Huge refugium & tank without water changes - what are the cons?

[thejacgues]

Hello,

I am considering using refugium or algae scrubber as the main source of filtration (previously I was more into carbon dosing, which I am doing currently).
That would mean buying a smaller skimmer for my new tank and/or letting it run only for some hours every day.

I wonder - what are the cons?
Is refugium a more effective export method in terms of dissolved organic matter/carbon than a skimmer is?

Cons I see:
- Refugium requires additional micro supplementation (like ChaetoGro) to avoid depletion of these essential minerals.
- Some macro algae are allegedly not reliable (like Chaeto) or may cause other harm (like Caulerpa reproduction).
Is there anything else?

Speaking about pros, apart from obvious nutrient export and pH elevation.
Is the release of some proteins, amino acids, and carbohydrates to the water column really significant and meaningful?
In other words, would a decent-size refugium (10% display tank size) with strong light provide amounts that really make an impact and make supplementation redundant for a at least medium-demand tank?

 

[Sean Clark]

A 10% display sized refugium and reduced or no water changes is basicly describing the Triton system.

I would suggest that you look into tanks that are running the Triton system.

 

[KrisReef]

The theory is that with a large refuge the display can't produce enough waste to overcome working refuge. A tank plumbed to the ocean is the perfect model and that can work. Our refuges are too small to get identical results, but in theory it should work.

Things that impact the theory are
- the livestock in the DT?
- the amount and kinds of food and other additives that you might add to the DT/ system?
- the maitenance and water change regime that you employ in the system?

There must be other factors to consider, but I'm to lazy to type any more this Sunday afternoon!