for me is with a year plus of carbon dosing, I've never gotten dark or smelly skimmate. It's never changed color or smell from light brown

This is from 4 different skimmers

Your kalk should not smell bad. I never stir mine and I have no issues. What does it smell like?

[Will]

the top off water smelled like fish market, and i think it may also be from the fact this my skimmer is still new and it could be just breaking in.

btw Mike, i will address your questions tomorrow as i went to blues on the green tonight an had a bit to drink, so i dont know if my response will be very good or coherent.

[Will]

Update:

all is well, my water is crystal clear, and everything seems to be happy. I have noticed a large increase in sponge growth in my tank and in my sump. I have also noticed increased polyp extension in my sps.

Mike, here is some great info on Activated carbon and its properties http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Activated_carbon

(notice the structure and the way each carbon atom is bonded to one another)

A diagram of the ethanol molecule can be found here, notice how the C atoms are bonded to each other and to hetero-atoms such as hydrogen and oxygen. It is the difference in bonds that makes molecules like alcohol or Polycaprolactone ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycaprolactone ) which is another common polymer used in carbon dosing (cant seem to find which polymer is used in the pellets im using)

Both of these organic molecules are "higher in energy," or less stable than elemental carbon or charcoal, and therefor can be used as an energy source for biochemical reactions.

so when you boil it down, AC does not = organic carbon, the same as charcoal is not the same as vodka. Another theme in chemistry is that compounds can have very different qualities than their elemental parents. NaCl is a good example, the sodium and the cloride (chlorine) are harmless to most life forms. elemental sodium on the other hand tends to explode violently ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polycaprolactone ) and chlorine gas is toxic. the state an atom is in plays a huge role in how it acts chemically.

Now on to the last part. I think it will do your tank no harm to use AC (in small manageable amounts and change it frequently) in you tank. I also think that filter socks can give your tank a nice clarity and filter out particulates. However you must be vigilant in your efforts to clean them and change them out. Being a college student with limited time and funds (and currently i work an hour outside of Austin, and stay out there for three days each week) I prefer to eliminate things that add extra cost or maintenance. I have designed my system in a way that I hope will allow me to have success without the above mentioned cost or maintenance. Call me lazy if you want

[caferacermike]

I like the way that you summed it up in the end. That this is what works for you. I was only dragging it out hoping you would say something like that. It's just that sometimes when someone is trying something new and says "I don't like such and such or won't do a certain something" that it takes on the sound of authority. Others walk away thinking that whatever method they've been doing is suddenly all wrong and that they need to instantly switch over the "new" method. In the end it's good to see some new information being written about without leading to confusion as to whether old methods are worthless. And no I wasn't calling you lazy, I was just stating that as we always say in this hobby "you get back what you put in". If someone isn't willing to put in the work to take care of simple procedures then there is a good bet they aren't taking care of the bigger picture either.

[Will]

UPDATE:

tank looks great (after not seeing it for 6 days, color has certainly improved). There is very little algae on the glass after not removing it for 6 days. Sponge growth in my tank is out of this world (could become a problem though if it continues at this rate)

I also have a fish eating nem that i need to get rid of but he is attached to on of my base rocks, how should i go about removing him without hurting him or my rockwork.

[+mcallahan]

UPDATE:

tank looks great (after not seeing it for 6 days, color has certainly improved). There is very little algae on the glass after not removing it for 6 days. Sponge growth in my tank is out of this world (could become a problem though if it continues at this rate)

I also have a fish eating nem that i need to get rid of but he is attached to on of my base rocks, how should i go about removing him without hurting him or my rockwork.

Can you get to its foot?

[Will]

Yea, but the fish I thought it ate was just hiding, so I may leave it

[innate1]

Started the vertex pellets on the 12th, had a little trouble getting a good tumble with my tlf reactor. Bigger pump fixed the problem. Day 2-3 water was cloudy, Day 4 crystal clear and no I repeat no algae on glass. I'm excited.

[Will]

everything is still going well (even with a 2 week vacation), sponge growth is getting a bit extreme. Still haven't tested for anything so dont know there. I did have one sps frag go rtn on sunday (may have been due to me putting alot of reef epoxy in my tank when i rescaped)

I also have one challice frag that is receding a bit, but i think that was because i had it in too much light, and none of my corals were fed while i was out of town.

innate, how is your tank doing?

I also might type up a FAQ on this stuff if i get time

[caferacermike]

All of my chalice are directly under a 250w mh. I've heard some people say that they prefer lower lighting, but I can say different. Hope it steadies. Any chance you are stripping the water to clean for chalice? Mine look great but aren't growing super fast. My understanding is they do a little better with a little more oomph in their water.

[Mike M.]

I think you should consider reducing the flow rate through your vertex reactor. I have seen similar results when the water gets over filtered by a fresh load of zeo stones. Happened to me in the last three weeks. Reduced the flow rate and even broke the day down into timed sections and a week later, all affected corals are looking better. I don't think it was the epoxy given what is going on chemistry wise in your tank. Food for thought!

[+mcallahan]

All of my chalice are directly under a 250w mh. I've heard some people say that they prefer lower lighting, but I can say different. Hope it steadies. Any chance you are stripping the water to clean for chalice? Mine look great but aren't growing super fast. My understanding is they do a little better with a little more oomph in their water.

my old chalice didn't do well at all till I moved it right under a MH light.