Liquid GFO...
- Thread starter Reefer40b
- Start date
Here is the link to Glenn's phosphate page http://dsrreefing.nl/phosphate.html where he outlines the use of Iron citrate.
Dennis
Dennis
I just tested the bentonite sample that I had redosed using some of the iron citrate sample. The bentonite sample (after the addition of the iron citrate) now reads 0.10 on the test kit.
I also tested the CaCO3 sample just now, close to 0.10, but not quite there yet.
Just to recap the results, all the samples started with a phosphate reading of 0.50.
The calcium bentonite clay was able to get it to 0.25, but then seemed to plateau.
The CaCO3 was able to reduce it to almost 0.10, but not quite.
The iron citrate was able to reduce it to 0.00, although the amount dosed was way higher than would be tank safe. Then a small amount of the iron citrate sample was added to the bentonite clay sample to bring it up to 0.12ppm of iron (or thereabouts) and the bentonite clay sample dropped to 0.10 PO4.
At this point, I am going to conclude that the iron citrate is the most effective means of lowering phosphate. The two ingredients for it cost about $25 (US) for enough Analytical Purity grade supplies to make 1L of iron citrate, which would last a lifetime as an iron supplement, and (I would suspect) a number of years as a means of phosphate control.
This confirms what GlennF has said all along, that iron citrate can be used to control phosphate.
Note: Anyone thinking of using iron citrate for phosphate control should read GlennF's warning about the sensitivity of Tang and Butterfly fish to elevated iron and more specifically the iron phosphate "dust" that occurs.
Dennis
Of the three chemicals tested, I agree that iron citrate seems to be the best, but I would stick with GFO as much as possible. I agree that GFO gets too expensive in some situations, though. Lanthanum chloride should be fine. I don't know whether iron citrate or lanthanum chloride is safer. I guess the costs are close?
I have actually never used Lanthanum Chloride. The costs should be similar between the two. Personally I would choose iron citrate over lanthanum chloride just out of concern for the possibility that precipitated residue of the LC (or iron phosphate) will possibly remain in the tank. If at some future point, through bacterial activity, the lanthanum or iron phosphate residue were to become disassociated, I would just feel more comfortable if the element that gets added back into the water column is iron rather than lanthanum. The risks to using each of them appear to be about similar.
I agree that GFO should be the first choice for most people. As for the situations where GFO is too expensive. That has me a bit confused. I am really not sure why GFO gets depleted so fast as compared to Iron Citrate / Lanthanum Chloride? I was always under the impression that GFO had a high surface area, but I am starting to question if a big portion of the GFO is unavailable for precipitation to occur as it is inaccessible (E.g not part of the surface of the GFO).
As for the costs of GFO, it is used in wastewater treatment, so I would expect it is not very expensive, and only is marketed at a high price within the aquarium trade.
Dennis
2smokes
In Memoriam
If you dont like my approach using cheap kalk (CaOH not CaCO3), then ,a cheap alternative would be to use iron nails instead of GFO.The nails will rust and the iron oxide will bond phosphates.There was an asian guy here that used nails with success.Randy Holmes Farley doesnt believe in the power of the nails here http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1469717 but that asian guy allready prooved you dont need too manny and that they work well.Just avoid zinc coated nails .The thread of the asian guy should be somewhere on reefcentral but i cant find it right now.
jason2459
Well-known member
First, you have not proven a practical way to use calcium hydroxide to directly reduce phosphates in our saltwater tank. The theory is there but in practice it would be very localized and in extremely small amounts. Maybe some kind of reactor incorporating calcium hydroxide, hydrochloric acid to handle the alkalinity spike, and very fine filter to handle the precipitate. Maybe some CO2.
Either way I'd like to see your reference to using limewater in a ease and practical way to reduce phosphates that is cheaper and more efficient then GFO.
Second, I would love to also now know how nails will practically work as well. Randy in that link you provided brought up several valid points.
1. Yes, it will rust and convert
2. Contaminants are a concern
3. You would need an extremely large amount of nails to compare to th surface area of GFO
4. Point 3 makes point 2 an even greater concern.
Contaminants would not just come from a surface coating. To make this work you could create maybe a reactor out of a large container filled with nails pumping water through it. That doesn't sound practical or powerful.
Would be easier to dose iron citrate like GlennF does or use GFO. I believe GFO in a small reactor to be safer.
2smokes
In Memoriam
The asian guy sayd he didnt changed the water to his reef tank in 13 years.People says that nails will have a smaller surface area than GFO but i dont agree with this.As the nails rust, the iron oxide expands so there will be just the same surface area as the GFO has.As for the contaminants,i doubt that GFO is made from pure iron as well.Gfo might also contain traces of various otther oxides.I wouldnt use nails in my aquarium but is interesting idea.If i vere a GFO fan i could have used a cast iron plate in the sump and from time to time i would clean the rust and throw it as its gets filled with phosphates.Would be a much better and safer idea of PO4 export than ,,liquid GFO,, or LaCl. http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1311723
jason2459
Well-known member
LaCL3 is very cheap if you buy it from a pool supply store. I bought some from amazon.
Someone in another thread found some bulk GFO on amazon or ebay I can't remember which at a fairly decent price.
However, GFO can be regenerated to be able to be used several times. I've done it at least 3 times but I don't use GFO or any phosphate specific binder normally. TMC has regenerated up to 10 times I belive. But this is with high capacity GFO. Which if going the regeneration route HC GFO is what I would recommend. It holds up much better to repeated soakings in muriatic acid. Regular GFO in my experience turns to mush. But I may have done it wrong. This makes GFO very cost effective.
So let me get this straight, you would be more inclined to use an iron plate which you would have no idea what contaminants are in, than you would be to use iron citrate which you can directly control by buying high purity reagent grade ingredients??
If if you are talking about a cast iron pan, same thing applies, no way of knowing what impurities are tagging along for the ride.
Just for the record. The tank that I used as the source of high PO4 sample, does use kalkwasser as its means of maintaining Ca/Alk. The rate of addition required is so small (0.3ml/minute) to keep the Ca/Alk stable, it has no effect on PO4.
Dennis
I am not sure which would be safer to leave in the tank, the iron plus phosphate or the lanthanum phosphate. I think the major danger is the precipitate itself, which is equally problematic. If disassociated, the lanthanum and the iron both would react and be removed from the water column fairly quickly, I think. Iron tends to get bound or reduced quickly, and lanthanum will combine with other phosphate or with carbonate.
More results ...
More results ...
Ok, I found the will to start dosing iron citrate into my frag tank that was the source of the high phosphate readings I was sourcing my test water from. This tank had both high nitrate (50 ppm) and high phosphate (0.50 ppm). What spurred me into action was that a ball of cheato that I had in the sump has melted away to about 50% of the size over the past few weeks. With nutrient s that high, and the cheato dying off, I was pretty sure that something was limiting its growth. The tank does get a daily water change, but for some reason that was not meeting the needs of the cheato.
Just to make sure that this could not be construed as a scientific test, I changed multiple a parameters at once! :headwally:
I made a DIY cheato reactor out of an Aquamaxx reactor with a string of LEDs spiraled around the outside, divided up into 3 levels for cheato. I moved what was left of my cheato into the reactor and set it on a reverse lighting schedule.
I also started dosing iron citrate daily to my tank. Not a lot, only about 3 drops daily (0.15ml), and one day on the weekend of 6 drops (0.3ml).
Just to muddy the waters a bit more, I also did a couple doses of Iodide/Iodate. In the past I have found iodine to be lacking on more than 1 occasion and my corals respond to it as soon as it is supplemented. Since cheato also is a user of iodine, I made the logical leap that it may also be lacking and the cheato would benefit as my corals have in the past.
The reactor has been running since Monday, the iron citrate has been daily dosed since the weekend. So this morning I decided to measure my PO4 and NO3 to see what effect if any had occurred.
Nitrate before 50 ppm
Nitrate now 50 ppm
PO4 before 0.50 ppm
PO4 now 0.15 ppm (lower than 0.25, higher than 0.10 on Salifert)
The change in PO4 is not being reflected with an equal lowering of the Nitrate. I would have expected to see the nitrate around 15 ppm if the lowering of the PO4 was as a result of the cheato starting to grow again. The top chamber of cheato in my DIY reactor is starting to show some moderate growth, The middle level, debatable if any, the bottom level nothing.
Now I am wondering if the PO4 being lowered is attributable to the addition of iron citrate. Precipitating it rather than due to increased cheato growth. The tank is about 100 G of water volume.
When I go home tonight I will re-measure the PO4 just to make sure it was not a bad test. If it holds and it really is 0.15 ppm now, I would like to have someone else try iron citrate on a tank with moderate phosphates to see if similar results are obtained. I am having hard time believing how such a small amount of iron citrate could impact the PO4 level of 100G.
Seems too good to be true. Mind you, when lanthanum chloride is dosed, the actual amount that is used is also ridiculously small as it is quite effective at binding PO4.
Dennis
More results ...
Ok, I found the will to start dosing iron citrate into my frag tank that was the source of the high phosphate readings I was sourcing my test water from. This tank had both high nitrate (50 ppm) and high phosphate (0.50 ppm). What spurred me into action was that a ball of cheato that I had in the sump has melted away to about 50% of the size over the past few weeks. With nutrient s that high, and the cheato dying off, I was pretty sure that something was limiting its growth. The tank does get a daily water change, but for some reason that was not meeting the needs of the cheato.
Just to make sure that this could not be construed as a scientific test, I changed multiple a parameters at once! :headwally:
I made a DIY cheato reactor out of an Aquamaxx reactor with a string of LEDs spiraled around the outside, divided up into 3 levels for cheato. I moved what was left of my cheato into the reactor and set it on a reverse lighting schedule.
I also started dosing iron citrate daily to my tank. Not a lot, only about 3 drops daily (0.15ml), and one day on the weekend of 6 drops (0.3ml).
Just to muddy the waters a bit more, I also did a couple doses of Iodide/Iodate. In the past I have found iodine to be lacking on more than 1 occasion and my corals respond to it as soon as it is supplemented. Since cheato also is a user of iodine, I made the logical leap that it may also be lacking and the cheato would benefit as my corals have in the past.
The reactor has been running since Monday, the iron citrate has been daily dosed since the weekend. So this morning I decided to measure my PO4 and NO3 to see what effect if any had occurred.
Nitrate before 50 ppm
Nitrate now 50 ppm
PO4 before 0.50 ppm
PO4 now 0.15 ppm (lower than 0.25, higher than 0.10 on Salifert)
The change in PO4 is not being reflected with an equal lowering of the Nitrate. I would have expected to see the nitrate around 15 ppm if the lowering of the PO4 was as a result of the cheato starting to grow again. The top chamber of cheato in my DIY reactor is starting to show some moderate growth, The middle level, debatable if any, the bottom level nothing.
Now I am wondering if the PO4 being lowered is attributable to the addition of iron citrate. Precipitating it rather than due to increased cheato growth. The tank is about 100 G of water volume.
When I go home tonight I will re-measure the PO4 just to make sure it was not a bad test. If it holds and it really is 0.15 ppm now, I would like to have someone else try iron citrate on a tank with moderate phosphates to see if similar results are obtained. I am having hard time believing how such a small amount of iron citrate could impact the PO4 level of 100G.
Seems too good to be true. Mind you, when lanthanum chloride is dosed, the actual amount that is used is also ridiculously small as it is quite effective at binding PO4.
Dennis
Gah, testing issue found
Gah, testing issue found
I tested the phosphate level this morning just to see if it had dropped anymore. I was going to do the test from memory, but instead I glanced the instructions over. When I did this I realized that I had been using the wrong amount of tank water for the Salifert test. I had confused the Alk test amount (4ml) for the Phosphate test amount (10ml) and had been using 4ml instead of 10ml. You probably know where this is going. I did the test using 10ml and got ... 0.50ppm :twitch:
So the drop I was detecting was not due to the chaeto reactor or the iron citrate, but just plain old user error.
On the bright side, I still have a 0.50ppm baseline tank level to go about attempting to using iron citrate on as Glennf does. (E.g. higher level doses)
Dennis
Gah, testing issue found
I tested the phosphate level this morning just to see if it had dropped anymore. I was going to do the test from memory, but instead I glanced the instructions over. When I did this I realized that I had been using the wrong amount of tank water for the Salifert test. I had confused the Alk test amount (4ml) for the Phosphate test amount (10ml) and had been using 4ml instead of 10ml. You probably know where this is going. I did the test using 10ml and got ... 0.50ppm :twitch:
So the drop I was detecting was not due to the chaeto reactor or the iron citrate, but just plain old user error.
On the bright side, I still have a 0.50ppm baseline tank level to go about attempting to using iron citrate on as Glennf does. (E.g. higher level doses)
Dennis
I have an update on this thread. I dosed the iron citrate for a couple of weeks, but was mildly disappointed that my PO4 seemed to either hover at .50 or would drop by 50% and then bounce back to .50. So I discontinued the addition of iron citrate and focused on a DIY cheato reactor that I was testing.
Initially they cheato reactor was growing algae like a champ, but then I hit a wall with the chaeto. The algae in the reactor turned a pale yellow and started to melt. I had seen this in the past with chaeto, typically too little iron. So I dosed some more iron citrate, but it did not have the expected effect (restoring the chaeto to a nice dark green). Over a couple of days the chaeto virtually disappeared in the reactor. It went from yellow to clear and then melted away.
I tested my PO4 and found it was between .50 and .25. I decided to throw in the towel on "alternative" nutrient controls and put a protein skimmer on the tank. That was 2 nights ago. Tonight I tested my PO4, it read a little bit lower than .10 on the Salifert test. Curious how a protein skimmer could lower my PO4 so fast when it had hung at .50 for so long.
Then a light went off in my head. I had read an article on Bean Animal's site last week about some LaCL tests they had done in Japan that stressed that if a sufficiently small micron filter was not used to filter out the bound PO4, the water would still test high for PO4. All the pieces started falling into place. This explained why my iron citrate addition failed to have the expected effect on the chaeto, and why PO4 was still testing high. I was detecting the unfiltered iron phosphate particles that remained in the water column. This also explained why the addition of the protein skimmer caused a significant drop in my PO4 test.
I am pretty sure the iron citrate still did contribute iron to the tank (in addition to binding phosphate). All my corals did darken during the iron citrate dosing period, though they are lightening up now. Up to that point they did not seem to be affected by the high PO4 and NO3, but the iron citrate appeared to be the opening for the zoanthalle to react to the high nutrients. However I think the rate of iron being bio available in the tank when using iron citrate is much slower than some of the other chelated iron solutions (like Kent's).
I am now of the opinion that iron citrate is useful in lowering PO4, but you do need to have sufficient filtering of the precipitate so as to not get false readings on your tests. Just waiting for it to settle out of the water column is not a viable plan as it takes a long time to settle out without active filtration (like a skimmer).
Dennis
Initially they cheato reactor was growing algae like a champ, but then I hit a wall with the chaeto. The algae in the reactor turned a pale yellow and started to melt. I had seen this in the past with chaeto, typically too little iron. So I dosed some more iron citrate, but it did not have the expected effect (restoring the chaeto to a nice dark green). Over a couple of days the chaeto virtually disappeared in the reactor. It went from yellow to clear and then melted away.
I tested my PO4 and found it was between .50 and .25. I decided to throw in the towel on "alternative" nutrient controls and put a protein skimmer on the tank. That was 2 nights ago. Tonight I tested my PO4, it read a little bit lower than .10 on the Salifert test. Curious how a protein skimmer could lower my PO4 so fast when it had hung at .50 for so long.
Then a light went off in my head. I had read an article on Bean Animal's site last week about some LaCL tests they had done in Japan that stressed that if a sufficiently small micron filter was not used to filter out the bound PO4, the water would still test high for PO4. All the pieces started falling into place. This explained why my iron citrate addition failed to have the expected effect on the chaeto, and why PO4 was still testing high. I was detecting the unfiltered iron phosphate particles that remained in the water column. This also explained why the addition of the protein skimmer caused a significant drop in my PO4 test.
I am pretty sure the iron citrate still did contribute iron to the tank (in addition to binding phosphate). All my corals did darken during the iron citrate dosing period, though they are lightening up now. Up to that point they did not seem to be affected by the high PO4 and NO3, but the iron citrate appeared to be the opening for the zoanthalle to react to the high nutrients. However I think the rate of iron being bio available in the tank when using iron citrate is much slower than some of the other chelated iron solutions (like Kent's).
I am now of the opinion that iron citrate is useful in lowering PO4, but you do need to have sufficient filtering of the precipitate so as to not get false readings on your tests. Just waiting for it to settle out of the water column is not a viable plan as it takes a long time to settle out without active filtration (like a skimmer).
Dennis
