High Nitrates - Immediate Removal?
- Thread starter Xxero
- Start date
Belgian Anthias
New member
Any additive or food source for bacteria that is not natural available in natural seawater may have unknown and known caveats. When the working, result or outcome is not predictable these additives are best avoided as they may be dangerous without notice. Will it work? When will it work? Does it effect the environment? When the answers can not be given why spent money on it?
Nitrate can easily be controlled and removed on a biological way by de-nitrificaton using Sulphur as a substrate. Sulphur is cheap, inert in seawater and natural available. All caveats are known and easily corrected or avoided.
Nitrate can easily be controlled and removed on a biological way by de-nitrificaton using Sulphur as a substrate. Sulphur is cheap, inert in seawater and natural available. All caveats are known and easily corrected or avoided.
Belgian Anthias
New member
As every aquarium system is different correct dosing of any kind of additive to induce assimilation of nitrate is difficult.
Vinegar and vodka are not really products which one will find in our oceans, probably for the best. Sugar?
As the outcome of dosing organic carbon containing additives and polymers is not predictable, the results of the doses are unknown as they may not only grow beneficial bacteria and nitrate removal is very unreliable as assimilation removes nothing from the system
If the beneficial effect of adding a product or an additive can not be predicted, what about the side effects? How they will influence the system? Wait and see? Hope for good results? Managing an aquarium system should not be guessing work.
probably more so than mounds of sulfur,
There is about 600 mg sulphur present in each litre of seawater mainly as part of the sulphate. But there is a lot more!
Sulphur is very important for ocean live. For the coasts of Chile one can find mats of Thioploca ( sulfur oxidizers) with a weight of more than 100 000 000 tons. The total amount of sulphur which plays a very important role in the nitrogen-, carbon-, and sulphur cycle of our oceans can only be estimated.
Elemental sulphur is inert in seawater.
Belgian Anthias
New member
Badess
Badess
BADESS: Biological Autotrophe Denitrification on Elemental Sulphur System
A BADESSystem gives control to the user over the nitrate removal rate, the daily nitrate removal and the nitrate level. Managed correctly the nitrogen cycle may be closed in a closed aqua-culture system. Once in balance on the by the user desired nitrate level, the BADES system is self-regulating. A BADESSystem is based on the daily to remove nitrate production. Nitrate removal and nitrate removal rate can easily de controlled by the user.
A BADESS is suitable only for nutrient demanding aquarium systems.
The system is able to bring high nitrate levels to the desired level in a short time and keep this level by removing the daily nitrate production daily. Every day! A low nitrate level (< 1ppm NO3-N) can be maintained at a high nutrient input and bio-load.
BADESS uses fluidized biofilm-reactors. The BADES-reactor is NOT kept anoxic (<0.5ppm DO). The effect on alkalinity by nitrification and de-nitrification is fully compensated within the system. Some calcium is added.
No additives must be dozed. No feeding required.
Badess
BADESS: Biological Autotrophe Denitrification on Elemental Sulphur System
A BADESSystem gives control to the user over the nitrate removal rate, the daily nitrate removal and the nitrate level. Managed correctly the nitrogen cycle may be closed in a closed aqua-culture system. Once in balance on the by the user desired nitrate level, the BADES system is self-regulating. A BADESSystem is based on the daily to remove nitrate production. Nitrate removal and nitrate removal rate can easily de controlled by the user.
A BADESS is suitable only for nutrient demanding aquarium systems.
The system is able to bring high nitrate levels to the desired level in a short time and keep this level by removing the daily nitrate production daily. Every day! A low nitrate level (< 1ppm NO3-N) can be maintained at a high nutrient input and bio-load.
BADESS uses fluidized biofilm-reactors. The BADES-reactor is NOT kept anoxic (<0.5ppm DO). The effect on alkalinity by nitrification and de-nitrification is fully compensated within the system. Some calcium is added.
No additives must be dozed. No feeding required.
So much poor information presented as facts which aren't factual requires a response.
There are no polymers in acetic acid ( vinegar ) or ethanol(acetic acid) . They are simple compounds with short pathways to acetate. There polymers are in sugar and other complex carbohydrates .Sugar is one of the worst things to dose IMO and experience due to the complexity of the reactions by products and pathways and a potential for excess glucose and it's effect on corals. These pathways are relatively simple and direct to acetate( an element benficial to living things ) for ethanol and acetic acid . Organics containing carbon are natural to sea water . Obtaining a natural balance between C( carbon): Nitrogen( ammonia, nitrate etc) and phosphourous. is relatively easy with precise dosing of ethanol and acetic acid at rates suited to the bioactivity in a particular aquarium.
Details and experiences on organic carbon dosing are are available here and in many other posts articles and related studies:
http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2134105&highlight=organic+carbon+dosing
Sulfur is present in seawater at 900ppm(http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2005-11/rhf/index.php#10) .
Spreading it around the substrate as originally suggested seems like a bad idea to me .
The prescriptive rules for the BAD.. system rely on a reactor which gets some containment, I suppose, but still interacts with the aquarium and requires more than 20 times the naturally occurring amount of sulfur. That's just not more natural than a balanced C:N: P ratio achieved via organic carbon dosing IMO.
Sulfur is only inert if nothing is using it or reacting with it . I suggest those who want to know what happens to sulfur in seawater take a look at the Sulphur cycle. This is a good place to start:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfur_cycle
A sulphur denitrator is a fine tool I've had success with them with moderate sulfur amounts. The amount of sulfur used and/or the effluent flow rate should be adjusted based on the NO3 level in the tank I suggest folks who want to try a sulfur denitrator check out this thread which outlines a nice diy model and offers feedback from many users :
http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1288082
PS Don't let the size of the thread put you off. Most of the useful information is in the earlier sections . Much of the rest becomes somewhat aracne and perseverative.
There is really no reason to use excessive amounts of sulfur spread around or in a reactor and I 'd advise caution. FWIW, 1 gallon of sulfur in a reactor for 500 gallons of aquarium water reduced NO3 from the 50ppm/80ppm range to near zero in a few weeks when I used it. Even at that level only .2% of total water volume of the sytemn it's still close to twice the naturally occurring level in seawater.The BAD... system suggested which relies on dubious calculations ,overreaching extrapolations from waste water treatments,limited experience with fish only systems and one way is the only way mind set would have mandated 10 gallons of sulfur which is unnecessary and frankly absurd IMO.
There are no polymers in acetic acid ( vinegar ) or ethanol(acetic acid) . They are simple compounds with short pathways to acetate. There polymers are in sugar and other complex carbohydrates .Sugar is one of the worst things to dose IMO and experience due to the complexity of the reactions by products and pathways and a potential for excess glucose and it's effect on corals. These pathways are relatively simple and direct to acetate( an element benficial to living things ) for ethanol and acetic acid . Organics containing carbon are natural to sea water . Obtaining a natural balance between C( carbon): Nitrogen( ammonia, nitrate etc) and phosphourous. is relatively easy with precise dosing of ethanol and acetic acid at rates suited to the bioactivity in a particular aquarium.
Details and experiences on organic carbon dosing are are available here and in many other posts articles and related studies:
http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2134105&highlight=organic+carbon+dosing
Sulfur is present in seawater at 900ppm(http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2005-11/rhf/index.php#10) .
Spreading it around the substrate as originally suggested seems like a bad idea to me .
The prescriptive rules for the BAD.. system rely on a reactor which gets some containment, I suppose, but still interacts with the aquarium and requires more than 20 times the naturally occurring amount of sulfur. That's just not more natural than a balanced C:N: P ratio achieved via organic carbon dosing IMO.
Sulfur is only inert if nothing is using it or reacting with it . I suggest those who want to know what happens to sulfur in seawater take a look at the Sulphur cycle. This is a good place to start:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulfur_cycle
A sulphur denitrator is a fine tool I've had success with them with moderate sulfur amounts. The amount of sulfur used and/or the effluent flow rate should be adjusted based on the NO3 level in the tank I suggest folks who want to try a sulfur denitrator check out this thread which outlines a nice diy model and offers feedback from many users :
http://reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1288082
PS Don't let the size of the thread put you off. Most of the useful information is in the earlier sections . Much of the rest becomes somewhat aracne and perseverative.
There is really no reason to use excessive amounts of sulfur spread around or in a reactor and I 'd advise caution. FWIW, 1 gallon of sulfur in a reactor for 500 gallons of aquarium water reduced NO3 from the 50ppm/80ppm range to near zero in a few weeks when I used it. Even at that level only .2% of total water volume of the sytemn it's still close to twice the naturally occurring level in seawater.The BAD... system suggested which relies on dubious calculations ,overreaching extrapolations from waste water treatments,limited experience with fish only systems and one way is the only way mind set would have mandated 10 gallons of sulfur which is unnecessary and frankly absurd IMO.
Last edited:
Xxero
New member
I had to focus very hard to read through the last few posts. :lmao:
My particular situation has been complex from the beginning, and it was all ignorantly self-induced. Because of those initial rookie mistakes, I have had to correct many different things. I truly believe what finally knocked my Nitrates down was that really big water change, but I also know that I didn't have enough Live Rock in place originally. And aside from my skimmer, I had little means of nutrient export.
At this point, my Nitrates are staying between 5-10ppm. I have added approximately 30+ pounds of Live Rock, began carbon dosing then switching over to NoPoX. I have tinkered around with additional export systems, trying out the less complicated first: ATS, DSB, etc. and now I'm trying out one of the Marinepure blocks. Ultimately I would like the Nitrates to consistently remain below 5ppm, and I am hopeful that I am on my way there.
Thank you guys for all of your input in this...I find it all very educational! :bigeyes:
My particular situation has been complex from the beginning, and it was all ignorantly self-induced. Because of those initial rookie mistakes, I have had to correct many different things. I truly believe what finally knocked my Nitrates down was that really big water change, but I also know that I didn't have enough Live Rock in place originally. And aside from my skimmer, I had little means of nutrient export.
At this point, my Nitrates are staying between 5-10ppm. I have added approximately 30+ pounds of Live Rock, began carbon dosing then switching over to NoPoX. I have tinkered around with additional export systems, trying out the less complicated first: ATS, DSB, etc. and now I'm trying out one of the Marinepure blocks. Ultimately I would like the Nitrates to consistently remain below 5ppm, and I am hopeful that I am on my way there.
Thank you guys for all of your input in this...I find it all very educational! :bigeyes:
Belgian Anthias
New member
There is about 600 mg sulphur present in each litre of seawater mainly as part of the sulphate. But there is a lot more!
Sulphur is very important for ocean live. For the coasts of Chile one can find mats of Thioploca ( sulfur oxidizers) with a weight of more than 100 000 000 tons. The total amount of sulphur which plays a very important role in the nitrogen-, carbon-, and sulphur cycle of our oceans can only be estimated.
Elemental sulphur is inert in seawater.[/QUOTE]
This must be 900mg.
Sulphur is very important for ocean live. For the coasts of Chile one can find mats of Thioploca ( sulfur oxidizers) with a weight of more than 100 000 000 tons. The total amount of sulphur which plays a very important role in the nitrogen-, carbon-, and sulphur cycle of our oceans can only be estimated.
Elemental sulphur is inert in seawater.[/QUOTE]
This must be 900mg.
Belgian Anthias
New member
Sulphur denitrators
Sulphur denitrators
I am propagating the use of sulphur for removing nitrate. High nitrate levels can be reduced very quickly using elemental sulphur.
Most of the sulphur denitrators used and threated are denitrators which are kept anoxic (<0.5ppm DO) by limiting the flow. These denitrators have a very limited performance range and are only able to reduce some nitrate. A lot at high nitrate levels, a very limited amount at low nitrate levels. The nitrate removal rate is not or very difficult to manage as flow is limited to keep the reactor anoxic. At low nitrate levels only a very small amount of nitrate can be removed this way. These reactors are also susceptible for mismanagement.
In a BADESSystem the BADES-reactor is NOT kept anoxic. The BADES-reactor is big enough to consume enough oxygen to make autotrophe denitrification possible in the sub-layers of the biofilm on the sulphur substrate. This makes easy flow regulation possible as the biofilm adjusts itself to the DO and nitrate entered. The nitrate removal rate can easily be adjusted and managed in relation to the nitrate level in the system and the daily nitrate production to remove to be able to lower the nitrate level or keep the level at the by the user desired level.
To lower the nitrate level only a bit more as the daily nitrate production must be removed daily.
Sulphur denitrators
I am propagating the use of sulphur for removing nitrate. High nitrate levels can be reduced very quickly using elemental sulphur.
Most of the sulphur denitrators used and threated are denitrators which are kept anoxic (<0.5ppm DO) by limiting the flow. These denitrators have a very limited performance range and are only able to reduce some nitrate. A lot at high nitrate levels, a very limited amount at low nitrate levels. The nitrate removal rate is not or very difficult to manage as flow is limited to keep the reactor anoxic. At low nitrate levels only a very small amount of nitrate can be removed this way. These reactors are also susceptible for mismanagement.
In a BADESSystem the BADES-reactor is NOT kept anoxic. The BADES-reactor is big enough to consume enough oxygen to make autotrophe denitrification possible in the sub-layers of the biofilm on the sulphur substrate. This makes easy flow regulation possible as the biofilm adjusts itself to the DO and nitrate entered. The nitrate removal rate can easily be adjusted and managed in relation to the nitrate level in the system and the daily nitrate production to remove to be able to lower the nitrate level or keep the level at the by the user desired level.
To lower the nitrate level only a bit more as the daily nitrate production must be removed daily.
Last edited:
jason2459
Well-known member
A few things for perspective :
A sulfur denitrator can reduce baseline nitrates quickly as I noted in posts # 26, #94 , # 146,and #166. I often recommend reducing baseline nitrate levels before starting organic carbon dosing either via water changes or with a sulfur denitrator. It can take months for pre existing nitrates to fall with organic carbon dosing since it takes time for enough anaerobic activity to take hold since the facultative heterotrophic bacteria work on ammonia preferentially for nitrogen( thus reducing the nitrate production by outcompeting the ammonia oxidizing bacteria that create nitrate from the ammonia. These heterotrophic bacteria go to nitrate for it when oxygen levels are low in hypoxic areas or even in their own mulm./mats/ biofilm.Sometimes that takes months; sometimes it's much faster. I think it's much easier to dial in a maintenance dose when carbon dosing is started with low nitrate levels,say under 5ppm.
It's also fine,IMO, to use a sulfur denitrator on an ongoing basis without organic carbon dosing if you are less interested in the PO4 reduction organic carbon dosing also provides and less inclined to raise bacteria for the food web. I chose organic carbon dosing for the main sps dominant system but others prefer sulfur denitrators and PO4 removers like GFO and there is no reason that a well managed combination of those two won't control NO3 and PO4 levels. I have also used the sulfur denitrator on several off system tanks I keep with success in lowering nitrates. I think a suilfur denitrator may be very useful on fry tanks as an example where limiting bacteria in the water column is often a concern and feeding is often very heavy.
Some use organic carbon dosing and a sulfur denitrator together ; I'm skeptical but still unsure this will work well or not given the potential for organic carbon to get into the reactor feeding sulfate reducing bacteria (producing toxic hydrogen sulfide gas as a by product) in the reactor (which can occur at truly anoxic conditions ;i.e no nitrate and no oxygen). I'm also concerned the bacteria using the organic carbon may outcompete the sulfur bacteria. Having said that I think the jury is still out on this combination.
A sulfur denitrator can reduce baseline nitrates quickly as I noted in posts # 26, #94 , # 146,and #166. I often recommend reducing baseline nitrate levels before starting organic carbon dosing either via water changes or with a sulfur denitrator. It can take months for pre existing nitrates to fall with organic carbon dosing since it takes time for enough anaerobic activity to take hold since the facultative heterotrophic bacteria work on ammonia preferentially for nitrogen( thus reducing the nitrate production by outcompeting the ammonia oxidizing bacteria that create nitrate from the ammonia. These heterotrophic bacteria go to nitrate for it when oxygen levels are low in hypoxic areas or even in their own mulm./mats/ biofilm.Sometimes that takes months; sometimes it's much faster. I think it's much easier to dial in a maintenance dose when carbon dosing is started with low nitrate levels,say under 5ppm.
It's also fine,IMO, to use a sulfur denitrator on an ongoing basis without organic carbon dosing if you are less interested in the PO4 reduction organic carbon dosing also provides and less inclined to raise bacteria for the food web. I chose organic carbon dosing for the main sps dominant system but others prefer sulfur denitrators and PO4 removers like GFO and there is no reason that a well managed combination of those two won't control NO3 and PO4 levels. I have also used the sulfur denitrator on several off system tanks I keep with success in lowering nitrates. I think a suilfur denitrator may be very useful on fry tanks as an example where limiting bacteria in the water column is often a concern and feeding is often very heavy.
Some use organic carbon dosing and a sulfur denitrator together ; I'm skeptical but still unsure this will work well or not given the potential for organic carbon to get into the reactor feeding sulfate reducing bacteria (producing toxic hydrogen sulfide gas as a by product) in the reactor (which can occur at truly anoxic conditions ;i.e no nitrate and no oxygen). I'm also concerned the bacteria using the organic carbon may outcompete the sulfur bacteria. Having said that I think the jury is still out on this combination.
Last edited:
Belgian Anthias
New member
What can I sell? Sulphur is cheap (10€/kg) and only a very small amount is consumed. Once installed there is not much to sell. Oyster shell is also very cheap and everywhere available as chicken food. Any container can be used as reactor. No high tech stuff needed. A small pump, some tubes and a small flow regulator valve. That is it.
But everything can also be bought in the aquarium trade, at the local store. One can add PH monitoring. Use commercial calcium reactors and/or bio-reactors, calcium-carbonate- and sulphur media, etc.-
I am speaking for myself when I say that nitrate should not be a problem in a nutrient demanding closed mixed reef aquarium system as it is easily removed and controlled using BADES (Biological Autotrophe Denitrification on Elemental Sulphur) There is nothing new about a BADESSystem. BADES was first used in reef aquaria two decades ago.
Belgian Anthias
New member
BADES vs sulphur -denitrator
BADES vs sulphur -denitrator
Are we comparing apples with pears.
I distance myself from the use of sulphur-denitrators that are kept anoxic (<0.5ppm DO). I do not propagate the use of sulphur-denitrators managed that way. I would never use them this way or advice them. It is not the first reactor managed this way that turns into a sulphide factory due to mismanagement.
I propagate the use of a BADESS to remove nitrate which is completely different in concept.
A BADESS does NOT use sulphur-denitrators which are kept anoxic by limiting the flow and managed in a way as used by Tmz . BADES-reactors are NOT managed the same way carbon dosed reactors and anoxic sulphur reactors are managed.
Sulphur denitrators which are kept anoxic (<0.5ppm DO) may become problematic and are easily mismanaged, unsuitable for a BADESS as we want reliability and user friendliness. In a BADESS sulphur-denitrators are NOT used and managed this way because it does NOT work as the nitrate removal rate can not be controlled which makes it NOT possible to close the nitrogen cycle within the closed aqua-system which is the main purpose of a BADESSystem.
A BADES-reactor is able to remove 10x more nitrate as a sulphur reactor that is kept anoxic . The flow true the reactor can easily be changed which makes managing the nitrate removal rate an easy task.
A normal BADESS processes daily the total volume of the aqua-system, every day.
Adding organic carbon in a BADES-reactor will remove the biofilm needed as the heterotrops will out-compete the autotrophs. Cultivating and maintaining the biofilm needed is a very important issue when bio-film BADES-reactors are used.
NEVER dose organic carbon when using a BADES-reactor.
A BADESS is used for nutrient demanding aquarium-systems.
A BADESS will give full control to the user over the nitrate removal rate and the nitrate level in the system. The user decides over the nitrate level he wants to keep on, helped by nature.
An anoxic kept sulphur-denitrator can only reduce some nitrate.
BADES vs sulphur -denitrator
Are we comparing apples with pears.
I distance myself from the use of sulphur-denitrators that are kept anoxic (<0.5ppm DO). I do not propagate the use of sulphur-denitrators managed that way. I would never use them this way or advice them. It is not the first reactor managed this way that turns into a sulphide factory due to mismanagement.
I propagate the use of a BADESS to remove nitrate which is completely different in concept.
A BADESS does NOT use sulphur-denitrators which are kept anoxic by limiting the flow and managed in a way as used by Tmz . BADES-reactors are NOT managed the same way carbon dosed reactors and anoxic sulphur reactors are managed.
Sulphur denitrators which are kept anoxic (<0.5ppm DO) may become problematic and are easily mismanaged, unsuitable for a BADESS as we want reliability and user friendliness. In a BADESS sulphur-denitrators are NOT used and managed this way because it does NOT work as the nitrate removal rate can not be controlled which makes it NOT possible to close the nitrogen cycle within the closed aqua-system which is the main purpose of a BADESSystem.
A BADES-reactor is able to remove 10x more nitrate as a sulphur reactor that is kept anoxic . The flow true the reactor can easily be changed which makes managing the nitrate removal rate an easy task.
A normal BADESS processes daily the total volume of the aqua-system, every day.
Adding organic carbon in a BADES-reactor will remove the biofilm needed as the heterotrops will out-compete the autotrophs. Cultivating and maintaining the biofilm needed is a very important issue when bio-film BADES-reactors are used.
NEVER dose organic carbon when using a BADES-reactor.
A BADESS is used for nutrient demanding aquarium-systems.
A BADESS will give full control to the user over the nitrate removal rate and the nitrate level in the system. The user decides over the nitrate level he wants to keep on, helped by nature.
An anoxic kept sulphur-denitrator can only reduce some nitrate.
Similar threads
