GFO (Phosban) vs. Rowaphos

[MrMikeB]

At the last meeting there was an interesting point made that claimed the dry GFO [Phosban like] was "30% less effective than the wet media [Rowasphos like]." I was hoping to get clarity on this as my own personal research has lead me to believe this has not been substantiated. I have a couple links to discussion boards, websites, etc. In the end, about the only thing conclusive is that nobody seems to think the Aluminum based phosphate removal products are as effective as the iron based media - which I would have to agree.

In addition, there seems to be little distinction in terms of effectiveness of dry vs wet.:

http://www.advancedaquarist.com/issues/june2004/review.htm

I personally like the dry based media, simply due to storage and manageability. I have seen an exposed can of Rowa actually have mold on it (yes it was a bit old). So if you have differing views or data that has lead you to a conclusion, please share!

Again not trying to rehash an age old debate, just trying to get points of reference in one place so I can be educated.

 

[airinhere]

I am under the impression that rowa does not share some of GFO's problems with PM in clams and tissue irritation on LPS,softies. I also was under the impression it was not as effective as the GFO though. Something about it leaching back out over time.

I would like to start the roundtable on any of the topics I just poured out there. Looking for well informed sources.

 

[MrMikeB]

Airinhere,

In my experience, I have seen minor irritation with softies when the dry GFO was not rinsed well prior to use. The free flowing particulate (dust) needs to be rinsed away so that it does not flood into the tank. I also find better results with a reaction chamber versus a media bag, where gravity helps keep most of the larger particles from flowing into the system. I too would be interested in your data sources to geek out on.

 

[airinhere]

Some light reading
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2004-11/rhf/index.php

http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-09/rhf/index.php

And I think it was the aluminum based stuff that leached back into the water.

But there is something about Rowa that made me leery of using it.

AAh, I'll remember what it was soon enough. I'm gonna go read both articles and brush up a little bit.

 

[CaptiveReefSystems]

you can find test results of phosphate reducers and how they stack up against ROWAphos here: www.theaquariumsolution.com/?q=node/163

 

[bored4long]

For me, it comes down to economics.

11 pounds of GFO = $132
11 pounds (5 kg) of RowaPhos = $250

Unless Rowaphos is TWICE as good as GFO, then you are still ahead by using GFO.

I know this logic is very simplistic and doesn't take into account clumping, leeching, other impurities one media might extract that the other does not, etc. The prices mentioned above are not entirely fair either, since the GFO price is from Mike's bulk discount and the RowaPhos is a retail price. Also not considered in the above is that RowaPhos claims less media is required to treat the same amount of water.

Summary: whatever is cheapest is better for my application.

 

[Aquarist007]

alot of this was discussed in August's thread of the month:

http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=1182318

 

[kdblove_99]

For the price i will take GFO all day.