do we need to run skimmers?
- Thread starter Joel A
- Start date
Atomikk
SPS OG
In most cases they are (if used properly). They make much smaller bubbles.
Going back to TOC, Fellman's talk on Skimmer efficiency at MACNAXXI was an eye opener. He basically explained that most skimmers reach the same level of efficiency. Some get there quicker then others, based on their design. As a result, you will still need to do the water changes as the leftover TOC will be present.
Joel A
New member
right... but then why don't we all run seaclones?
fishtime123
New member
I find this very interesting. I always ran a skimmer and used refujiums. I do agree in that they have to be beneficial with oxegionating the water exspecially when the temp goes up during the summer months.
I Would not want to take the risk with my current set up. Im loaded with sps. Maybe a future tank It would save us all alot of money.
I Would not want to take the risk with my current set up. Im loaded with sps. Maybe a future tank It would save us all alot of money.
Atomikk
SPS OG
Because, according to this new study, the seaclone would take a long time to reach that point of maximum efficiency of removing TOC (keeping feeding constant of course). As an example, your Bubble King would get there in one day, versus SeaClone which can get there in four. One is faster at removing TOC then other, but they all reach the same max level. Eventually, the remaining TOC in the water will have to be removed via water change, regardless if you have a Bubble King or a SeaClone.
jjk_reef00
New member
I hope he doesn't keep large fish that enjoy/require oxygenated water. My skimmer was down for about 5 days while I upgraded and it seemed like my Naso tang and my California sting ray were less active. Maybe it was just my imagination...I doubt it!
The other thing to keep in mind is that many public aquariums have access to pumped in NSW, they are open systems, so water changes are not the same problem. I have a friend that worked at both Long Beach and Montery they are in a different realm than most home systems. It doesn't make much sense to omit a skimmer on a home closed system. I wouldn't dream of taking mine offline..Its possible but why..they're cheap to operate, efficient and don't really have a down side...and if you have to buy salt at retail prices forget about it..
rroselavy
Premium Member
I am not sure that "efficiency" is the right term to be used here. What you are saying is that the Seaclone will eventually take out the same amount of TOC as the BK, it'll just take longer. While this may be true, this does not really say much about efficiency. Efficiency is how well something can perform per base unit of measurement, like per watt or per lph of air. If the BK performs better because it a) draws more air per watt, b) processes more water per watt, c) produces more bubbles per lph of air, or d) all of the above, then it can be considered more efficient.
If you measure efficiency in performance per dollar spent, then you might balance the scales a bit...
Remember, if it takes longer for the Seaclone to remove TOC, then that TOC will be in the water column longer, available to promote bacteria and algae. The tank will continue to accrue TOCs, so the base level of TOCs should be higher than a system with a more efficient skimmer. Likewise, if your skimmer's neck is grossly oversized, it will require a larger bioload to build a consistent foam head. IMHO, this will reduce skimmer efficiency and leave more TOCs in the water column, available for nuisance bacteria and algae.
---
The skimmerless tank is definitely an interesting topic of discussion. I feel that it can be done, it will just require much larger water changes to compensate, unless you are striving for a nutrient rich, filter feeding biotope.
Joel A
New member
I'm confused... so let's say a tank that never has had a skimmer before... we set up a bubble king and within a day it takes out 30% of all the DOC. Now if we set up the tank with a seaclone instead, it would take 4 or 5 days to reach the same level of DOC removed, correct? But isn't that assuming there is no feeding? If we feed the tank heavily each day, wont the bubble king remove more DOC each day than the seaclone, making it remove more DOC overall?
I understand that skimmers can only take out so much, and if given enough time they will all take out that much... but isn't that assuming that we are not adding more DOC back into the water? Isn't it a possibility that the seaclone would never reach that level of "30 % DOC" removal simply because it takes it to long to get there and we feed the tank daily?
I understand that skimmers can only take out so much, and if given enough time they will all take out that much... but isn't that assuming that we are not adding more DOC back into the water? Isn't it a possibility that the seaclone would never reach that level of "30 % DOC" removal simply because it takes it to long to get there and we feed the tank daily?
rroselavy
Premium Member
That's what I was just trying to say.
You do not seem confused to me...
Bubble size, the amount of water/hour processed, and suppressed turbulence are the most important things to look for in a skimmer. Correctly sizing it for your bioload will promote consistency.
Quality of construction, pump durability, ease of use/maintenance, and hype are what really separates the cheap from the über-expensive.
I do not like paying for the hype part.
---
Strictly getting back on topic, does anyone have links to a >40 gallon system that runs without a skimmer? I am sure they are out there, I would just like to see what they are like and how they are maintained...
SunnyX
New member
With all the advancements in technology its amazing that some people are still promoting arcane methods. If he want to run his system skimmerless that is fine, but when starts telling newbie's that skimmers are a gimmick I take issue. This hobby is challenging enough, especially as a newbie, so why would ANYONE want to start-up with a disadvantage?
I am certain that I could run a tank without a skimmer, but why would I?
-I dont have the time to conduct extra water changes
-I dont want to waste money on excess carbon and GFO
-I dont want to tend to a refugium
-I demand the best coloration from my SPS
-I need my water to be fully oxygenated at all times
-I need the peace of mind a skimmer brings in case of over feeding of some unforeseen mishap
I wouldnt worry about this guys, but when you see him tell him I said semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit
(the necessity of proof always lies with the person who lays charges) or simply: The burden of proof lies with the claimant. If he is going to tell others that skimmerless is better then he needs to present his case and prove to everyone that his method is better.
Dont waste too much time with this guy. These goofballs usually crash their systems and are never seen again. :wildone:
I am certain that I could run a tank without a skimmer, but why would I?
-I dont have the time to conduct extra water changes
-I dont want to waste money on excess carbon and GFO
-I dont want to tend to a refugium
-I demand the best coloration from my SPS
-I need my water to be fully oxygenated at all times
-I need the peace of mind a skimmer brings in case of over feeding of some unforeseen mishap
I wouldnt worry about this guys, but when you see him tell him I said semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit
(the necessity of proof always lies with the person who lays charges) or simply: The burden of proof lies with the claimant. If he is going to tell others that skimmerless is better then he needs to present his case and prove to everyone that his method is better.
Dont waste too much time with this guy. These goofballs usually crash their systems and are never seen again. :wildone:
rkaires
Active member
Amen!
Hi everybody.
First off all let me say that i am a big fan of overskimming, but....
I recently joined a seminar by Eric Bonreman (for those who don't know please Google him)
I can say that he changed the way we see our aquariums.
He said that he never used a skimmer for the past 20 years because NOBODY can proove
what a skimmer actually does BUT he tested ALL the filtration systems out there and he ended up with the algae turf scrabber. He specifically said that if you use a skimmer and it works don't touch it!! His aquariums (witch we saw in slides) were perfect and as healthy as possible (SPS dominated with full colour).
As for the question "skimmers are oxygenating the water" i personally asked him and his respond was "All the oxygenation you need in a reef aquarium is provided by your lights , if there is a power cut don't use a battery backup on a powerhead , put a small lamp over the aquarium" . I personally respect this scientist and i follow most of his advices and so far he is 1000% right in every perspective (like the perfect advice "don't put in the water things that you can't measure" )
All that said i am still running a skimmer cause my sump can't handle an ATS and i am
not very good in DIY, one last thing is that with the ATS he suggests minimum water
changes but he never said RUN NOTHING :hmm4:
First off all let me say that i am a big fan of overskimming, but....
I recently joined a seminar by Eric Bonreman (for those who don't know please Google him)
I can say that he changed the way we see our aquariums.
He said that he never used a skimmer for the past 20 years because NOBODY can proove
what a skimmer actually does BUT he tested ALL the filtration systems out there and he ended up with the algae turf scrabber. He specifically said that if you use a skimmer and it works don't touch it!! His aquariums (witch we saw in slides) were perfect and as healthy as possible (SPS dominated with full colour).
As for the question "skimmers are oxygenating the water" i personally asked him and his respond was "All the oxygenation you need in a reef aquarium is provided by your lights , if there is a power cut don't use a battery backup on a powerhead , put a small lamp over the aquarium" . I personally respect this scientist and i follow most of his advices and so far he is 1000% right in every perspective (like the perfect advice "don't put in the water things that you can't measure" )
All that said i am still running a skimmer cause my sump can't handle an ATS and i am
not very good in DIY, one last thing is that with the ATS he suggests minimum water
changes but he never said RUN NOTHING :hmm4:
Joel A
New member
i understand the logic of "put a small lamp over your fish tank during a power outage" but how practical is that really?
The reasoning behind it is that with a small lamp over the fish tank, the corals will photosynthesize, and give off oxygen while getting rid of excess co2. This is true for photosynthesis, but a small, battery operated light is supposed to make corals photosynthesize enough to keep the water oxygenated? I doubt that...
PogoMonogo
New member
i am in the "always have a giant skimmer" club. I think the point about a seaclone versus a bubbleking that was left out is this: the amount of stuff to be pulled out in that example is fixed. So, if you have a tank with X amount of garbage in the water (i know over simplified) it would take the BK a day to remove, and the seaclone 4 days to remove. In that example, there is really no reason to go with one over the other. But in a functioning fish tank (atleast most peoples) that load "resets" daily (again, terrible wording). If you feed your fish everday, eventually you will get backlogged in export, and you will have a net GAIN in waste. If everyday X=2 and you are removing 1 each day, it adds up, and it adds up quick. Was that off based? haha, oh man, i need a nap, this swine flu is making me crazy.....
Similar threads
