Oh no, not the oxygen myth!
Oh no, not the oxygen myth!
hehe...
I got a good "lesson" in the whole chemistry bit of the oxygenation gab. See, I
used to think that the bubbles of course put oxygen in the water.
I was first "placed" a few years back when my marine biology (for credentials
) friend at UCSC told me that those "bubbles" were insignificant, and that my "oxygenation" would come via an excellent surface exchange. Seeing as he had what came to be my first tank up and running for 12 years, and I saw how beautiful his systems were, I accepted his "word" as significantly "experienced."
It was until just recently, however, that I got a much
clearer understanding of the whole "bubble theory."
Some will remember that awesome debate over at AL.
Now, I'm not a chemist, but the guy explaining, saltshop, really knows his stuff, and although I was on the right line of thinking, he cleared up the process significantly. There's only
so much oxygen saturation in the water. Putting "bubbles" from a skimmer will not put more oxygen in the water unless that water has
less oxygen than the oxygen contained in the bubbles. Confusing? Don't let it be... It's real simple... More oxygen in the bubbles
will transfer into the water, but more oxygen in the
tank and those bubbles will actually
consume oxygen from the tank.... Now, unless you have a tank which is covered, sealed and otherwise deprived of oxygen, a skimmer
will not put more oxygen into the tank. This is because with a good surface agitation, and good exchange at the top of the tank (assuming the tank is well circulated) the tank will have achieved a certain oxygenation level. Now, your skimmer is taking air from the same environment, right? And in some cases, the skimmer (especially the air pump) is located in a stagnant cabinet. This "air" being injected into the skimmer's water column might actually
deprive one's overall oxygen levels. This would be rare, and I'm not doing anything other than showing a graduated example. If you are obtaining air from an environment with far more pure oxygen, then sure, you will naturally put more oxygen into the water. But how many of us have our skimmer pumps located remotely from the tank, or have them
outside the house, where they might actually bring in
fresh oxygen? The bubbles rising actually
can produce an exchange, but it will work to the benefit of whichever "unit" is oxygen deficient. That means it will either take, give, or remain balanced. With a good surface exchange, there's just no way that a skimmer can "inject" more oxygen than what is already stable from the same atmospheric source.
Why argue or debate? Get a good probe, put it in your tank, and watch your readings.... See if they change from one day to the next with "injections" of bubbles with the same oxygen content as what is already in the tank. Some of ya might even freak if your numbers dip because your air pump is in a mildewy, stank cabinet (I raise my hand here, because that's what
I experienced - yes, it
was that bad).
Again, if a person has a tank which is fairly "sealed off" from getting a good surface exchange, then adding bubbles for possible exchange in the sump can be a positive thing. But for those running systems with easy access to the air in the room, and a good surface exchange, bubbles from the same air won't help increase the oxygen level.
I have a problem putting things simply, but I
Saltshop was able to put years of chemistry studies behind his explanation. I just try to put it as basically as I can. Hopefully, it makes sense... If not, like I said, get the ORP probe and see for yourself. You simply can't "exchange" oxygen if the levels are the same in both the bubbles and the tank - which is the case in
most of our systems where we shoot for a good "surface exchange."
Now,
who said skimmerless is a fad???
Au contraire, this hobby was around long
before these plastic bongs,
and if I might politely interject, the
skimmers are the fad to the hobby. They are clearly a device which made its appearance, was heavily relied upon, and now, thanks to a greater appreciation and understanding of how our systems can
utilize organics, are indeed making their way to more and more garages... Now, you tell me: Which is the fad? The aquarium, or the skimmer?
So many folks have never even owned a skimmer, and really the big question was can we keep corals, and so many other things "in question" as readily healthy
without a skimmer. Clearly, it has been shown that we can. Indeed, some folks report
much better appearances once they ceased skimming... You can't fault them for what they see to be true. There should be no animosity or despise, nor should there be this
so untrue theory that "skimmerless" is best left for the experienced. I've set up too many folks, and seen too much success for this thought to even register as potentially valid. We all agree that beginners should
never rush into this hobby without researching, right? Well, that same research that you "require" them to have will carry them over just fine without the need for a skimmer. Proper cycling and establishment does
not require our interference. There's no "skill" involved in letting things sit.
And there's
far too many folks not using skimmers to consider it a "fad." Again, if anything is the "fad" it is the skimmer itself, which will take it's place in history alongside the wet/dry trickle filter, and cannister filters also once "required" to run a successful saltwater aquarium.... It's not that skimmers don't serve a purpose, it's just that I think folks are coming to see them as a bit over-rated, and actually completely unnecessary.
There are always a few schools of though, as noted. The student of the skimmer-professor will no doubt experience the awe and wonders of the conventional skimmer, and naturally become trained in thought that the skimmer is an "essential" element to the success of the system.... That person (especially after having spent hundreds of dollars on it
) will always justify it's need and purpose.....
Then there is the student who I set up... No skimmer, spend your money on lights, concentrate on circulation and a good surface exchange.... Explain how caulerpa works (and by the way, I have
never used a refugium, as pictured on my website I love to employ the look of caulerpa right in my main tank). This student will never come to know the skimmer other than an explanation of what it is used for, and why it is not necessary. I will explain precisely what it does, and how that can often be
contrary to the nutrient needs of many systems. By example, I would point out the dozens of snake-oils (err, necessary elements) that proclaim their success in "replacing trace elements removed by skimming."
The long and short of it would be I would show him/her my systems, even the most basic of them, and Smitty's systems, Redhawk's system... Ken's systems.... Marc's system..... Some of the local folks... But after a few short months, the "student" would be well on the way to a successful, stable system not contingent upon a life support system... I would of course advise them
not to dump anything into the tank "by accident", and show them how easy it is to lay the food out on the table, and then only bring over to the tank what is necessary, so there is no danger of "overfeeding" or justification for nutrient removal with a skimmer.
But of course, if they don't have common sense to begin with, I can't help them....
No, skimmerless can't be considered a fad, it has been around longer than the skimmer itself, so by nature of the definition of the word, that would be a false assertation at best.
I
know it can be confusing to beginners, but every one I've "gotten my hands on" has conclusively agreed after a few months that they are glad they didn't throw their money away. A good cannister filter is always recommended to have on hand to pull out any medications, or to run carbon if one desires. I guess it's like driving a stick..... Those that can, think of it as second-nature, while those that can't regard it with a type of mystical engagement of awe, that people have such awesome "experience" to engage in transportation with such a type of transmission.
The only bad thing with that analogy is that you actually
do have to learn to drive a stick, while you
don't need to "learn" how to go skimmerless.
But hey, I thought we were
through debating skimmers??? Dayung..... There's nothing left to "prove", now the issue is whether or not it's "recommended" to beginners... Like I say, everybody I mentor goes skimmerless from the start, and I am not sent new hobbyists from MENSA, or any other supremely intelligent source. Indeed some of the folks I take under my wing would probably be taxed a bit too much if I explained the work involved in setting up, maintaining, checking, adjusting, dumping skimmate, making sure the seal is made, airstones reknewed, etc., etc., No, better for me to just explain the skimmer and wet/dry as more recent fads to a hobby that has been in existance for decades, and how we have advanced so that we don't need to rely on mechanical filtration.... and how it's much easier..... etc. etc.
