I don't know much abut ethyl acetate.
I read up on it a little.
It requires acidic conditions to hydrolize to ethanol ,as I read it. Our tanks are basic.
It is also less miscible in water than ethanol or acetic acid.
Unlike you, I wouldn't have ready access to it anyway. I'm not sure it wouldn't work but I don't see an advantage; more of a disadvantage.Vodka and vinegar are cheap and easy for me.
As far as bolus dosing vs spread dosing goes, you can dose either vodka or vinegar over a 24 hour period rather than as a bolus dose. In fact for vinegar dosing in large amounts spreading it out during photosynthetic (higher ph periods) is strongly preferred to avoid a precipitous ph drop. The acetic acid deprotonates to acetate quickly on entering the basic salt water.
Vodka moves ph slower as the ethanol must oxidize to acetic first and does not deprotonate.
Both have about the same effect on ph over the long run but acetic acid really can't be bolus dosed in significant amounts without a quick ph drop .
I prefer bolus dosing because:
I've always done it that way and I reckon the bacteria in my tank are used to it.
According to a least one study anaerobic denitrifiction by the facultative heterotrophic bacteria increases when the levels of organic C is higher at a given time.
Slow dosing in flowing water might not provide enough C at one time for enough bacterial mulm to form and create as many hypoxic areas as larger increments of the same total amount per day would . If just a little organic C is present at one time the smaller numbers of bacteria would still consume it along with N and P for food but the extra kick from respiring the O from the NO3 leaving some unbound N to form N2 gas and bubble out would not occur since the O2 would never be exhausted.
The more I read about what GAC removes and doesn't remove the less certain I am about it. There are a vast numbers of diferent of organics and other molecules in seawater .Further exactly how carbon attracts things is not as simple as adsorbtion,binding or eletrostaic attraction but rather a sum ofl inter molecular attraction forces.
I did find this via Wikipedia, though:
Physically, activated carbon binds materials by van der Waals force or London dispersion force.
Activated carbon does not bind well to certain chemicals, including alcohols, glycols, strong acids and bases, metals and most inorganics, such as lithium, sodium, iron, lead, arsenic, fluorine, and boric acid.
So it seems it wouldn't bind the ethanol.
BTW,
Van der Waals forces include attractions between atoms, molecules, and surfaces, as well as other intermolecular forces. They differ from covalent and ionic bonding in that they are caused by correlations in the fluctuating polarizations of nearby particles (a consequence of quantum dynamics<sup id="cite_ref-Abrikosov_1-0" class="reference">[2]</sup>).
Even if the gac attracted some vinegar or ethanol, the bacteria would just consume it there ,just like from any other surface it might be hanging on to. The bacteria are largely benthic.
I read up on it a little.
It requires acidic conditions to hydrolize to ethanol ,as I read it. Our tanks are basic.
It is also less miscible in water than ethanol or acetic acid.
Unlike you, I wouldn't have ready access to it anyway. I'm not sure it wouldn't work but I don't see an advantage; more of a disadvantage.Vodka and vinegar are cheap and easy for me.
As far as bolus dosing vs spread dosing goes, you can dose either vodka or vinegar over a 24 hour period rather than as a bolus dose. In fact for vinegar dosing in large amounts spreading it out during photosynthetic (higher ph periods) is strongly preferred to avoid a precipitous ph drop. The acetic acid deprotonates to acetate quickly on entering the basic salt water.
Vodka moves ph slower as the ethanol must oxidize to acetic first and does not deprotonate.
Both have about the same effect on ph over the long run but acetic acid really can't be bolus dosed in significant amounts without a quick ph drop .
I prefer bolus dosing because:
I've always done it that way and I reckon the bacteria in my tank are used to it.
According to a least one study anaerobic denitrifiction by the facultative heterotrophic bacteria increases when the levels of organic C is higher at a given time.
Slow dosing in flowing water might not provide enough C at one time for enough bacterial mulm to form and create as many hypoxic areas as larger increments of the same total amount per day would . If just a little organic C is present at one time the smaller numbers of bacteria would still consume it along with N and P for food but the extra kick from respiring the O from the NO3 leaving some unbound N to form N2 gas and bubble out would not occur since the O2 would never be exhausted.
The more I read about what GAC removes and doesn't remove the less certain I am about it. There are a vast numbers of diferent of organics and other molecules in seawater .Further exactly how carbon attracts things is not as simple as adsorbtion,binding or eletrostaic attraction but rather a sum ofl inter molecular attraction forces.
I did find this via Wikipedia, though:
Physically, activated carbon binds materials by van der Waals force or London dispersion force.
Activated carbon does not bind well to certain chemicals, including alcohols, glycols, strong acids and bases, metals and most inorganics, such as lithium, sodium, iron, lead, arsenic, fluorine, and boric acid.
So it seems it wouldn't bind the ethanol.
BTW,
Van der Waals forces include attractions between atoms, molecules, and surfaces, as well as other intermolecular forces. They differ from covalent and ionic bonding in that they are caused by correlations in the fluctuating polarizations of nearby particles (a consequence of quantum dynamics<sup id="cite_ref-Abrikosov_1-0" class="reference">[2]</sup>).
Even if the gac attracted some vinegar or ethanol, the bacteria would just consume it there ,just like from any other surface it might be hanging on to. The bacteria are largely benthic.
