I got into a reef tank setup and now realize that it takes more money/time than I have to maintain it. If I go to fish only, will I save much money in terms of monthly maintainence? Can I use tap water, go without my RODI unit, change water less, not worry about bulb changes, not worry about water parameters as much and things like that?
Going to fish only....need advice
- Thread starter Titus07
- Start date
i think the monthly maintenance for reef and fowlr is about the same but i think fowlr is a bit harder cuz u have to keep ur water quality really good and its hard to do so when ur fishes eat like pigs(if going for Predator tank) meaning you'll have to do water changes more often. also u should never use tap water for anything RODI always in my opinion.
JustinReef
New member
Tap water is a big debate with FOWLR tanks, many people do use tap water with great results but if you have RO already, you should use it maybe. Water quality does not change. You still need to keep nitrates below 20 ppm, so a little higher than a reef I guess but I would try for lower than 20 ppm. You should always be trying to give fish the cleanest water you can.
JustinReef
New member
Oh and you don't have to change bulbs as much but old bulbs cause bad algae. Just something to remember.
sean48183
New member
Use a refugium to cut down on nitrates and algae in the main tank. I would use one on a reef or a fish tank. A oversized skimmer will also help. Work wise it is about the same but fish tend to be a little easier to diagnose problems. Corals can just begin to disappear and you have no idea why.
I would say yes. There are ways you might be able to tune your system to save on maintenance time and cost. If you don't already have a lit refugium with macro, it could help reduce nitrates. You could go with less intense lighting, which could help reduce nuisance algae growth. (Though as mentioned, you still need to stay up to date on bulb changes because the spectrum change can encourage "bad" algae growth.)
If you can tell us what your current set-up is like, we may be able to make some suggestions...
If you can tell us what your current set-up is like, we may be able to make some suggestions...
Setup is 125g tank and total system volume is 140g. 2 6ft VHOs, 180lbs live rock with plenum. Water goes out overflow box to wet/dry with bioballs, wet/dry then runs into a rubbermaid sump. Skimmer pump is in the sump while the skimmer is external and external main pump returns water to the tank. All supps are manually dosed as is water topoff. I do have a kit to add two more VHO's but have yet to assemble the unit.
sean48183
New member
Not a bad setup for a fish only but I would find a way to incoporate a fuge in there somehow. Maybe just another rubbermaid with few rocks and a light on it. I still like bio balls for fish only tanks for ammonia removal but they will produce nitrates so you will need algae to grow to take out the nitrates. I actually like to grow hair algae in the fuge for fish tanks. Eats nitrates better and faster than any type of macroalgae.
limitdown
New member
You'll find a lot of posts on this subject in the Fish Only forum.
I completely tore down by 3yr-old 50g reef, sold all my corals, and replaced it with a 200g FO system and I'll never look back.
My 2 biggest motivations for making the switch were 1) time/energy requied to maintain a reef 2) energy consumption. If I did an apples-to-apples comparison on operating cost per gallon, I would say that the FO wins hands down, by a mile.
When I was running my reef, I had a bunch of SPS, which required 300watts of halides which and a serious amount of heat, so required a 400watt chiller. For my FO, I use very cheap 4x60inch regular T8's using 40watts each. And because fish don't need lights (well, natural sunlight coming thru the windows into the living room lets them know that it's daytime), I only turn on the lights when I come home from work for 4-5hrs when I actually want to look at the fish. Yes, the intensity of the lighting is lower, but fish don't need that much light, and the lower intensity is easier on the eyes. And because I'm using much less wattage for lighting (160watts vs. 300watts), I'm producing a lot less heat, so I've also ditched the chiller and replaced them with fans (also, fish can tolerate bigger swings in temperature). I estimate I was using 180 kilowatt/hrs per month on lighting/chilling the reef (300watts x 12hrs+ 400watts x 6hrs for 30days) versus 24 kilowatt/hrs per month for my FO (160watts x 5hrs). The difference of ~150kw/hr comes out to about $20/mth or $240/yr. Also, I never think about changing bulbs unless a tube completely dies and even then the Philips tubes at Home Depot are so cheap. If you don't want to change your lighting system, you can consider turning on fewer tubes at a time and turning them on only when you want to look at the fish.
I've ripped out my DI filter and use the RO water only for cooking and drinking these days. I've put in a bypass just before my RO membrane which T's off water for the fish. I've got 3 pre-filters, a 1micron PP, KXMatrix +5 carbon block and a KXMatrix +1 carbon block. The carbon blocks are rated at 1gpm (ie 60gp/hr or 1,440gpd) which is literally 14x faster than my 100gpd RO membrane. This speeds up the entire water changing process and eliminates the need for other cumbersome equipment. It takes me literally 50 minutes to fill a 50gallon drum instead of the 12hrs+ with my RO membrane (depending on temperature of incoming water) so I fill it up, toss in the salt and powerhead and walk away. My incoming water has always tested zero for nitrates, but if you've got high readings, then you can consider adding a 4th stage with a DI filter, which will run at about 0.5gpm, still decently fast though.
Going FO in itself will not raise your nitrates! But if you start adding big, hungry fish that eat/poop a lot, then your nitrates will definitely go up. If you kept the same fish list, then you will not need to change water as frequently because fish can tolerate much higher nitrate levels. Whether you're running a reef or FO tank, I would highly recommend a sulfur-based denitrator. I've had my Schuran denitrator for 1yr and feel that it's one of te best equipment purchases I've ever made. I actually bought it second-hand locally from a guy that had been using it for 3mths, so it came fully populated with denitrating bacteria. Within literally 5 days, my nitrates went from 50ppm down to about 5ppm! The reason I went for a sulfur-based denitrator is that it requires the least amount of maintenance. The bacteria only need nitrates and sulfur to survive/multiply, so you do not need to constantly add hydrocarbons like sugar/alcohol/vodka like with the hydrocarbon-based denitrators. The only thing I do is open the top air outlet to let out the nitrogen gas once every 2-3days. During my 1yr of use, the amount of sulfur pearls has only dropped by about 20%, so I probably won't need to add any pearls for quite awhile. Although my nitrates read always read zero, I still change out 25% of my water every 2mths, because as others have mentioned before, there are many toxins which we can't test for.
With feeding, I've got an automatic feeder that drops in pellets/flakes and the fish gobble them up. When I'm at home, I'll toss in some fresh vegetables once in awhile. Extremely simple. No more mess and hassle with feeding certain types of corals.
I've also sold my calcium reactor. Which is 1 less piece of equipment to maintain.
I no longer need to dose any supplements.
It's difficult to quantify exactly, but I estimate that I spend 50-60% less time maintaining my 200g FO versus my 50g reef.
Hope this helps.
I completely tore down by 3yr-old 50g reef, sold all my corals, and replaced it with a 200g FO system and I'll never look back.
My 2 biggest motivations for making the switch were 1) time/energy requied to maintain a reef 2) energy consumption. If I did an apples-to-apples comparison on operating cost per gallon, I would say that the FO wins hands down, by a mile.
When I was running my reef, I had a bunch of SPS, which required 300watts of halides which and a serious amount of heat, so required a 400watt chiller. For my FO, I use very cheap 4x60inch regular T8's using 40watts each. And because fish don't need lights (well, natural sunlight coming thru the windows into the living room lets them know that it's daytime), I only turn on the lights when I come home from work for 4-5hrs when I actually want to look at the fish. Yes, the intensity of the lighting is lower, but fish don't need that much light, and the lower intensity is easier on the eyes. And because I'm using much less wattage for lighting (160watts vs. 300watts), I'm producing a lot less heat, so I've also ditched the chiller and replaced them with fans (also, fish can tolerate bigger swings in temperature). I estimate I was using 180 kilowatt/hrs per month on lighting/chilling the reef (300watts x 12hrs+ 400watts x 6hrs for 30days) versus 24 kilowatt/hrs per month for my FO (160watts x 5hrs). The difference of ~150kw/hr comes out to about $20/mth or $240/yr. Also, I never think about changing bulbs unless a tube completely dies and even then the Philips tubes at Home Depot are so cheap. If you don't want to change your lighting system, you can consider turning on fewer tubes at a time and turning them on only when you want to look at the fish.
I've ripped out my DI filter and use the RO water only for cooking and drinking these days. I've put in a bypass just before my RO membrane which T's off water for the fish. I've got 3 pre-filters, a 1micron PP, KXMatrix +5 carbon block and a KXMatrix +1 carbon block. The carbon blocks are rated at 1gpm (ie 60gp/hr or 1,440gpd) which is literally 14x faster than my 100gpd RO membrane. This speeds up the entire water changing process and eliminates the need for other cumbersome equipment. It takes me literally 50 minutes to fill a 50gallon drum instead of the 12hrs+ with my RO membrane (depending on temperature of incoming water) so I fill it up, toss in the salt and powerhead and walk away. My incoming water has always tested zero for nitrates, but if you've got high readings, then you can consider adding a 4th stage with a DI filter, which will run at about 0.5gpm, still decently fast though.
Going FO in itself will not raise your nitrates! But if you start adding big, hungry fish that eat/poop a lot, then your nitrates will definitely go up. If you kept the same fish list, then you will not need to change water as frequently because fish can tolerate much higher nitrate levels. Whether you're running a reef or FO tank, I would highly recommend a sulfur-based denitrator. I've had my Schuran denitrator for 1yr and feel that it's one of te best equipment purchases I've ever made. I actually bought it second-hand locally from a guy that had been using it for 3mths, so it came fully populated with denitrating bacteria. Within literally 5 days, my nitrates went from 50ppm down to about 5ppm! The reason I went for a sulfur-based denitrator is that it requires the least amount of maintenance. The bacteria only need nitrates and sulfur to survive/multiply, so you do not need to constantly add hydrocarbons like sugar/alcohol/vodka like with the hydrocarbon-based denitrators. The only thing I do is open the top air outlet to let out the nitrogen gas once every 2-3days. During my 1yr of use, the amount of sulfur pearls has only dropped by about 20%, so I probably won't need to add any pearls for quite awhile. Although my nitrates read always read zero, I still change out 25% of my water every 2mths, because as others have mentioned before, there are many toxins which we can't test for.
With feeding, I've got an automatic feeder that drops in pellets/flakes and the fish gobble them up. When I'm at home, I'll toss in some fresh vegetables once in awhile. Extremely simple. No more mess and hassle with feeding certain types of corals.
I've also sold my calcium reactor. Which is 1 less piece of equipment to maintain.
I no longer need to dose any supplements.
It's difficult to quantify exactly, but I estimate that I spend 50-60% less time maintaining my 200g FO versus my 50g reef.
Hope this helps.
