When using Biofuel do you have to worry about the alk being above 8?

[Winwood]

Just like the title states, when using biofuel do you run into the same tissue recession issues like you do with vodka when the alkalinity gets above 8 dkh or so?

 

[Winwood]

Anyone? The reason I ask is I regularly dose vodka and a couple of days ago I noticed a couple acro colonies STNing from their bases. I checked my alkalinity and it was around 10-11 dkh. I believe my high alk levels to be the cause of the recession and I'm hoping the colonies recover.

The reason I asked the question above is I am considering biofuel as an alternative to vodka and was wondering if it is a less "harsh" means of carbon dosing?

Just for good measure my parameters are
NO3= 0 API
PO4= .03 Hannah
pH= 8.2
dKH= back down to 7 API (allowed it to naturally fall after a couple of days)

 

[reefrick.M]

I dose vodka and I keep my Alk up around 9 dkh. If it gets low around 7 dkh I'll have issues with base up stn. Never had burnt tips and use a LaMotte test kit.

 

[Winwood]

I dose vodka and I keep my Alk up around 9 dkh. If it gets low around 7 dkh I'll have issues with base up stn. Never had burnt tips and use a LaMotte test kit.

Huh, well that's kinda contrary to what I've read about. Do you mind sharing your dosing regime, size tank, and how long you have been doing it?

 

[surfjeepzx]

I just switched from Vodka to Vinegar. The Vodka was giving me green algae issues. I never had issues with high Alk, just algae.

 

[Winwood]

I noticed the vodka did a lot when it came to reducing my nitrates initially, however phosphates were another story. It wasn't until I did a couple rounds of GFO that I started to see my phosphates dropping.

Now the aquarium store that I work at has two display reef tanks, one primarily SPS and the other a truly mixed reef. Both tanks had phosphates creeping up into the the .08 mark. The owner decided to pull some biofuel off the shelf and give it a try. In one weeks time both tank's phosphate levels came down to atleast half their initial values. I believe one was .04 and the other was .03.

These are large tanks that are rarely tinkered with. One has been set up for atleast 15 years and the other for what I believe is around 7. Minimal water changes are done on both and the GFO has not been replaced on either for several months. I believe the biofuel is responsible for the reduction in phosphates in both of these systems. It is probably important to note that neither of these systems have ever had any type of carbon dosing before this.

Again returning back to my original question does anyone run their alkalinity relatively high (say 9 to 12ish) and dose biofuel? If so, what is your results?

 

[reefrick.M]

Huh, well that's kinda contrary to what I've read about. Do you mind sharing your dosing regime, size tank, and how long you have been doing it?

I've been dosing vodka since 2008.Hardly a beginner. I have a 120 gl. DT with a 75 gl. sump in my basement. I also have 10 gl. fuge. And on top of that I run a BRS GFO reactor.I dose 5 ml a day.

 

[Alex T.]

I vodka dose as well. Biofuel is essentially the same end result. In another tank that I started with, the alkalinity was 11 and always stayed there. I never saw any STN or other problems from the vodka dosing.

On my current tank, I did have some STN right around the time I started using ROX carbon and putting a large calcium reactor on line and trying to tune it in. I had never been above 9 on this tank yet had hit 11. As the alkalinity dropped and I dialed in my calcium reactor the STN began and I subsequently lost many SPS. I don't necessarily perceive a higher alkalinity being solely responsible for STN, but a downward or upward shift that isn't corrected I believe is detrimental. We read all the time that dKH should be no higher than 9 when carbon dosing. Then someone who's using a high alkalinity salt like Instant Ocean rushes to bring it down to NSW parameters and voila...their next post is about base receding and STN. It's worked both ways for me....high and low alkalinity. I think the reason many with high alkalinity see more problems is that in an SPS tank it's very difficult to keep alkalinity so high all the time, and the impending drop will cause the damage. JMO

 

[Winwood]

I vodka dose as well. Biofuel is essentially the same end result. In another tank that I started with, the alkalinity was 11 and always stayed there. I never saw any STN or other problems from the vodka dosing.

On my current tank, I did have some STN right around the time I started using ROX carbon and putting a large calcium reactor on line and trying to tune it in. I had never been above 9 on this tank yet had hit 11. As the alkalinity dropped and I dialed in my calcium reactor the STN began and I subsequently lost many SPS. I don't necessarily perceive a higher alkalinity being solely responsible for STN, but a downward or upward shift that isn't corrected I believe is detrimental. We read all the time that dKH should be no higher than 9 when carbon dosing. Then someone who's using a high alkalinity salt like Instant Ocean rushes to bring it down to NSW parameters and voila...their next post is about base receding and STN. It's worked both ways for me....high and low alkalinity. I think the reason many with high alkalinity see more problems is that in an SPS tank it's very difficult to keep alkalinity so high all the time, and the impending drop will cause the damage. JMO

This is an interesting observation as I currently use IO salt and have noticed that it is around 11 dkh when freshly made up. I like to keep my alk around the 7-8 range because of what I've read about vodka dosing. For this reason I have been hesitant to do water changes as I do not want to shock the corals. Perhaps a lower alkalinity salt may be more suitable to a system on a regular carbon dosing regimen?

 

[Alex T.]

Winwood,

I switched to Reef Crystals back in August and couldn't be happier. Apparently they've played with their formula and I've been getting the following readings:

Ca: 455
Mg: 1350
Alk: 8

I posted on my findings a while back in the chemistry forum because my readings weren't jiving with bertoni's salt mix postings from a while back. Many have verified the same thing. Here's the thread I started.

http://www.reefcentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1927577&highlight=reef+crystals+parameters

This is mixed at 1.025/1.026 and my tank has stayed extremely stable with my calcium reactor. It's actually become much easier to maintain thee levels and large water changes haven't thrown everything out of whack. It was nice to finally find a salt that my calcium reactor maintained. As many who run calcium reactors know, eventually your tank stabilizes right around your salt mix parameters. Not having to bump a little here and add a little there has helped the wallet and given me peace of mind.

 

[Winwood]

Alex T. thanks for the link. Figures this information would come right after I just bought a brand new bucket of IO. It sounds like RC is producing a salt closer to natural seawater these days then. This may be a good fix in my situation because I believe my original spike that caused my coral's recession was partly due to a substantial water change I had performed about 4 days earlier. It would be nice to be able to do larger water changes without throwing my parameters off each time.

 

[Alex T.]

Well, actually the transition may be easier than you think. If you bought another bucket of Reef Crystals or even a bag you could mix a little more RC percentage in every time you perform a water change. Then by the time you're out of IO you'll be good to go with a smooth transition.

 

[Alex T.]

FWIW,

I test my tank parameters once a month and keep a log. I just finished testing for the sake of this thread. Here are current parameters:

Ca: 420 Salifert
Alk: 8 API
Mg: 1350
NO3: 0 Salifert
PO4: 0 Salifert
SG: 1.025
Ph: 8.05 - 8.18

One thing I've noticed is that my calcium has stabilized right around 420 even though I measure new salt water for wc at 445. High demand I guess. I don't adjust it. It seems to have stabilized here for the last 7 months so I just let it sit. If it approaches 400 I may do a large water change to stabilize the tank and wait it out again. Seems like killing two birds with one stone instead of dosing to get it there. I was always bad at chemistry anyway....:lolspin:

 

[pimp2daizzo]

doesn't vodka lower alk?

 

[Alex T.]

I know that GFO can lower alkalinity. I never knew vodka did. I know that when I was using vinegar to get rid of the cyano that the vodka was feeding that my ph would drop more than with vodka.

 

[pimp2daizzo]

i know vinegar dose it pretty fast; i just couldn't remember about vodka

 

[sowellj]

I think the consensus is that as you run more and more into the ultra low nutrient area, the coral become sensitive to alk. Mind you its anecdotal, and no one really knows why. Thus the recomendation to keep your alk a bit lower if you running these systems.

 

[Winwood]

I think the consensus is that as you run more and more into the ultra low nutrient area, the coral become sensitive to alk. Mind you its anecdotal, and no one really knows why. Thus the recomendation to keep your alk a bit lower if you running these systems.

I doubt my system would be considered an ULNS yet but I did notice that when my phosphates started getting down around .03 or lower that my corals showed their sensitivity to the higher alkalinity.

This tends to bring me back to my original question again in that if one achieves a ULNS with biofuel is an alkalinity swing just as detrimental as one that is achieved with vodka?

 

[Winwood]

i know vinegar dose it pretty fast; i just couldn't remember about vodka

I believe this to be expected as vinegar is a pretty effective acid.