Zero water changes?

[Newreeflady]

Very nice, mb. If you remember, update this thread in a year. It's really cool to see a tank thrive with no changes. I' not sure what trace minerals are used up by the coral (maybe a biologist can chime in?), and also not sure which might be added back with food. The Rod's food is pretty rich stuff, I wonder....

Yeah, bubble algae isn't so bad, imo. I don't worry about it, either. I only worry about algae that smothers coral such as turf algae and hair algae. Also, agreed, I wish I'd left out the hermits. I won't be transferring them to the new tank. I was also really hesitant to buy limpets from them since they aren't guaranteed- good to know they got there safely, I think I'll order them next time. Those are the best algae dozers I've seen to date!

I am not sure why I asked about your fish. I guess I wanted to see if you were over or understocked. But, never having kept a large tank I have no idea what overstocked or understocked is for that size system, lol. Would you say you're over or understocked?

Thanks for the info and the pix. Truly a lovely system.
Cheers,
-A

ps, that filefish is amazing cool!

 

[thebanker]

I just switched to an Ecosystem method filtration system. Water changes are not something I do voluntarily, but I end up doing weekly 3 gallon water changes by cleaning and refilling my Rena xp1 canister, plus another one gallon or so every month when cleaning my phosban reactor.

*note: the ecosystem method does not typically involve activated carbon. I'm a big fan of carbon, so I add that to my system by placing it in a canister. I also use a bag of purigen in there to remove organics.

 

[palyam]

my system runs for more than 2 years, with only 2 10% water changes during the entire period.

 

[Newreeflady]

my system runs for more than 2 years, with only 2 10% water changes during the entire period.

These are interesting experiences. I wonder if the trace minerals that are needed are very low compared to what is provided in the salt mixes... hmmmm....

Do you dose any trace minerals? (iodine, manganese, etc?)

-A

 

[palyam]

well, in the begining I used to monitor the elements with the test kits, but eventually I've reached a point where I know the exact dosage of elements in the closed system.

I dose all the necessary trace elements regulary, and monitor them monthly

 

[thebanker]

I can't believe I'm going to be the one to post this link, but it's evidence that a water change is good every now and again, esp with regard to the exportation of sulfate in the water column. I don't do as many as I used to, but they're unavoidable with my regular maintenance and cleaning of filtration devices. Water changes are usually good for the tank IMO.

Water Changes in Reef Aquaria http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2005-10/rhf/index.php

 

[teesquare]

Good point - interesting to note that no one in this thread has voiced any concern over what may accumulate. Only about "trace element depletion".

I still refer to the saying that I was taught when still a kid that pertains to water changes:

"There is no solution to pollution like dilution"

There are ingredients in foods and waste by products that I am more concerned with the accumulation of - than I am concerned about adding any "trace elements"

 

[Newreeflady]

I can't believe I'm going to be the one to post this link, but it's evidence that a water change is good every now and again, esp with regard to the exportation of sulfate in the water column. I don't do as many as I used to, but they're unavoidable with my regular maintenance and cleaning of filtration devices. Water changes are usually good for the tank IMO.

Water Changes in Reef Aquaria http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2005-10/rhf/index.php

The article mentions buildup of sulfates from dosing epsom salts (of course, not everyone does this). The article doesn't actually mention the problem with epsom salts, at least not in the same location that it talks about their buildup and removal. Seems like a bit of an oversight, do you know what the problem, is?

The article closes with "... Some things build up in certain situations (organics, certain metals, sodium, chloride, nitrate, phosphate, sulfate, etc.)..."

But, really, we only went through sulfate in the article, all other sections talked about adding things to the system, not removing them. Furthermore, Sodium and Chloride are building up? In what forms, exactly, are they a problem in (sodium sulfate? iron chloride? they should be more specific!) Also, people have found ways to remove a great deal of phosphates and organics, so lets set those aside for the moment....

So, we're left with "certain metals" along with sulfates. OK, this is where it gets interesting! Which metals are they finding in excess, exactly? And, is there another way to remove them (polyfilter, for example, tends to bind metals as I understand it.) As for the sulfates, how about not dosing Epsom salts- perhaps we should be more picky about what we're putting in, if, in fact, sulfates are a problem (which they didn't really explain how they were a problem.) Same with foods- what exactly are we adding in when we feed? What is in there that cannot be consumed at some level from fish down to bacteria? OK, once we identify it, maybe we can avoid it or find a way to pull it out?

Overall, the article leaves huge gaps for discussion in this thread. If you don't want to think about how one might keep a system without water changes, then by all means don't think, just do them. But, if you're curious, this is the place to discuss it. How can zero water changes be successful? What are the concerns (ie, those perhaps brought up in the article, among others)? And, how might we mitigate them? (ie, selective addition and removal of elements and nutrients to leave a balanced system.)

-A

 

[teesquare]

For me it is a simple linear deduction:

I know that between the foods we feed, and the chemicals we add, and the infinite opportunities for other "unknown" chemicals to enter the system ( think about potential leachates from all the plastics we use, or chemicals are stored in, airborne materials, anything on your skin, etc.)
Now: We can - and many do - use carbon, and chemi-pure and poly filters. Fine. I think they are great. And we know - or at least the manufacturers know WHAT these products can remove from the water colum. *BUT*....We cannot effectively remove what we cannot know, and what we cannot measure. And THAT is at the heart of the "pro" water change side of the arguement.
Granted - I have seen tanks that have gone for a long time ( a year or 2 ) without and they can look great. Then "something" just starts mysteriously going wrong, and...well - it probably was not worth the salt it saved for the person owning the tank.

Just my 3.832 cents ( inflation included)

T

 

[Lanie]

I love the idea of no water changes but my tank would be very dead if I didn't, only have a 26g

 

[Newreeflady]

For me it is a simple linear deduction:

I know that between the foods we feed, and the chemicals we add, and the infinite opportunities for other "unknown" chemicals to enter the system ( think about potential leachates from all the plastics we use, or chemicals are stored in, airborne materials, anything on your skin, etc.)
Now: We can - and many do - use carbon, and chemi-pure and poly filters. Fine. I think they are great. And we know - or at least the manufacturers know WHAT these products can remove from the water colum. *BUT*....We cannot effectively remove what we cannot know, and what we cannot measure. And THAT is at the heart of the "pro" water change side of the arguement.

Actually, we remove a lot of things that we have not directly identified the molecular structure of. This is why we apply broad chemical binders such as carbon (for organics such as "... natural metabolic compounds [that] remain largely unidentified but include organic acids, phenolics, proteins, carbohydrates, hormones, and antibiotic compounds."1) and polyfilter (for heavy metals and a broad range of organics as well), mechanical filtration to remove large particulate containing detritus and (humic substances?)

So, what is left? Well, you're right, we don't know. But, consider that this hobby is advancing- at some point we didn't realize that a lot of these things were in there. Analytical chemistry is advancing, being more and more able to measure things in small quantities. OK, so what does this mean? That this conversation IS relevant. Am I saying stop doing water changes right now? No! That is up to you. But, it certainly is worth looking at what the people who are getting away with it are doing- particularly in the context of those who have tried and failed.



Granted - I have seen tanks that have gone for a long time ( a year or 2 ) without and they can look great. Then "something" just starts mysteriously going wrong, and...well - it probably was not worth the salt it saved for the person owning the tank.

Can you link us to a couple of examples of people who started this and then had system crashes? Those systems could be good discussions here.

Just my 3.832 cents ( inflation included)

That's the point of the thread and this forum... keep contributing, but don't forget that you need to keep your mind (err, pocket book?) opened.

T

-A

1. http://www.hallman.org/filter/gac.html

 

[Newreeflady]

I love the idea of no water changes but my tank would be very dead if I didn't, only have a 26g

Not super insightful... feel free to contribute to the thread your ideas of why you couldn't make it work... but a comment such as yours with absolutely no real thought process included should not be made in an "advanced" topics forum.

cheers,
-A

 

[teesquare]

-A

1. http://www.hallman.org/filter/gac.html

The Hallman reference above is extremely old information. It is still good info, in my opinion - but there is nothing new or enlightneing for the average hobbyist.

To echo your sentiments, and apply them to the only reference you posted:

"Not super insightful... feel free to contribute to the thread your ideas of why you couldn't make it work... but a comment such as yours with absolutely no real thought process included should not be made in an "advanced" topics forum. "

Sited examples of tank crashes due to no water changes? There have been plenty on RC - if you search, you may find some references. I suppose the bottom line ( and my parting post on this) is that I think you are barking up a tree not holding anything worth barking about. It simply is old news. Some do it, some don't. The body of available advice from a number of experienced hobbyists ( some in the science community) recommend water changes. For all of the same arguements you wish to make against it.......

I hope you find what you are looking for!

T

 

[Voltekker]

Ive done the no water changes thing for atleast a year, I cant remember the supplement I use right now but ill post it when I get home. It has more than just the two part, I just top off all the time. My coral have grown and reproduced/split whatever, I don't keep any SPS though.

 

[Newreeflady]

The Hallman reference above is extremely old information. It is still good info, in my opinion - but there is nothing new or enlightneing for the average hobbyist.

To echo your sentiments, and apply them to the only reference you posted:

"Not super insightful... feel free to contribute to the thread your ideas of why you couldn't make it work... but a comment such as yours with absolutely no real thought process included should not be made in an "advanced" topics forum. "

Sited examples of tank crashes due to no water changes? There have been plenty on RC - if you search, you may find some references. I suppose the bottom line ( and my parting post on this) is that I think you are barking up a tree not holding anything worth barking about. It simply is old news. Some do it, some don't. The body of available advice from a number of experienced hobbyists ( some in the science community) recommend water changes. For all of the same arguements you wish to make against it.......

I hope you find what you are looking for!

T

Eeew, a bit nasty about a reference that was simply provided so that I didn't sound like I was making up what carbon takes out. I don't think we need a new reference for that, activated carbon has been used for many years

I'm not arguing against water changes. I don't know how on earth you are getting that from my posts! I think you're just being a bit defensive from someone trying to counterpoint you and have an actual discussion instead of taking your word as that of God himself. If you don't want a discussion, just post and leave, don't keep coming back to discuss.

Anyhow, hope you have a good day:wavehand:

-A

 

[thebanker]

No need for anyone here to get their knickers in a twist!

I believe 0 water changes are possible, if you have a combination of the right biological processes in place to break down waste, enough water volume, and sufficient exportation methods. I'm sure there are more innovations in the future of reefkeeping that will bring us closer to this goal.

Zero water changes is the end goal of all the filtration innovators within our hobby- I would think.

 

[Kev Reefer]

Not me personally but a LFS that i use has had a 210 set up with a jaubert plenum and in 9 yrs has never done a water change...the store is called Beyond the reef in schaumburg ,illinois...sps, huge 18 " clam, alot of other softies and LPS and its doin great!!!! just my 2 sense!!!

 

[chumcrazy]

I was diving the other day and a surge moved me back about three feet and I thought to myself that was alot of water moving through and the reef is beautiful. No matter what we do we can never have a sand bed like the beach and as much water moving through our tanks as out in the ocean.

 

[palyam]

a little bit more about my filtration system:

PURA complete carbon, 24/7, change it every 3 months

46 pounds of High quality live rock

the RSM 130D skimmer

2.5 inch live sand

Seachem Purigen

bacteria dosing and bacteria food for biological filtration

that's all..

 

[Newreeflady]

So, here is a different article from reefkeeping that goes a bit more into what is actually building up in the water.


http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2007-09/rhf/index.php

It seems from reading it that we are most concerned with hydrophilic organics as hydrophobic organics are removed by GAC and skimming. Randy also discusses "commercial phosphate binders" that, although are less effective in total organics removed with compare to GAC, may be removing a different subset, such as anionic organics. (see the "accumulating organics" section.)
Also, the section about metals is pretty interesting- I didn't realize that macro algae takes up copper! Furthermore, there are tons of links in the article.
_____
While I have never had a system where I've performed literally zero water changes, it certainly is an interesting prospect given that some are actually having it work for them... Now if we can just get those cationic organics out!

-A