“The solution to pollution is dilution” Do larger tanks still have this advantage?

[revhtree]

Good Monday morning reefing family! I am going to be featuring some QOTD from different members at different times and more specifically more from one of our good members @Sisterlimonpot! So thank you Jimmy for today's QOTD topic! It's a good one! (if you want a QOTD featured, write it up and PM me with it)

“The solution to pollution is dilution”

This may be a phrase you are familiar with, what does it mean? To me, it means when a problem arises, larger tanks can be a lot more forgiving than smaller ones. If you were to argue against that statement 10-15 years ago, you would’ve been laughed at and anything you said after would’ve been dismissed as words of a lunatic.

However, with the advancements of equipment, refined nutrient export techniques and advanced products on the market, has that statement stood the test of time? Can we say it with the same confidence that we did back then? Do larger tanks still have the advantage of being more forgiving? So let's talk about it today!

1. Do you believe that the "The solution to pollution is dilution?"

2. Do larger tanks still have the advantage of being more forgiving?

 

[BeltedCoyote]

1. To an extent I would imagine that yes, greater water volume would help dilute “pollution”. That’s a big part of how creating appropriate solutions is done. Does that mean greater water volume is the be all end all answer? No, but it does play a part in overall stability.

2. To some extent, yes.

 

[montethemoster]

I think in larger volume tanks it is actually more difficult to take this approach. For larger tanks, you need to be able to make and store a lot of water for dilution, whereas with small tanks obviously it is easier to manage problems with dilution as you need much less water to accomplish this.

 

[DeniseAndy]

Does it actually solve things, no. Just may take longer to discover an issue if one occurs.

In our reef tanks, larger water volumes dilutes yes. For instance, if my toadstool decides to shed in my 210g, no big deal. If the same toadstool sheds in my 20g or 5g, I would have to do a water change to help relieve the system of its burden. So, the volume helps.

Being more forgiving, sure as their is more water to dilute the issue.

 

[725196]

I believe that helps, however good management of what goes into the tank via feeding and dosing. Further good export of what comes out of the tank, filtration, skimming etc is a better solution overall. Water changes are a key part of this, but not the end all be-all.

 

[Hugh Mann]

I would say yes, if you go by the dictionary definition of pollution which is something introduced to your tank that is dangerous. The same volume of say, accidental overdose of something that would crash a small-mid size tank might merely annoy a large tank.

That being said, once it actually becomes a problem, diluting it is far harder in larger systems unless you keep huge storage tanks. I can do a 50% change in my 55 in under an hour starting from rodi if I really had to. My 265, not a chance.

 

[Crashnt24]

With modern solutions to nutrient export and chemical filtration, water volume isn't as important anymore. The way I see it, you have two choices: 1) spend more on a bigger tank and salt, 2) spend more on filtration methods. Either way you have to spend some money, it just boils down to preference.

A small tank could have a skimmer, refugium and carbon reactor and be just as pollutant free as a large tank with just a skimmer.

 

[vanpire]

“The solution to pollution is dilution” <- I have always interpreted this as do more water changes or a big one if there is a immediate problem.

 

[Ippyroy]

With more dilution the pollution is less, but if not caught early and dealt with with, then the pollution is actually greater. Constant testing and monitoring is best thing for small and large tanks. Many things that will cause a crash in a small tank will also cause it in a large one. Spray air freshner next to tank and if you don't have a hood good chance of a high death rate in any sized tank.High nutrients in a small tank, do a large water change which most people can do quickly and easily. With a larger tank, if you do not have large amount of water on hand it can be almost impossible causing small issues over a much longer time.

 

[Epic Aquaculture]

I think that with the technology and equipment available today, water changes have become less needed, and in fact some do very few water changes over the life of their tanks. Larger tanks can be more forgiving in the beginning of an issue, but it is also more difficult to dilute the pollution because a lot more new water is needed in a 300 gallon tank than in a 30 gallon tank in order to accomplish the same thing. That being said I think a larger tank does give you more time to correct an issue, and if nothing else, water changes are still my go to if there is a problem that I cannot immediately identify.

 

[Reefs and Geeks]

Although I find keeping a large system stable requires less frequent interaction on my part, when I do need to intervene, I have to take larger and more expensive measures. For instance, on my first tank a 30% water change was only 10 gallons, or a pair of buckets I'd have mixed up before. Now for me to do a 30% water change, I have to have 2 brute trash cans ready to go, which is alot more of a pain than a few quick scoops of salt. And takes alot longer to prepare if I don't have RODI ready in advance. If I want to dose chemiclean, meds, aminos, trace elements...etc. the cost can add up quick and is very discouraging when going through an algae battle. Much easier to fight in a more reasonable sized tank.

I've been adding frag setups and tying them all to the same sump for ease of maintenance. However, this does add to the cost for any fixes that might need done.

I might rephrase dilution slighty to export/dilution more than simply relying on a large starting volume. A large volume of water will also delay when you might find out about an issue due to lower numbers in tests.

 

[fish farmer]

No. Maybe. Depends.

I hear this all the time about bigger tanks or more stable. The only thing is see being more stable could be water temperature swings. Proper stocking, proper dosing, etc. etc, it is about finding the balance in whatever size tank you have.

If you believe your 100 gallon tank is more stable than a 10 gallon tank, go dump one gallon of saturated kalk into your tank right now, how about 3 gallons or whatever volume your kalk batch is mixed up to. It will mess things up just as fast as in a 10 gallon tank.

I work at a trout hatchery so I think of tanks as holding biomass. If you have lots of biomass in a large tank and half as much biomass in the same sized tank...which do you think will have problems quicker....the high biomass tank since they would be contributing more pollution.

Sure the better equipment, etc, etc used on a bigger tank makes it more stable by design, but also adds more things that could fail. If it is heavily stocked with fish does that really make it more stable than a reef bowl that has no fish and very little equipment to fail?

 

[Jacked Reefer]

I believe the backbone to our systems is bacteria and planktons. Larger tanks have a lot more of these and in the long run turn out to be more stable. A small tank can achieve these results with a good size cryptic Fuge or large amounts of bio media

 

[RobB'z Reef]

Good Monday morning reefing family! I am going to be featuring some QOTD from different members at different times and more specifically more from one of our good members @Sisterlimonpot! So thank you Jimmy for today's QOTD topic! It's a good one! (if you want a QOTD featured, write it up and PM me with it)

“The solution to pollution is dilution”

This may be a phrase you are familiar with, what does it mean? To me, it means when a problem arises, larger tanks can be a lot more forgiving than smaller ones. If you were to argue against that statement 10-15 years ago, you would’ve been laughed at and anything you said after would’ve been dismissed as words of a lunatic.

However, with the advancements of equipment, refined nutrient export techniques and advanced products on the market, has that statement stood the test of time? Can we say it with the same confidence that we did back then? Do larger tanks still have the advantage of being more forgiving? So let's talk about it today!

1. Do you believe that the "The solution to pollution is dilution?"

2. Do larger tanks still have the advantage of being more forgiving?

1. Do you believe that the "The solution to pollution is dilution?"
No, it's not a solution, it might be a buffer however.

2. Do larger tanks still have the advantage of being more forgiving?
Yes

 

[andrewkw]

I would say to some degree yes, especially if you are frequently testing whatever you need to dilute it will be much longer before it's a serious problem. However most people are no longer afraid of 90-100% water changes which once you pass say 100 gallons most people are not equipped to do and once you pass approximately 200 you don't have the capability to do it in most cases even if you have 2 water storage tanks (fresh & salt) you still can't physically mix enough water to do one massive change.

A large or complete water change will dilute much better then simply having a large water volume to start with.

 

[WVNed]

I am sure a large system is harder to accidentally poison. There is a strong motivation to prevent anything that would become a large problem from happening.
It makes you pay attention to little things.

 

[Brew12]

1. Do you believe that the "The solution to pollution is dilution?"

2. Do larger tanks still have the advantage of being more forgiving?

I went with other. No doubt water volume dilutes pollution which makes it more forgiving at the onset of an issue. That does not make it a solution. The problem is that larger tanks can also be much harder to correct issues with once they occur.

I also agree with comments about stocking making a huge difference. I may have 160ish gallons of water volume, but my alk drops over 4dkh per day. If I have a problem with my CaRx or dosing equipment, it is much less forgiving than a 40g tank that drops 1dkh per day.

 

[littlebigreef]

Ahhh I love a good Anthony Calfo reference!

1) Yes, is as true today as it ever was. However, ("the big however"), we are also better able to dial in the nutrient input/export, replenish trace elements, and more precisely check our water parameters. In short, a water change is, and will always be, your best hammer for correcting issues that going sideways in your aquarium. This is especially true for novice reef keepers and folks that can't afford some of the pricier tools now available. It is possible to keep water parameters optimal for longer periods of time sans water changes. However, corals respond to nothing better than a nice big water change, especially if you're using a high quality trace element rich aquarium salt.

2) Bigger tank, exponentially larger margin of error. If you have a 3gal pic with a goby you're pulling in a tiny amount of food, supplements, etc, and you're losing a small amount of water to evaporation versus a large aquarium where everything is happening in higher amounts. The biological ceiling for a larger volume of water is just higher than that of a smaller volume.

 

[Larry L]

We like to fill up our tanks, so larger ones usually have a larger bioload. So proportionally you're probably adding the same relative amount of food and generating the same relative amount of waste. If you're prone to overfeeding, then that might become more apparent in a smaller tank.

 

[Richyreefer]

Water changes are great to help with pollution. Carbon and ion exchange resins can be a life saver too!