Does hydrogen peroxide clear the water? Wow!

[UK_Pete]

Re the 'if we could measure something' I agree - but its like Randy says in the intro to his organics article, organics are one of the most difficult aspects of reefing to measure and manipulate. I read the thread you linked but I think its mainly concentrating on removal of nuisance algae. I suppose water clarity might be linked to nuisance algae of course, and in the days when ozone was more popular people used it to improve clarity. I've found ozone to not seem to have a beneficial effect in my tank, but since using vodka water clarity has never been an issue for me. But it is interesting to see the posts above about eliminating patches of GFA.

As for natural reefs I find it hard to believe there are high levels of organics on them, having dived in quite a few myself, although not with a salifert test kit tucked into my weight belt, in the ones I have dived on the water does not have a brown tint, it dosent foam much in the surf, and it frequently seems to run in from offshore deep water areas that seem unlikely to contain much organic matter. Coupled with the numbers in Randys article of NSW reef organics I can't help but think that most tanks might have higher organics than natural reefs, and I wonder what effect that has on sensitive corals, mostly SPS, considering the fact that organics feed bacteria and SPS exist in symbiosis with bacteria living on their 'skin'. Overgrowth of SPS skin bacteria is associated with RTN and bacteria are fed with organics. Hmm easy to draw conclusions but theories are frequently wrong in this hobby. Although some people say SPS respond well to things like aminos, is that mainly because they are running ULNS and just dosing an expensive form of N and P? Might reducing organics and providing stable levels of mineral N and P be worth trying? If so, peroxide might have value in reducing those organics. Having said that, Randy seems to believe that if you want to reduce organics, bacterial methods and GAC are superior to oxidants, and it has to be said he is more likely to know.

 

[brandon429]

That sounds reasonable. You can see how in addition to nuisance algae we've made several lists about animals that tolerate various doses covering most macro aspects of in tank use like you are contemplating. The micro level impacts of peroxide dosing a reef tank are still up for review, and has no formal references to cite, enter speculations stage left

But in five years our hobby went from 2009 threads about how in tank peroxide use would be just devastating to today where you can see what happens to your tank before dosing. Trial by anecdote is working, fair to say we still don't have endorsed professional use for it yet and thats great, keep the bar high. Results drive the current use

I was never using peroxide in my tank for organics it was always for the target. 500% flushing water changes all at once makes for a very long weekend sometimes and heckuva organically clean tank lol. My reefkeeping technique is old fashioned export thankfully this is easy to wield on small tanks. Larger tank keepers are always looking for ways to lessen the work and deal with organics on site, and in the case of the oxydator it is not chemically unreasonable to think it can be working on organics too as a primary mode of action when water clarity results. Something had to explain the 30 yr following imo

In the case of the original poster here it was clear to me any perceived clarity was the shock cleaning of the water column of suspended primary producers and any suspended organics affecting light transmission. Its also fair to say some of the pelagic valuables such as gametes/juvenile micro organisms and various planktors were also burned and in that totality you have the reasonable detractors to dumping peroxide in the whole running tank. With the resounding agreement that peroxide acts on organics in ways that are aggressive that only adds to the support of the oxydator imo. love to see redox comparisons between oxydator, ozone and control


My opinion is currently that algae and primary producers must expel poisonous oxygen during photosynthesis or face free radical irreparable damage (known facet of plant photosynthesis) so the addition of calculated trace amounts of more oxygen is killing them rather selectively because everything else wasn't already on the verge of self poisoning anyway. Add to that raw physical assault of the plant cell but its still rather selective...coral tissue seems to insulate the algae cells we don't want killed.

On up the chain of life various enzymes and metabolic pathways exist to deal with peroxide specifically, such that the net result of broadcast application is death of those with the least complement. Everybody's getting burned, but it typically only has significance to the targets in known dose levels.

 

[UK_Pete]

Yea its really good to be able to see evidence from many people that peroxide does not cause much if any harm at various dosing quantities, although it seem possible to me that different results might be had by different people because of different amounts of easily oxidized organics which might 'soak up' excess peroxide. Maybe the term 'free radical scavengers' or 'antioxidants' is appropriate (not sure) but if you have lots of such a substance in your tank, the peroxide would immediately be soaked up and neutralized by it, whereas in a really clean tank (say with fresh mixed water in a new start tank) then the peroxide would have a far longer life, meaning organisms like fish, which you dont want to oxidize, might get a higher dose and be oxidized so to speak. So I think its worth being aware of this possibility.

Also remember that in certain tanks, adding oxygen might be quite beneficial. Some tanks are quite low in oxygen saturation (according to for instance advanced aquarist articles) for various reasons (high BOD, low aeration, etc). Adding oxygen to such tanks with an oxydator would probably help correct that. Bacteria which degrade organics mostly require oxygen IIRC, so by using the oxydator you would be allowing greater bacterial activity and break down organics faster perhaps. However for me it would seem quite an expensive and high maintenance method of increasing oxygen in tanks, although I've never used it, thats just a presumption. But the other side of the coin is CO2 removal, which is even harder than oxygenation. Unless youre using something like kalk, if your tank is under oxygenated, it will probably have a CO2 content which is higher than desired, and hence a low pH. I've recently become worried myself about high CO2 since I effectively measured my tanks CO2 as being very high. Adding oxygen from peroxide would not help remove CO2 as far as I know.

Anyway I think its likely that I will try dosing peroxide for a while myself and I will probably post after a while with any results I notice.

 

[reefwiser]

It is not an expensive thing to try thats why I di it 20 years ago. Now I don't set up a tank with out one it it. In 24 hours the water was cyrstal clear and I have never looked back. Simple an effective that is the way to go. I really don't want to run ozone on a small tank. An they make oxydators al the way up to large Koi ponds. So I just use simple and effective.

 

[UK_Pete]

Interesting, might give it a try sometime then. Also want to try dosing peroxide straight sometime also, maybe use camera to get before and after 'light transmittance' pictures. If I do get any interesting results i'll post here about it.

 

[hart24601]

Update Pete?

 

[Mr. Microscope]

For me, the biggest issue with H2O2 is it's effect on more sensitive inverts and corals, specifically acros and BTA's. It really does a number on them (bleach city) and it takes them like six months to recover from dosing H2O2. All other corals seem unaffected, even birdsnests and montis seem fine, but H2O2 is a no go for me. I won't even keep it in my house anymore because it's too tempting to use and I always regret it. Plus, by the time my acros have recovered the algae is back.

 

[acidtablockshifty]

im just a noob, but i would say my thought is that any decrease in cyano or hair algae, could be from an increase of dissolved oxygen, and a somehow decrease of usable co2, so having the oxydator would be like having more plant life in the tank, as soon as you stopped using it you would loose the affect. ive been told several times that if you have a skimmer that its enough oxygenation alone i still believe this to be false, i read this a long time ago im not gonna read it again right now but, but at one point it stats that the dissolved oxygen levels can be well over 100 percent. i have a lot of cyano in fuge and i know when i was running an air stone in there there was a lot less, i just havent got around to making some kind of bubble trap to reduce the salt creep. my tank also runs full siphon so most all of my aeration is from the skimmer but im positive its not enough

Dissolved Oxygen - Environmental Measurement Systems

 

[Maximus]

A little update of sorts. I have been running the large Oxydator w/10% peroxide for the past 5-6 weeks and so far so good. My tank water is clear without running any carbon and I have had no deaths of inverts, coral or fish.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

im just a noob, but i would say my thought is that any decrease in cyano or hair algae, could be from an increase of dissolved oxygen, and a somehow decrease of usable co2, so having the oxydator would be like having more plant life in the tank, as soon as you stopped using it you would loose the affect. ive been told several times that if you have a skimmer that its enough oxygenation alone i still believe this to be false, i read this a long time ago im not gonna read it again right now but, but at one point it stats that the dissolved oxygen levels can be well over 100 percent. i have a lot of cyano in fuge and i know when i was running an air stone in there there was a lot less, i just havent got around to making some kind of bubble trap to reduce the salt creep. my tank also runs full siphon so most all of my aeration is from the skimmer but im positive its not enough

Dissolved Oxygen - Environmental Measurement Systems

I haven't generally heard of a real difference in cyano with O2. Your effect might have been due to flow, which is well known to reduce cyano.

 

[acidtablockshifty]

I haven't generally heard of a real difference in cyano with O2. Your effect might have been due to flow, which is well known to reduce cyano.

randy i was going to put a nano power head in there and do the air stone, but if i increase the internal flow of the fuge, and say it decreases the cyano in there, am i more apt to have cyano start growing in the display because everywhere has good flow, no say safe haven, should i just leave it alone as it gives it, i guess perfect environment to grow in. I wouldn't be increasing the flow through the fuge so it would still have the same amount of water in and out, just might help the chaeto grow versus the neusence algae ?

 

[beaslbob]

(after reading the thread more thoroughly).
I think macros in a refugium or an ats would give much better results. Afterall desirable plant life oxygenates the water also.

But then most don't care what I think anyway.
Which is why it's only worth .02

 

[jedimasterben]

A little update of sorts. I have been running the large Oxydator w/10% peroxide for the past 5-6 weeks and so far so good. My tank water is clear without running any carbon and I have had no deaths of inverts, coral or fish.

Define 'clear'. Do you have any before/after photos taken from the long end of the aquarium?

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

randy i was going to put a nano power head in there and do the air stone, but if i increase the internal flow of the fuge, and say it decreases the cyano in there, am i more apt to have cyano start growing in the display because everywhere has good flow, no say safe haven, should i just leave it alone as it gives it, i guess perfect environment to grow in. I wouldn't be increasing the flow through the fuge so it would still have the same amount of water in and out, just might help the chaeto grow versus the neusence algae ?

I don't know, but I expect that reducing the suitability of cyano in the sump won't make it more likely to thrive elsewhere.

 

[calistyle]

I've used h202 in the past to spot treat red turf algae. Since my tank at the time was a 34g solana, I simply diluted 3% h202 w/ 1/2 salt water, filled up 5ml syringes and hit the troubled area. I use 5-10ml per target with all equipment off and did this a few times a week (before weekly WC)

It had zero effect on acros or my shrimp. It did turn the red turf algae to a almost orange color, by the 3rd treatment it was becoming white, and finally being eaten by my CUC. None of my fish seemed to be bothered by it and I still have them today.

 

[Amphibious]

I recently purchased the Sochting Oxydator to see if it would hve an effect on my Bryopsis problem I was experiencing in my aquaculture facility. I had battled the Bryopsis with high Mag, pulling it out buy the bunch for months. I was sick of it!!! Then I heard about the Sochting Oxydator. You can see I had a problem.

I installed one model A. In just three days there was a significant difference. I had continued pulling it out. I wanted it gone, NOW. I was tired of this crap!!! Then, I realized sizing the unit to the system was important. The model A is for up to a 100 gal system. I was using it on a 150 gal system. It was doing some damage to the Bryopsis but I realized my error and installed a second unit.

You can see a big difference in that the Bryopsis is significantly reduced. The Setosa frag barely visible in the top picture, is in plane sight in the second. My livestock consists of Acros, Montiporas, Trachs, Lobos, clams, and well, you can see the diversity in the second pic. This is one half the coral display. The other half is acro colonies, a large M setosa colony, large trachies, Lobo colony, plate corals, and clams. The dosing H202 through the oxydator has done nothing to harm these corals, in fact they have never looked better.

Let me be perfectly clear... At least with Bryopsis, I continued to pull it out by hand. I noticed two significant changes in the Bryopsis. First, it pulled off the structures it was adhered to without any effort, ie, it had lost it ability to stay attached. It pulled off as if dead. Second, It didn’t grow back as easily or robust. After installing the second unit the process is even easier and regrowth is at a minimum.

The Sochting Oxydators work better than direct dosing H202 because the second direct dosed H202 hits the SW it splits into it’s two parts, pure water and pure oxygen. The oxydator delivers a continuous mini dose 24/7 and is much more effective. The recommended H202 for model A is 3% to 6%. I’ve been using 7% with success. I’m going to bump the strength up to 8.75%. to see the effect it has on this Bryopsis, the most stubborn of all algae, IMHO.

Anyone with the desire for more information, please PM me.

Thanks, I hope this helped clear up the use of the Sochting Oxydator as opposed to direct dosing.

Dick

 

[asandbox]

Is it better than Nopox?

 

[Amphibious]

I can’t address your question asandbox. I’ve not used the Red Sea product NoPox. Sorry.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

The Sochting Oxydators work better than direct dosing H202 because the second direct dosed H202 hits the SW it splits into it’s two parts, pure water and pure oxygen. The oxydator delivers a continuous mini dose 24/7 and is much more effective. The recommended H202 for model A is 3% to 6%. I’ve been using 7% with success. I’m going to bump the strength up to 8.75%. to see the effect it has on this Bryopsis, the most stubborn of all algae, IMHO.

Well, what you are claiming isn't entirely true. Hydrogen peroxide does not break down instantly into water and O2 the "second' it hits seawater. It can last for a half hour or longer in seawater. See the EPA report linked below. It also has lots of different effects and products in seawater, including oxidizing iodide and iron into more oxidized forms).

I don't see how the oxidator would work different on bryopsis than direct dosing if your assertion were true, since the hydrogen peroxide produced in the device would similarly break down rapidly.

However, having the hydrogen peroxide there 24/7 seems a likely reason it might work better than direct dosing.

I just have to stress again, as evidenced by this effect, that hydrogen peroxide is not a benign chemical. It irritates and kills things. If you are desperate to kill a pest (like dinos), it may be worth exploring. If you have a nice tank and want to make it better, this wouldn't be my choice.

http://www.epa.gov/opp00001/chem_search/cleared_reviews/csr_PC-000595_12-Jul-07_a.pdf

 

[jedimasterben]

The Sochting Oxydators work better than direct dosing H202 because the second direct dosed H202 hits the SW it splits into it’s two parts, pure water and pure oxygen. The oxydator delivers a continuous mini dose 24/7 and is much more effective. The recommended H202 for model A is 3% to 6%. I’ve been using 7% with success. I’m going to bump the strength up to 8.75%. to see the effect it has on this Bryopsis, the most stubborn of all algae, IMHO.

The reaction is not instantaneous. If it were, then you would not be seeing the effect you are seeing. The peroxide breaks down in a short time, but at a constant drip rate (a few drops per minute) there is plenty of it to go around to do its thing.

If peroxide were to decay immediately upon contact with saltwater then even direct dosing would not have the negative effects that it does, such as the deaths of Lysmata shrimp and extreme aggravation to xenia, hosting anemones, etc.