Bulk soda ash discontinued?

[dragon99]

Hi,
The calcium hydroxide had the most significant increase in quality and in a whole different class of source materials. Functionally it is denser, and you can use a small amount less to achieve the same results. It is also less talc-like or "poofy" meaning it is harder to get airborne and breath, so I think it is fair to consider it safer to use. This also contains ultra-low organics and impurities, most specifically ultra low aluminum. I understand that many do not believe a higher quality material is needed because kalk solution will settle out many impurities but that's not the case with all impurities, and that also implies you never let the pump suck concentrated impurities off the bottom. It's just better if it was never there in the first place. I also think ultra low impurities in our additives is more important than ever in a world where many reefers are doing fewer water changes than ever before.

Thanks for stepping in and sharing your thought process behind this change. Obviously it hit a nerve. I don't doubt that you did this for good reasons, but that doesn't mean it was correct. The Kalk change especially deserves a BRS investigates. I firmly believe this change is reef fantasy.

I think you can put together a test of old Kalk and new Kalk that shows the results in a reef tank after ~3-6months. Take 2 systems, dose kalk in both and after 6 months get an ICP test. If what you say is true the results should be obvious. Maybe dose large amounts over a shorter timeframe and let precipitation takes it course (though that might be skewed vs coral growth).

Regarding sucking concentrated impurities off the bottom, is there any proof that these will dissolve in a tank? I'd assume they stay solids and have no effect on water quality.

 

[jduong916]

I'm going to be honest, I always wondered how you guys made money off the five gallon buckets. I can go to leslies and buy soda ash in a five gallon bucket for a little less than what BRS sold it for. Mind you, this is swimmming pool quality (may be the same as reef quality, maybe not). I totally understand not selling the five gallon buckets and i totally understand the gripe of everyone who bought the five gallon buckets.

For the majority of us who only bought the 7 or 8 pound jugs, come on now, its 4 bucks more for something that lasts a few months, just get over it. Most of the people comparing the price of the five gallon buckets dont even use the five gallon buckets. Compare this to the two part cost of other brands and youre still saving a lot.

Whoever uses the five gallon ca or alk supplements go ahead and buy the leslies swimming pool buckets or the driveway melt stuff. Do some research and you can find the chemicals are 99% pure and youll save a little more than what you were originally paying from BRS. All chemical stuff is sold by the same companies, I'd bet the same company that wholesales to leslies is probably the same company wholesaling to BRS. Trust me, ive bugged Randy Holmes on many other possible DIY Alk and Ca supplements out there and hes pretty much said I should be ok with every one (man i love that guy). But then again, don't trust me, what works for me may not work for you lol

All jokes aside though, I just order a five gallon bucket of magnesium chloride, might as well save on this while it lasts

 

[Greenstreet.1]

Randy’s DIY looks like I may be headed that way soon.

 

[JonJ]

With all that a typical person spends in this hobby, I can’t imagine getting worked up over this increase. Companies raise prices on EXISTING products all the time and as a consumer, if you don’t like it you buy a competitor’s product or stop using it all together. In this case, BRS is providing a better quality product. To get cheaper, you are going to bake sheets of baking soda?-Seriously?!? I’m using BRS 2 part on my tank and even when doing the math on what would be an extremely high level of daily consumption, it is still the best value in managing the big three parameters. The ROI on a quality calcium reactor was 7 years in comparison to their 2 part the last time I did the math.

 

[chicago]

No problem with changing the business model and quality.. But for those of us that ordered and loved the buckets bring them back. I have no issue paying more for a better product or to allow you to continue financing the the lab warehouse for all those great videos. LOL. Bring back the buckets.. or better yet.. send out a deal with 30 pre packaged packets.. thanks Randy

 

[Ryanbrs]

Thanks for stepping in and sharing your thought process behind this change. Obviously it hit a nerve. I don't doubt that you did this for good reasons, but that doesn't mean it was correct. The Kalk change especially deserves a BRS investigates. I firmly believe this change is reef fantasy.

I think you can put together a test of old Kalk and new Kalk that shows the results in a reef tank after ~3-6months. Take 2 systems, dose kalk in both and after 6 months get an ICP test. If what you say is true the results should be obvious. Maybe dose large amounts over a shorter timeframe and let precipitation takes it course (though that might be skewed vs coral growth).

Regarding sucking concentrated impurities off the bottom, is there any proof that these will dissolve in a tank? I'd assume they stay solids and have no effect on water quality.

I get where you are going with the investigates opportunity, and that's maybe something we can get to after everything that's already in the works. However, it is a pretty low priority in relation to other testing opportunities. I think most of us would rather see the results of how flow, spectrum, pH and coral foods affect coral coloration and growth rather than the effects of saving a few bucks a month on kalkwasser

End of the day all of these additives are just nutritional supplements for animals we care for. Similar to any pet food or nutritional supplement for our dogs, cats or birds. The likelihood that most of us would be able to identify if the quality of the raw materials going into Science Diet or some organic grain free diet is really better than Meow Mix is pretty low no matter how long you watch your cat. The presumption is we just do the best we can for them, research what we think is best for our pets and fits within a reasonable budget.

In this case, even though BRS chems have been the best value retail offering, they have never been the cheapest option out there. Buying industrial chemicals produced for industrial purposes like ice melting or pool chemistry and taking the time to bake baking soda has and always will always be the cheapest option out there. Similar to the lowest cost pet food out there it will very likely keep your pets alive, in reasonable health and in most cases won't be so toxic that anyone would notice health differences with the naked eye or be able to attribute them to the food in the long term. The difficulty is when you run into some form of tank issue down the road it's really impossible to know what caused it so one of the best approaches as always been to eliminate as many potential causes as we can, to begin with. The value proposition of industrial chemicals is just the most affordable solution possible. I don't think anyone has ever claimed it is the best option and those using it are probably not in search of the better or best option, just acceptable quality at the lowest cost.

Part of transitioning to a full line of chems that use pharmaceutical grade raw materials is to make it easier for those researching what they want to put in their tanks. Anyone can say they are "better" or the "best," but that really has no meaning. The independently graded material has definable quality standards. As you can imagine there is a fairly dramatic difference in the manufacturing processes, facilities, cross contamination standards and raw materials used between products between something designed to be an affordable method of melting ice and something designed to be used for human dialysis, baby formula or pharmaceuticals. We can all debate if our tanks need this standard of quality but considering the pretty low overall cost, I think a lot of what reefers are buying here is peace of mind and the ability to skip a debate that will likely never have a universally agreed upon answer.

End of the day I don't think there is "one product to rule them all" but I'd certainly like to think we offer the best value mix of quality and price out there. I can only hope others share this view.

 

[Ryanbrs]

No problem with changing the business model and quality.. But for those of us that ordered and loved the buckets bring them back. I have no issue paying more for a better product or to allow you to continue financing the the lab warehouse for all those great videos. LOL. Bring back the buckets.. or better yet.. send out a deal with 30 pre packaged packets.. thanks Randy

I will tell the team : )

 

[Greenstreet.1]

With all that a typical person spends in this hobby, I can’t imagine getting worked up over this increase. Companies raise prices on EXISTING products all the time and as a consumer, if you don’t like it you buy a competitor’s product or stop using it all together. In this case, BRS is providing a better quality product. To get cheaper, you are going to bake sheets of baking soda?-Seriously?!? I’m using BRS 2 part on my tank and even when doing the math on what would be an extremely high level of daily consumption, it is still the best value in managing the big three parameters. The ROI on a quality calcium reactor was 7 years in comparison to their 2 part the last time I did the math.

Where is it said that it’s better ?
All they said is that it’s a better pharmaceutical grade that’s all.
Yes I will bake sheets of baking soda seriously if it gives me the same results as the fancy package.

I’m not against BRS I’ve been a custom since 2008.

 

[JonJ]

Where is it said that it’s better ?
All they said is that it’s a better pharmaceutical grade that’s all.
Yes I will bake sheets of baking soda seriously if it gives me the same results as the fancy package.

I’m not against BRS I’ve been a custom since 2008.

If they say that it is a more pure product than what they used to sell, then I would say that would qualify as better. There will always be “good enough” but I find a lot of hobbyists such as myself, don’t subscribe to that mentality. If you want to bake baking soda, then by all means, go for it- to each their own. I meant no offense in my previous reply, so apologies if I came across as rude.

 

[Ryanbrs]

Where is it said that it’s better ?
All they said is that it’s a better pharmaceutical grade that’s all.
Yes I will bake sheets of baking soda seriously if it gives me the same results as the fancy package.

I’m not against BRS I’ve been a custom since 2008.

I really do appreciate everyone that elects to support BRS and what we do here. I apologize that this particular move may not suit everyone's needs perfectly. Even if this doesn't fit the exact reefing desires for everyone I do hope our good intentions come across.

 

[Ibn]

Fair point and understood.

For what it is worth, many years ago when we increased the price because we went from food grade Dow calcium and dead sea magnesium to USP grade the response was overtly positive and the community was excited. All I can say is the goal here is to increase the quality of how we serve the reefing community. I understand its hard to trust any company is really attempting to act in the communities best interest rather than their wallets. I can only hope that the general way we behave and our intentions come through. I understand that everything we do might not be perfect for everyone but our hearts are in the right place. While not the absolute cheapest option possible there I am very excited that on almost most of the chems BRS can say we are not just Better but also Less and in many cases More as well which is the value trifecta

So the old BRS was food grade calcium and USP grade magnesium. I assume that the old BRS sodium bicarbonate was the same (food/USP grade)? What percentage of clarity are we looking at with those additives vs. the current offering of the pharma grade? The fact that the magnesium was already USP grade would put it in the lines of pharma grade correct? Googling USP brings up a chemical grade of sufficient purity to meet or exceed requirements of the United States Pharmacopeia (USP); acceptable for food, drug, or medicinal use; may be used for most laboratory purposes.

As tiering goes, it goes from ACS --> reagent (generally equal to ACS) --> USP --> USP-NF --> lab (not pure enough for food, drug, or medicinal use)
There's a couple of other grades below that, but I don't think that's relevant to the discussion since we're going below food grade.

Looking up sodium bicarbonate at their different purity levels, it's:
ACS/reagent: 99.7 - 100.3% (mean 100%)
USP/FCC: 99 - 100.5% (mean 99.75%)

So, we're looking at an average incremental value of 0.25% difference?

I get where you are going with the investigates opportunity, and that's maybe something we can get to after everything that's already in the works. However, it is a pretty low priority in relation to other testing opportunities. I think most of us would rather see the results of how flow, spectrum, pH and coral foods affect coral coloration and growth rather than the effects of saving a few bucks a month on kalkwasser

End of the day all of these additives are just nutritional supplements for animals we care for. Similar to any pet food or nutritional supplement for our dogs, cats or birds. The likelihood that most of us would be able to identify if the quality of the raw materials going into Science Diet or some organic grain free diet is really better than Meow Mix is pretty low no matter how long you watch your cat. The presumption is we just do the best we can for them, research what we think is best for our pets and fits within a reasonable budget.

In this case, even though BRS chems have been the best value retail offering, they have never been the cheapest option out there. Buying industrial chemicals produced for industrial purposes like ice melting or pool chemistry and taking the time to bake baking soda has and always will always be the cheapest option out there. Similar to the lowest cost pet food out there it will very likely keep your pets alive, in reasonable health and in most cases won't be so toxic that anyone would notice health differences with the naked eye or be able to attribute them to the food in the long term. The difficulty is when you run into some form of tank issue down the road it's really impossible to know what caused it so one of the best approaches as always been to eliminate as many potential causes as we can, to begin with. The value proposition of industrial chemicals is just the most affordable solution possible. I don't think anyone has ever claimed it is the best option and those using it are probably not in search of the better or best option, just acceptable quality at the lowest cost.

Part of transitioning to a full line of chems that use pharmaceutical grade raw materials is to make it easier for those researching what they want to put in their tanks. Anyone can say they are "better" or the "best," but that really has no meaning. The independently graded material has definable quality standards. As you can imagine there is a fairly dramatic difference in the manufacturing processes, facilities, cross contamination standards and raw materials used between products between something designed to be an affordable method of melting ice and something designed to be used for human dialysis, baby formula or pharmaceuticals. We can all debate if our tanks need this standard of quality but considering the pretty low overall cost, I think a lot of what reefers are buying here is peace of mind and the ability to skip a debate that will likely never have a universally agreed upon answer.

End of the day I don't think there is "one product to rule them all" but I'd certainly like to think we offer the best value mix of quality and price out there. I can only hope others share this view.

I don't think we're looking at comparing it to industrial chemicals, but rather the slight difference between the old grading of the BRS additives vs. the current line of pharma grade additives.

 

[jimmyzhou]

...

 

[Shawn Dahl]

@BRS thank you for keeping on top of quality standards and always striving to improve and push the hobby forward. I would gladly pay the extra couple dollars a month for a better product. Innovation and advancement costs more than a lot of people realize. I still feel like the best deals can always be found at BRS and know that the quality of the product is top notch. Keep up the good work.

With that being said, when is BRS going to offer a BRS branded trace elements haha. I would also like to see ATI Essentials. Just had to offer some criticism with the praise. Again thank you BRS for what you do, and have done for many reefers entering the hobby

 

[pga7602]

So the old BRS was food grade calcium and USP grade magnesium. I assume that the old BRS sodium bicarbonate was the same (food/USP grade)? What percentage of clarity are we looking at with those additives vs. the current offering of the pharma grade? The fact that the magnesium was already USP grade would put it in the lines of pharma grade correct? Googling USP brings up a chemical grade of sufficient purity to meet or exceed requirements of the United States Pharmacopeia (USP); acceptable for food, drug, or medicinal use; may be used for most laboratory purposes.

As tiering goes, it goes from ACS --> reagent (generally equal to ACS) --> USP --> USP-NF --> lab (not pure enough for food, drug, or medicinal use)
There's a couple of other grades below that, but I don't think that's relevant to the discussion since we're going below food grade.

Looking up sodium bicarbonate at their different purity levels, it's:
ACS/reagent: 99.7 - 100.3% (mean 100%)
USP/FCC: 99 - 100.5% (mean 99.75%)

So, we're looking at an average incremental value of 0.25% difference?



I don't think we're looking at comparing it to industrial chemicals, but rather the slight difference between the old grading of the BRS additives vs. the current line of pharma grade additives.

Someone on the forum just pointed out to me that you can find similar products in the same size containers on DFS under their brand. Its also Liveaquaria approved. Good thing there are so many choices these days.

 

[tautog83]

Nobody likes a price increase , but like stated before for most of us it's maybe $ 5 extra a month . That's like going to Cumberland farms for 2 coffees in the morning rather than Starbucks . At the end of the day everyone has a choice of where they buy it from

 

[Brew12]

Just saw this today, and I am actually pleased with this change. I use Kalk and 2 part in my 187g system. I am also in the group that is trying to move away from doing regular large water changes. Anything I can do to reduce the amount of accumulated impurities in my system is a plus. If I had a smaller system or was going to do more regular water changes, I could see this as being a negative.

 

[amnesiac]

Just saw this today, and I am actually pleased with this change. I use Kalk and 2 part in my 187g system. I am also in the group that is trying to move away from doing regular large water changes. Anything I can do to reduce the amount of accumulated impurities in my system is a plus. If I had a smaller system or was going to do more regular water changes, I could see this as being a negative.

But what level of purity are we moving from and going to??? Maybe I missed it in the thread but have any hard numbers been put up?? I've read pharmaceutical grade, better than pharmaceutical, food grade, etc. I think we'd all be in a better place to make a decision if we had an actually number like "the new stuff is 99.999995% pure sodium carbonate as opposed to the old stuff that is 99.75%".

 

[Ryanbrs]

But what level of purity are we moving from and going to??? Maybe I missed it in the thread but have any hard numbers been put up?? I've read pharmaceutical grade, better than pharmaceutical, food grade, etc. I think we'd all be in a better place to decide if we had an actually number like "the new stuff is 99.999995% pure sodium carbonate as opposed to the old stuff that is 99.75%".

The ~98% references are often referring to water as the major impurity and not of tremendous value to this type of consideration. The heavy metals, arsenic and organics are often measured in the parts per million or billion. To be honest, even within that, the path doesn't have a lot of value to go down because there isn't a single reefer anywhere that knows the threshold where most of these contaminants would definitively pose a problem or what the long-term effects are. Most of this is not toxic enough that it would result in immediate mortality so it is the long-term multi-year effects that are of biggest concern.

End of the day I don't think there is a satisfying answer to your question because it doesn't exist and probably never will. The reason I am certain this will be debated eternally is because we don't just debate the quality of nutritional additives for our fish and corals which has a pretty small research budget but also a billion dollar cat and dog food industry with huge research budgets but still no to limited agreed upon results. Even with trillion dollar industry of food for humans with a basically unlimited research budget, there are very few agreed upon results. I can't tell you definitively that organic meats fruits and vegetables will be healthier for you but anecdotally people who make an effort to eat organic do seem to be healthier and if it were the same price almost everyone would select the organic option that has fewer undesirable contaminants. So for most people, it is just a question of how much am I willing to spend to buy organic. For many it is a lot, others zero.

The "organic" designation is important because it means a set of regulated standards are in place, so you don't have to get a medical degree to understand what is or isn't in the food or what exact benefits it is going to have for your life. It is just a better standard of nutrition with fewer undesirable contents for your body. Results are largely assumed, the quality of input equals quality of output.

This is where pharmaceutical grade (USP / Ph.Eur) designation comes in. You don't have to be a chemist and a marine biologist to know that we all would generally like to add as few contaminants to the tank as possible. There are existing regulated standards that can certainly achieve that. Only real question is what is this piece of mind worth? The biggest difference with most of the pharmaceutical grade (USP / Ph.Eur) materials versus technical or industrial grade materials is industrial grade materials are typically made with raw materials like lime and limited treatment to create the desired chemical. Meeting the pharmaceutical standards very often means they have take steps to remove undesirable contaminants and produce the desired chemical synthetically. It always means implementing a regulated facility, production, cleanliness, and cross contamination standards capable of producing the required standards which are very different than a facility that produces salt designed to be thrown on a sidewalk. It's just a reality of the intended use and keeping production costs as low as possible for that use. Because they are consumed by humans, food grade materials often fall somewhere in the middle of these standards and closer to what most people would call "acceptable."

So there isn't a right or wrong answer here. Only is the higher quality worth the monthly/yearly expense. If the piece of mind fits your approach to reefing and pets costs a buck or two a month a fairly large portion will probably appreciate that value offering. If it is $100 a month, there will be substantially fewer coming to that conclusion.

In the end, this isn't really a debate, just a personal value choice.

 

[Brew12]

But what level of purity are we moving from and going to??? Maybe I missed it in the thread but have any hard numbers been put up?? I've read pharmaceutical grade, better than pharmaceutical, food grade, etc. I think we'd all be in a better place to make a decision if we had an actually number like "the new stuff is 99.999995% pure sodium carbonate as opposed to the old stuff that is 99.75%".

My answer to that is that I'm not sure it matters. How much better is PE Mysis than the cheaper stuff? I don't know, but I chose to pay more. How much better is feeding LRS or Rod's food over pellets? I don't know, but I chose to pay more. I also understand why people don't pay more and chose to use the cheaper products.
If I were looking to save cost, I wouldn't have been buying the original stuff from BRS. There are much cheaper alternatives. These are bulk commodities and can be purchased on large volumes for very low cost. There are aquarium clubs that will buy in bulk and can keep 20 members stocked for a year at under $10/member. That is value. It is also a market that BRS can't (and shouldn't want to) compete with.
Instead, BRS can go one of two routes and preferably both. They can offer a premium product which they can charge enough for to make it worth them dealing with it. Or, they can offer a higher level of convenience to add value to the product.
As with all things, how much we are willing to spend on quality and convenience varies by individual. That is why you can buy a $1000 return pump, a $120 pump, or anything in between.

 

[amnesiac]

@Ryanbrs thanks for replying. I'm sure you would agree that hobbyists have used even lesser quality/grade soda ash to maintain their tanks for years, even decades, correct?? That being the case and if what this basically comes down to is personal choice then why wouldn't BRS offer us the choice between what was working and the newer additives?? Sure everyone would buy organic if they could afford to, so most grocery stores offer organic produce, also. What they don't do is fire sale the normal stuff and only sell organic. If it's because there is no profit in selling the older stuff then, hey, nuff said. You guys aren't a charity and I think most would understand that, but if this really just comes down to "I want to put better quality stuff in my tank so I'll spend a bit more" then why not offer both options so that people who are loyal customers and want to keep their business with you have an option???