Are algae scrubbers better than protein skimmers at removing nutrients? | BRStv Investigates

[randyBRS]

We are headed down a new rabbit hole and this time...it's algae scrubbers!

Today we start with some baseline testing of how effective a scrubber can be, then we ramp it up in the next test.

If you have ideas for scrubber tests you want to see, throw them below!

 

[fermentedhiker]

One thing comes to mind regarding scrubbers is that algae consumes more the Nitrate/Phosphate and these may end up limiting the growth rate in a scrubber. For instance someone who does few water changes and doesn't test or dose for Iron may hit a wall and have poor growth and feel the scrubber is not as good as anticipated when in reality it's his own poor maintenance routine limiting it's effectiveness.

 

[Admann]

I'm probably wrong but I thought skimmers removed proteins and waste before becoming nitrate and phoshate and algae removed strictly Nitrate and Phosphate. 2 different methods for removing the source (in suspension) with a skimmer and the product with macroalgae (in solution)? I haven't watched the video yet, I just wondered if my thought process is correct concerning these 2 methods of N and P removal.

 

[Admann]

You guys have the best job in the world.

 

[JoshH]

I'm personally confused, your investigates question is asking if a scrubber is just as effective at removing nitrates and phosphates as a protein skimmer. But in your control tanks you state you have no form of filtration in them (No skimmer)?

So how could it be labeled as a reef certainty if you never actually tested against any type of skimmer? Am I missing a video somewhere??

Will there be a future video running JUST a skimmer to compare?

Should this test have been run with 6 tanks? 2 controls, 2 with skimmers, 2 with scrubbers?

Just trying to get some clarification @Bulk Reef Supply keep up the vids @randyBRS !

 

[hart24601]

I'm personally confused, your investigates question is asking if a scrubber is just as effective at removing nitrates and phosphates as a protein skimmer. But in your control tanks you state you have no form of filtration in them (No skimmer)?

So how could it be labeled as a reef certainty if you never actually tested against any type of skimmer? Am I missing a video somewhere??

Will there be a future video running JUST a skimmer to compare?

Should this test have been run with 6 tanks? 2 controls, 2 with skimmers, 2 with scrubbers?

Just trying to get some clarification @Bulk Reef Supply keep up the vids @randyBRS !

I was just thinking the same thing. For that statement I would have expected the controls to have skimmers at a minimum if not 6 tests like you say.

 

[ca1ore]

I'm probably wrong but I thought skimmers removed proteins and waste before becoming nitrate and phoshate and algae removed strictly Nitrate and Phosphate. 2 different methods for removing the source (in suspension) with a skimmer and the product with macroalgae (in solution)? I haven't watched the video yet, I just wondered if my thought process is correct concerning these 2 methods of N and P removal.

Has always been my assumption as well.

 

[hart24601]

Has always been my assumption as well.

Also skimmers export bacteria and other Microorganisms that have consumed nutrients as well - so the comparison is odd to me.

 

[csb123]

I would like to see carbon dosing (ie. NOPOX) + skimmer vs ATS.

 

[Njbjr]

I said in their comment section. It seems like advertisement for their scrubbers.

 

[robbyg]

I'm probably wrong but I thought skimmers removed proteins and waste before becoming nitrate and phoshate and algae removed strictly Nitrate and Phosphate. 2 different methods for removing the source (in suspension) with a skimmer and the product with macroalgae (in solution)? I haven't watched the video yet, I just wondered if my thought process is correct concerning these 2 methods of N and P removal.

You are not wrong!
The two of them are meant to compliment each other, they are not substitutes for each other. A better test would have been algae scrubber versus bioreactor vs (sulfur react / Phos Reactor) shootout with all tanks running the same skimmers.

Yes some tanks with light fish loads, lots of micro critters and careful feeding can work perfectly without a skimmer.

 

[sixty_reefer]

They probably went with the common knowledge that a protein skimmer is effective at removing organics, but it would of been nice to see it side by side in the same test.

In the event of a protein skimmer being used wouldn’t that bring more questions.

what brand to use.
Size, should it be a skimmer rated for the tank size or over rated.
What speed to use
Etc..

 

[AZMSGT]

On the clearwater scrubbers used in this test, what did you seed them with? Where they already seeded and running prior to the test start?

The clearwater scrubbers are notorious for taking several weeks 4-8 to seed on their own.

 

[robbyg]

They probably went with the common knowledge that a protein skimmer is effective at removing organics, but it would of been nice to see it side by side in the same test.

In the event of a protein skimmer being used wouldn’t that bring more questions.

what brand to use.
Size, should it be a skimmer rated for the tank size or over rated.
What speed to use
Etc..

I assume you are talking to me?
I would run the test with whatever skimmer works well and just make sure all three identical skimmers are set to the same skim settings.

 

[Crashjack]

I would like to see ATS vs. refugium as I think a lot of reefers would like to go with one or the other.

 

[JoshH]

They probably went with the common knowledge that a protein skimmer is effective at removing organics, but it would of been nice to see it side by side in the same test.

In the event of a protein skimmer being used wouldn’t that bring more questions.

what brand to use.
Size, should it be a skimmer rated for the tank size or over rated.
What speed to use
Etc..

I think the exact same argument could be made for scrubbers as well, size, flow rate, cleaning rate etc all come into play so I think as long as they went with an appropriately sized skimmer against an appropriate sized scrubber it would be FAR better than comparing scrubber numbers to "Common knowledge" with no actual numbers.

To me if they don't have actual numbers to compare with on skimmers this video shouldn't be in there investigates series and should be a product spotlight video (Nothing wrong with that as I love there spotlight videos). They could add a second part to the video with skimmers VS. There control setup and make this kindof a 2 Part series which would solve all the issues. Maybe they are already working on that part I'm not 100% sure

 

[Turbo's Aquatics]

Plenty of people have done comparisons to a skimmerless tank vs a skimmed tank. So, if one tank has no scrubber and the other tank has one, now you have a common baseline of sorts. It's not a perfect parallel but it's a start

As the OP says:

Today we start with some baseline testing of how effective a scrubber can be, then we ramp it up in the next test.

There have literally been zero benchmark studies to measure the effectiveness of an algae scrubber in a hobbyist level aquarium, in the current form/design that is. No universities, etc. Just 40 year old info from Adey, that's as close as we can get.

The rest of the info out there is anecdotal by majority. So before everyone starts chucking axes at @Bulk Reef Supply let's just start with the fact that they are doing decent studies on this kind of thing and we should, as a hobby, thank them for taking it to that level. I've been in the area where they are testing things, it's like a hobbyist's dream lab man...I saw this test setup when it had only been up and going for a few weeks and I've been anticipating the results.

I said in their comment section. It seems like advertisement for their scrubbers.

They're a business, of course they're going to promote products that they carry. Think about it this way though, if they wanted to advertise scrubbers, wouldn't they just grow one out and take a bunch of pics of servicing it and such? Why would they set up a controlled environment composed of 2 test tanks and 2 control tanks on Neptune dosers and controllers to do the same thing they could have done on 1 tank? Don't tank that they wrong way, I'm not trying to by rude or snarky or anything - my point is as started above - they are going beyond the anecdotal.

One thing comes to mind regarding scrubbers is that algae consumes more the Nitrate/Phosphate and these may end up limiting the growth rate in a scrubber.

IMO system biodiversity has as much to do with growth on an algae scrubber as do nutrients. As long as you are feeding on a regular basis and have a bioload in the tank producing waste, you'll have growth, even when nutrients appear to be bottomed out.

You are not wrong!
The two of them are meant to compliment each other, they are not substitutes for each other.

I've been on both sides of this fence. Initially, when I first started using a scrubber, I was anti-skimmer and anti-water change. Now that I have a little more white in my beard I understand that there is a lot of middle ground.

I wouldn't go as far as saying they are "meant" to complement each other, but rather that they can in certain situations. In other situations, they can replace one another.

Julian Sprung's video on this topic is really the best way to cover this.

I'm probably wrong but I thought skimmers removed proteins and waste before becoming nitrate and phoshate and algae removed strictly Nitrate and Phosphate.

They probably went with the common knowledge that a protein skimmer is effective at removing organics

Also skimmers export bacteria and other Microorganisms that have consumed nutrients as well - so the comparison is odd to me.

We have tests that a skimmer can remove X compared to a tank without. I don't think the intent was to compare the 2 directly...just have some data to even discuss - at least that's how I see it. I have a ton of anecdotal examples of scrubber effectiveness but no one gives a rats behind about actually running a study, and I understand why...

The clearwater scrubbers are notorious for taking several weeks 4-8 to seed on their own.

Maturation time has always been 4-6 weeks for bare plastic canvas, but it is also highly dependent on the system (age, bioload, etc, etc). I've had customers with one of my scrubbers have it take 4 months to get enough to call "growth" and others that had a full growth chamber in 15 days from scratch (with no screen seeding).

 

[Hermie]

My cynical guess is that the skimmer tank (alone) removed significantly less phosphates/nitrates than the ATS tank (alone) removed, so a skimmer tank (alone) wasn't included in the data because it'd make the skimmer look bad, and skimmers are money makers.

 

[Turbo's Aquatics]

My cynical guess is that the skimmer tank (alone) removed significantly less phosphates/nitrates than the ATS tank (alone) removed, so a skimmer tank (alone) wasn't included in the data because it'd make the skimmer look bad, and skimmers are money makers.

That's not it...but I enjoy your cynicism lol.

 

[JoshH]

My cynical guess is that the skimmer tank (alone) removed significantly less phosphates/nitrates than the ATS tank (alone) removed, so a skimmer tank (alone) wasn't included in the data because it'd make the skimmer look bad, and skimmers are money makers.

That's not it...but I enjoy your cynicism lol.

You never know, they didn't include the Neptune ATK in there Best Of 2019: ATOs video atall and I can't think of anything other than trying to save Neptune some face...