UV Sterilizers
- Thread starter StlScott
- Start date
cephalotus
Member
Definately not a must have, I have never ran one.
davidadelp
New member
I wouldnt say they are a must have but if you have a algea problem it will help clear this problem up. If your running a MH the tendencies for algea to become a problem tends to explode fast. So itll help keep up on that problem. I dont see why it would kill any animals like copepods or other life.
ReefTrigger
New member
They will only kill your Copepods if they physically pass through the UV
I have a 40watt UV , which I added the same time as carbon and gfo , and I'm having night and day results in only 3 days ..
the water is for sure more clear, and the algae is falling off by the truckload ..
Since I added both at the same time, I can't say in both help, or one more than the other, but I can say my algae problems will be a thing of the past in no time :beer:
I have a 40watt UV , which I added the same time as carbon and gfo , and I'm having night and day results in only 3 days ..
the water is for sure more clear, and the algae is falling off by the truckload ..
Since I added both at the same time, I can't say in both help, or one more than the other, but I can say my algae problems will be a thing of the past in no time :beer:
jimmyj7090
aka John K
UV is good for free floating algae blooms (aka green water), and water clarity. They do little else.
They do nothing for any other kind of nusiance algae, little to nothing for fish parisites, and little to nothing else....
In a multi tank system, UV may help parisites from spreading downstream, but that's about it.
They do nothing for any other kind of nusiance algae, little to nothing for fish parisites, and little to nothing else....
In a multi tank system, UV may help parisites from spreading downstream, but that's about it.
Alot of people dont see benefits to UVs because they do not size them correctly. If you just want to kill free floating aglea then yes most on box ratings will work fine.
If you want it to kill bacteria and parasites like ich you have to run them MUCH slower.
I have a 57w UV on my main tank that is run at 300gph to kill EVERYTHING that goes through it. It processes the tank volume every two hours and is only run for 12 hours a day along with ozone for water clarity and killing of nasties.
I also have a 40w UV on my quarantine system that runs 24/7 when the system is in use also at 300 gph to kill EVERYTHING.
Size it right and the you wont see the benefits because you wont see problems. Do you need it NO. Is it nice to have just in case, YES!
If you want it to kill bacteria and parasites like ich you have to run them MUCH slower.
I have a 57w UV on my main tank that is run at 300gph to kill EVERYTHING that goes through it. It processes the tank volume every two hours and is only run for 12 hours a day along with ozone for water clarity and killing of nasties.
I also have a 40w UV on my quarantine system that runs 24/7 when the system is in use also at 300 gph to kill EVERYTHING.
Size it right and the you wont see the benefits because you wont see problems. Do you need it NO. Is it nice to have just in case, YES!
this is where I bought my UV, and love it...This page might help with your questions. What I found from doing my homework was most of the opinions out there are just that, opinions. You have to really decide for yourself whether its for you or not...
http://www.americanaquariumproducts.com/AquariumUVSterilization.html#basics
http://www.americanaquariumproducts.com/AquariumUVSterilization.html#basics
jimmyj7090
aka John K
No matter what the flow rate, UV is minimally effective against parisites simply because it can only treat what passes through it.
I agree that it doesn't hurt to have a UV unit on hand, but even when sized correctly they don't have the benfits that people sometimes attribute to them.
I agree that it doesn't hurt to have a UV unit on hand, but even when sized correctly they don't have the benfits that people sometimes attribute to them.
No they are a not a need. They may help clear the water of planktonic algae and kill planktonic bacteria which isn't necessarily a good thing. . If large enough they kill whatever passes through them and nothing else and may break up some organics for better and/or worse. Even large sized they don't control fish disease in recirculating systems. I have several and used them for years . They have been most beneficial on the shelf where they have been for several years now.
should you choose no UV... I highly suggest emulating TMZ best you can in his methodology and husbandry... http://reefkeeping.com/joomla/index.php/current-issue/article/88-tank-of-the-month
his system is awesome!
his system is awesome!
give it a go. I personally would not run a tank without one. I do not run any media(GFO/Purigen/carbon) and I only run the uv with a skimmer... I have zero fish disease problems ever(22 years of uv run tanks)...I do not have algae problems,bacterial blooms, nitrate and phosphate issues. People do things like tell others based on some article they read that uv can't kill disease, do nothing, etc. and yet ick disappears in fish, fish stay healthy and just do not get disease, water is clearer, PO4 and nitrate is reduced(this is because UV can break up organics and also phosphates into ortho phosphate which is skimmable)... TMZ is a great experienced reefer, yet, I am unsure how algae, bacteria, and organic removal can be in any way a bad thing(folks run carbon and purigen as well as skimmers). I have run a couple tanks without a uv and no way would I do it again. Oh, I set up my uv to flow about 10x water to watts...so 20watts and I flow 200gph through it...my first uv was 25 watts and about 500 gph and it worked very well also. SO in between 10x-20x flow trough.
Now for the argument of running the uv slow enough to kill disease...well... according to what I have read(and my years of observable experience), the nature of the uv is making the water healthier(improved redox potential) and thereby strengthening the immune system and stressing the fish less...thus they do not get ich and other disease as they are better served to fight it off naturally.
Now for the argument of running the uv slow enough to kill disease...well... according to what I have read(and my years of observable experience), the nature of the uv is making the water healthier(improved redox potential) and thereby strengthening the immune system and stressing the fish less...thus they do not get ich and other disease as they are better served to fight it off naturally.
Thanks for the compliments. Glad you are happy with your system and after a length of time I understand a reluctance to change and there is no need to,since your tanks run the way you like them to.
I have no issue with folks who choose to use a uvs; many like them. I was very reluctant to remove the 4 I had been running but I wanted more micro fuana and metabolism of metals and other things so I did it and have been pleased with the results over the last five years and to learn they are not needed which is what the op asked.
They clairify the water and kill things that pass through them, especially small organisms like bacteria and other micro fuana and larvae. I prefer richer organics and natural food webs in my system .
I am unsure how algae, bacteria, and organic removal can be in any way a bad thing(folks run carbon and purigen as well as skimmers).
Uv doesn't remove any of those things it changes some of them . Either by killing them or maybe with organics breaking them up a bit which can cause a release of some things like bound metals.
I doubt a uv will have any impact on redox . How would it do that?
They are often used in misguided fashion in lieu of an effective quarantine and treatment protocol for disease prevention and treatment but do not control fish disease, ime.
I have no issue with folks who choose to use a uvs; many like them. I was very reluctant to remove the 4 I had been running but I wanted more micro fuana and metabolism of metals and other things so I did it and have been pleased with the results over the last five years and to learn they are not needed which is what the op asked.
They clairify the water and kill things that pass through them, especially small organisms like bacteria and other micro fuana and larvae. I prefer richer organics and natural food webs in my system .
I am unsure how algae, bacteria, and organic removal can be in any way a bad thing(folks run carbon and purigen as well as skimmers).
Uv doesn't remove any of those things it changes some of them . Either by killing them or maybe with organics breaking them up a bit which can cause a release of some things like bound metals.
I doubt a uv will have any impact on redox . How would it do that?
They are often used in misguided fashion in lieu of an effective quarantine and treatment protocol for disease prevention and treatment but do not control fish disease, ime.
you deserve the compliment... I love your system!!!!!
http://aquariumdigest.wordpress.com/2009/12/02/redox-in-aquariums/
I find lots of literature involving redox and uv. this is just one mentioning.
I should have said I doubt uv will have any impact on healthy redox.
Some blasting with uv at the right wave lengths will increase oxidizers; not reduce them as the cited article suggests. That increase is not necessarily a good thing as increased oxidants can be harmful to fish ,corals and other aquatic life. How much of it a hobby grade uv can provide in a reef tank full of complex organic compounds is unknown and of very dubious value and may actually be do harm if it begins to breakdown refractory organics enabling the release the toxins like free metals they may be holding. That article and the back up writings are very disconnected with gaps and jumps from freshwater pond, aquariums and goldfish to salt water aquariums. The ranges cited for healthy aquariums are wrong; specifically -100 mv in a healthy range, huh? 0 mv would result in virtually no oxygen in a saltwater tank. It is confusing and has many inaccuracies and not a useful reference,imo.
This one by the founder of the RC chemistry forum, a serious hobbyist and Harvard phd chemist Randy Farely, presents Oxygen Reduction Potential ( aka redox) in an understandable way and moves from the general to the very complex to satisfy a range of readers:
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2003-12/rhf/feature/index.php
Here are a few relevant quotes from it:
Re; oxidizers:
"..These include ozone (O[SIZE=-1]3[/SIZE]), hydrogen peroxide (H[SIZE=-1]2[/SIZE]O[SIZE=-1]2[/SIZE]), triplet oxygen ([SIZE=-1]<sup>3</sup>[/SIZE]O[SIZE=-1]2[/SIZE]), and a variety of oxygen radicals, some with such inspiring names such as superoxide radical (O[SIZE=-1]2<sup>-</sup>[/SIZE]). They also include chlorine (Cl[SIZE=-1]2[/SIZE]) and chloramine (NH[SIZE=-1]2[/SIZE]Cl). It turns out that oxygen molecules (O[SIZE=-1]2[/SIZE]) can occasionally morph into some of these better fighters (such as hydrogen peroxide), sometimes all on their own, but most frequently when they get blasted with UV light..."
These are not elements I want in excess in my tanks.
Where do the reducers that counteract the oxidants come from?
"..The reducers come from fish food, metabolic waste products, the breakdown of dead organisms, and certain additives put into the aquarium (e.g., iron supplements that contain ferrous ion). The surfaces of most organisms themselves enter the fray as reducers, waiting to be oxidized by the enemy..."
' If you add oxidizers to the aquarium (ozone, permanganate, hydrogen peroxide, etc.) then the ORP rises. Alternatively, if you add a lot of organic molecules to the solution, or restrict the oxygen supply, the ORP drops..."
So what happens if there are too many oxidizers or reducers?
"..If the oxidizers carry the day, the ORP would rise to the point where the organic molecules that represent the bodies of organisms would be burned away. If the reducers won outright, the ORP would drop below 0 mv. In that case, there would be little oxygen left, and toxic hydrogen sulfide would rule the aquarium. In either case, the aquarium would be a disaster..."
So what is a healthy ORP level?
"..Most aquarium authors have recommended a range of 300-450 mV. Why? Mostly because the ocean often has ORP in this range, and because these authors have successfully operated aquaria in this range..."
Do you need uv ozone or other oxidizers to get to that range in reef tank?
No. I have monitored orp fo years. When I used uv even relatively large units I saw no increase.Perhaps the hobby grade uvs don't have enough punch or the right wavelengths to change the oxygen molecules to the stronger oxidizers like ozone, ch hydrogen perodie ,et alia..
Even with dosing extra oranics( vodka and vinegar) my system maintains orp in the the 340 to 380 mv range with out adding oxidants.
Some blasting with uv at the right wave lengths will increase oxidizers; not reduce them as the cited article suggests. That increase is not necessarily a good thing as increased oxidants can be harmful to fish ,corals and other aquatic life. How much of it a hobby grade uv can provide in a reef tank full of complex organic compounds is unknown and of very dubious value and may actually be do harm if it begins to breakdown refractory organics enabling the release the toxins like free metals they may be holding. That article and the back up writings are very disconnected with gaps and jumps from freshwater pond, aquariums and goldfish to salt water aquariums. The ranges cited for healthy aquariums are wrong; specifically -100 mv in a healthy range, huh? 0 mv would result in virtually no oxygen in a saltwater tank. It is confusing and has many inaccuracies and not a useful reference,imo.
This one by the founder of the RC chemistry forum, a serious hobbyist and Harvard phd chemist Randy Farely, presents Oxygen Reduction Potential ( aka redox) in an understandable way and moves from the general to the very complex to satisfy a range of readers:
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2003-12/rhf/feature/index.php
Here are a few relevant quotes from it:
Re; oxidizers:
"..These include ozone (O[SIZE=-1]3[/SIZE]), hydrogen peroxide (H[SIZE=-1]2[/SIZE]O[SIZE=-1]2[/SIZE]), triplet oxygen ([SIZE=-1]<sup>3</sup>[/SIZE]O[SIZE=-1]2[/SIZE]), and a variety of oxygen radicals, some with such inspiring names such as superoxide radical (O[SIZE=-1]2<sup>-</sup>[/SIZE]). They also include chlorine (Cl[SIZE=-1]2[/SIZE]) and chloramine (NH[SIZE=-1]2[/SIZE]Cl). It turns out that oxygen molecules (O[SIZE=-1]2[/SIZE]) can occasionally morph into some of these better fighters (such as hydrogen peroxide), sometimes all on their own, but most frequently when they get blasted with UV light..."
These are not elements I want in excess in my tanks.
Where do the reducers that counteract the oxidants come from?
"..The reducers come from fish food, metabolic waste products, the breakdown of dead organisms, and certain additives put into the aquarium (e.g., iron supplements that contain ferrous ion). The surfaces of most organisms themselves enter the fray as reducers, waiting to be oxidized by the enemy..."
' If you add oxidizers to the aquarium (ozone, permanganate, hydrogen peroxide, etc.) then the ORP rises. Alternatively, if you add a lot of organic molecules to the solution, or restrict the oxygen supply, the ORP drops..."
So what happens if there are too many oxidizers or reducers?
"..If the oxidizers carry the day, the ORP would rise to the point where the organic molecules that represent the bodies of organisms would be burned away. If the reducers won outright, the ORP would drop below 0 mv. In that case, there would be little oxygen left, and toxic hydrogen sulfide would rule the aquarium. In either case, the aquarium would be a disaster..."
So what is a healthy ORP level?
"..Most aquarium authors have recommended a range of 300-450 mV. Why? Mostly because the ocean often has ORP in this range, and because these authors have successfully operated aquaria in this range..."
Do you need uv ozone or other oxidizers to get to that range in reef tank?
No. I have monitored orp fo years. When I used uv even relatively large units I saw no increase.Perhaps the hobby grade uvs don't have enough punch or the right wavelengths to change the oxygen molecules to the stronger oxidizers like ozone, ch hydrogen perodie ,et alia..
Even with dosing extra oranics( vodka and vinegar) my system maintains orp in the the 340 to 380 mv range with out adding oxidants.
Just a few examples of misinformation from the aquarium digest article cited earlier:
"...the UVC irradiation destroys destructive oxidizers in the water column which can otherwise add oxidative stress to fish.."
No, if it does anything it creates these oxidizers.
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Avant Garde]"..achieving a Redox of about +300 to -100 mV for marine or +125 to -200 mV for freshwater are the raw numbers we are aiming for,.."
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Avant Garde]That is absurd and dangerous and deadly. This fellow has lots of bits of stuff from here and there but makes no sense whatsovever.He has it backwards and sideways. Pendantic obsfuscation at it's worst,imo.
BTW swcc. What is the orp range in your system,. Do you notice drops when the sterilizers are off or the bulbs age? I never did.
[/FONT]
[/FONT]
"...the UVC irradiation destroys destructive oxidizers in the water column which can otherwise add oxidative stress to fish.."
No, if it does anything it creates these oxidizers.
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Avant Garde]"..achieving a Redox of about +300 to -100 mV for marine or +125 to -200 mV for freshwater are the raw numbers we are aiming for,.."
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, Avant Garde]That is absurd and dangerous and deadly. This fellow has lots of bits of stuff from here and there but makes no sense whatsovever.He has it backwards and sideways. Pendantic obsfuscation at it's worst,imo.
BTW swcc. What is the orp range in your system,. Do you notice drops when the sterilizers are off or the bulbs age? I never did.
[/FONT]
[/FONT]
Not sure really... I am a simple guy... I know what my salt water experiences were without running a UV and what they have been running a UV...So I run one cause things are much better and easier for me when I do. All that matters to me are the results I can see and experience and I have been running them much longer than I ever have read about them.
Thanks for the reply. I would like to find some data on orp (redox) increases related to use of variable sized hobby grade uvs to test the hypothesis that they create significant amounts of oxidizers for better or worse which would show up in an orp shift.
Similar threads
