gone solar
- Thread starter hobogato
- Start date
sfsuphysics
Active member
Not to shabby at all.
Although I was reading an AA article and it pretty much comes to the conclusion that red light isn't necessarily good for corals which had me second guessing using sunlight, although granted the specimen used was from 14 meters deep...
Still think I'll plan on suntubes though in placement of the tank even if I don't actually go there.
Although I was reading an AA article and it pretty much comes to the conclusion that red light isn't necessarily good for corals which had me second guessing using sunlight, although granted the specimen used was from 14 meters deep...
Still think I'll plan on suntubes though in placement of the tank even if I don't actually go there.
Reefski's
Active member
my reading of the article seems to say the experimenters did not have full spectrum light that included red but instead used mostly or entirely red light.
"found that exposure to broad bandwidth red light resulted in low growth rates in corals (Kinzie et al., 1984). Further experiments (Kinzie and Hunter, 1987) found that corals exposed for more than 60 days to light composed of mostly the red portion of the spectrum resulted in corals that "…were almost entirely free of algae and appeared white, but retained complete coverage of living animal tissue."
the way i read this is that red light is just not much used by this particular coral at least. it is not harmful, just not used by the coral.
i think that is very different than what we are getting with our full spectrum sun light.
"found that exposure to broad bandwidth red light resulted in low growth rates in corals (Kinzie et al., 1984). Further experiments (Kinzie and Hunter, 1987) found that corals exposed for more than 60 days to light composed of mostly the red portion of the spectrum resulted in corals that "…were almost entirely free of algae and appeared white, but retained complete coverage of living animal tissue."
the way i read this is that red light is just not much used by this particular coral at least. it is not harmful, just not used by the coral.
i think that is very different than what we are getting with our full spectrum sun light.
Last edited:
sfsuphysics
Active member
Reefski: Good point, guess I was over generalizing that "red = bad", and as mentioned from the growth results, the coral sample in the article was gotten at 14m where red light is all but extinct. I do have red, pink and orange corals in my tank, so obviously those are from a little higher in the ocean 
Reefski's
Active member
i am not sure if pinker corals or fish are from shallower water. many anthias and wrasses are pink and from deeper water.
i have a crosshatch trigger which usually lives at 100-150 feet and it has a pink tail.
btw- my tank is lit with a skylight and my corals are growing. most of the year i have had no additional light but during these short days i have supplemented the natural light with a few hours morning and evening of halides on a light rail.
Carl
i have a crosshatch trigger which usually lives at 100-150 feet and it has a pink tail.
btw- my tank is lit with a skylight and my corals are growing. most of the year i have had no additional light but during these short days i have supplemented the natural light with a few hours morning and evening of halides on a light rail.
Carl
hobogato
New member
decided to take the tank in an even more natural direction. cut the return flow down to one mag18 and the in tank flow down to two seio 2600s on a controller. the lps seem to be much happier. i also removed the skimmer and will fill that section of the sump with more macro algae. this means i will be running with no mechanical filtration - just the liverock in the tank, the 150 lbs of rubble in the first section of my sump and a 48" x 15" refugium (half barebottom with macroalgae and half 8" dsb with a red and black mangrove forrest).
current fish list (besides the three clowns that will go back to mike's tank):
purple tang
chocolate tang
yellow eye kole tang
striped dogface puffer
zebra eel
marine beta
flame hawk
two spot candy hogfish
cleaner wrasse
yellow coris wrasse
clown fairy wrasse
radiant wrasse
blue pencil wrasse
took a few new fishy pics tonight
for grins, i decided to figure out a comparison on power consumption of my tank at its most complicated vs now.
then:
total volume 400 gallons - 240 gal display, 50 gal clam tank, rest in sump/fuge
1400 watts of MH (1250 main tank, 150 clam tank)
800 watts of t5 (580 main tank, 220 clam tank)
325 watts of return pump (mag12 and mag18 main tank, mag7 clam tank
300 watts of circulation pumps (4 seio 2600s in main tank, two powerheads in clam tank)
45 watts calcium reactor mixing pump
12 watts kalk reactor mixing pump
125 watts skimmer pump
300 watts chiller
48 watts refugium light
in the RC calculator, at $.08 /KWh, it said $993 a month - this is totally wrong since my highest monthly electricity bill was right at $600.
now:
350 gallons - 240 display and the rest in the sump/fuge
220 watts if t5 actinics
145 watts return pump (mag18)
110 watts circulation pumps (2 seio 2600s)
96 watts refugium light
in the RC calculator, it said $23 a month
current fish list (besides the three clowns that will go back to mike's tank):
purple tang
chocolate tang
yellow eye kole tang
striped dogface puffer
zebra eel
marine beta
flame hawk
two spot candy hogfish
cleaner wrasse
yellow coris wrasse
clown fairy wrasse
radiant wrasse
blue pencil wrasse
took a few new fishy pics tonight
for grins, i decided to figure out a comparison on power consumption of my tank at its most complicated vs now.
then:
total volume 400 gallons - 240 gal display, 50 gal clam tank, rest in sump/fuge
1400 watts of MH (1250 main tank, 150 clam tank)
800 watts of t5 (580 main tank, 220 clam tank)
325 watts of return pump (mag12 and mag18 main tank, mag7 clam tank
300 watts of circulation pumps (4 seio 2600s in main tank, two powerheads in clam tank)
45 watts calcium reactor mixing pump
12 watts kalk reactor mixing pump
125 watts skimmer pump
300 watts chiller
48 watts refugium light
in the RC calculator, at $.08 /KWh, it said $993 a month - this is totally wrong since my highest monthly electricity bill was right at $600.
now:
350 gallons - 240 display and the rest in the sump/fuge
220 watts if t5 actinics
145 watts return pump (mag18)
110 watts circulation pumps (2 seio 2600s)
96 watts refugium light
in the RC calculator, it said $23 a month
stylolvr
New member
Just found this thread, and am very impressed!! Everything looks like it is extremely happy, and growing well!
Living in Florida, I have thought about doing this many times. Do you think that over a frag tank, specifically designed for growth, that I would still need to supplement Actinics, or would they only be useful to color up frags before being traded/sold? Being able to go completely solar would cut way back on expenses, as you have shown here!
Thanks for the inspiration!
Living in Florida, I have thought about doing this many times. Do you think that over a frag tank, specifically designed for growth, that I would still need to supplement Actinics, or would they only be useful to color up frags before being traded/sold? Being able to go completely solar would cut way back on expenses, as you have shown here!
Thanks for the inspiration!
jnarowe
New member
I figured so. They are sweet, but wrasses are very crafty and have some serious predator tendencies, besides their proclivity to jump. I just found a Rhomboid in the overflow. Whatever the case, I keep a close eye on mine. I am fairly certain that one or all of them ate about 60 shrimp, among other things.
8BALL_99
New member
Two seio's isn't alot of flow for a 240 I guess since your only planning on keeping soft coral for the most part you should be fine. Still though a couple of Tunze would move more water for about the same power. If you worried about efficiency A mag 18 isn't a very good pump. Are you trying to thin stuff out due to cost or is this to make it easier? Just wonder cause skimmers and reactors make things easier not harder.. But they do add a little to cost. IMO not much at all though. Most people with out reactors dose much more and they have to constantly test and dose. Both the tests and the additives add up. Also people with out skimmers tend to do more water changes or atleast change more water each time.. With a nano this can be the cheapest option.. But with a 400 Gallon system:eek2: I'm just wondering why you got rid of so much stuff. Alot of the stuff you did away with really doesn't cost much to run and makes day to day maintenance easier.. The only down side is start up cost. But you already bought the stuff.
hobogato
New member
i kept the seios vs going with tunze or vortek because i already have them anemone proof - - dont want to risk that disaster again since i have four anemones in my tank.
the mag18 is just the larger of the two return pumps i already had. eventually i may go to a more efficient pump, but it has to be submersible to keep the noise down.
i plan on 5 gallon water changes twice a week. it doesnt sound like much, but when i have done that in the past, my skimmer would stop skimming and my orp would stay above 330 without ozone.
as far as the calcium and alkalinity - if needed i will go with balling method (i think that is what it is called) using randy hfs recipes.
i only have five sps colonies and a few frags, so the demand should be very low.
truthfully, i just want to see how well a large system will run with purely biological filtration. i will of course monitor things closely and adjust as needed. luckily, since i can build any reactor/skimmer i need for a fraction of the cost of buying one retail, it would be very easy to add anything i need to the tank.
the mag18 is just the larger of the two return pumps i already had. eventually i may go to a more efficient pump, but it has to be submersible to keep the noise down.
i plan on 5 gallon water changes twice a week. it doesnt sound like much, but when i have done that in the past, my skimmer would stop skimming and my orp would stay above 330 without ozone.
as far as the calcium and alkalinity - if needed i will go with balling method (i think that is what it is called) using randy hfs recipes.
i only have five sps colonies and a few frags, so the demand should be very low.
truthfully, i just want to see how well a large system will run with purely biological filtration. i will of course monitor things closely and adjust as needed. luckily, since i can build any reactor/skimmer i need for a fraction of the cost of buying one retail, it would be very easy to add anything i need to the tank.
unseen_clone
New member
give'em H@LL Ace...
i think its an awsome direction,for awhile i was trying to hard to get everything perfect,buying reactors and this and that,and to be honest,after all of it i had a crash,and for the most part of just running it back to the way i was 4 years ago before i knew of all these cool toys.IM HAPPY AGAIN.
just kepping it real.
Im sure the people with the a large amount of sps have beautiful aquariums, and have everything automated,and thats cool your going great ways with the hobbie,but simple is cool too right?
i think its an awsome direction,for awhile i was trying to hard to get everything perfect,buying reactors and this and that,and to be honest,after all of it i had a crash,and for the most part of just running it back to the way i was 4 years ago before i knew of all these cool toys.IM HAPPY AGAIN.
just kepping it real.
Im sure the people with the a large amount of sps have beautiful aquariums, and have everything automated,and thats cool your going great ways with the hobbie,but simple is cool too right?
Reef-o-Roni
Active member
Wow,you have a beautiful tank hobogato
