Hydrogen Peroxide

[atoll]

I wish we had a better understanding as to what was actually happening, but I have no doubt they oxidise some organics... I need to point out I have edited my post from O3 to heavy oxygen. I also dose Fe as per Randys recipe and currently dose 3ml a day and never get a reading on my monthly ICPs, so in addition to my algae consuming it the oxydator could be affecting my Fe availability

And you don't notice any iron deficiency?

 

[Dan_P]

From Dan Underwood who did some testing of Oxydators with regards to free peroxide in the aquarium.
"The following was sent to me a while back.
Quote
"Dan Underwood, owner and operations of seahorsesource.com.

"As mentioned above, the Oxydators work by the catalyst reacting with the peroxide. This releases the gas inside the device and the gas O2 rises. As it expands. Using the recommend size oxydator and the recommended solution, I have not been able to get a peroxide reading in a tank. When I have increased the strength several times that of the recommendation, I did get peroxide readings. "

Unfortunately Dan does not say how many times the recommendation of peroxide was needed to get a residue reading. My guess it was at least 3 times. My own experiments although hardly scientific show I had to go to around 18% to achieve a negative affect in the DT.
I never use more than 12% and 2 catalysts in my 100 gallon that I feed at least 4 times a day and heavily with plenty of fish in. I currently use 12% peroxide and 2 catalysts in my
Oxydator A.

Other shortcomings of this experiment include not placing the device in a small amount of water to enable detection of the level leakage rate of unreacted peroxide and not measuring the amount of oxygen actually released per hour. A ratio of reacted v unreacted H2O2 leaving the device would be nice to know. At this point, this device strikes me as possibly being a placebo.

 

[Mortie31]

And you don't notice any iron deficiency?

I can’t get a reading so not sure if deficient or not, but my macro algae grows well. How can you tell iron deficiency?

 

[atoll]

Other shortcomings of this experiment include not placing the device in a small amount of water to enable detection of the level leakage rate of unreacted peroxide and not measuring the amount of oxygen actually released per hour. A ratio of reacted v unreacted H2O2 leaving the device would be nice to know. At this point, this device strikes me as possibly being a placebo.

A placebo. That's an interesting thought. I and many more have been using Oxydators for more years than many here have been on this earth and only witnessed good things using Oxydators. So proving or suggesting what we have experienced over all those years isnt really valid because we or somebody hasn't published scientific data means little to those who swear by them. The technology is proven and patented and what many see and witnessed counts to us. People mainly those who have never used an Oxydator can continue casting doubts on them but unless somebody does lots of scientific tests and proves what we are witnessing is a placebo effect then I don't see anybody removing them any day soon. My tank speaks for itself that that of many more, would my tank be any better off without an Oxydator, I don't think so, in fact I know it wouldn't.

 

[atoll]

I can’t get a reading so not sure if deficient or not, but my macro algae grows well. How can you tell iron deficiency?

One way to tell would be if your algae didn't grow well. Your algae needs iron so is getting it from somewhere.

 

[Mortie31]

Other shortcomings of this experiment include not placing the device in a small amount of water to enable detection of the level leakage rate of unreacted peroxide and not measuring the amount of oxygen actually released per hour. A ratio of reacted v unreacted H2O2 leaving the device would be nice to know. At this point, this device strikes me as possibly being a placebo.

I certainly wouldnt call them a placebo, maybe misunderstood, I’m not sure either way all I know is that I never get yellowing of my tank water i don’t run carbon or do regular water changes, for me there is no other thing in my system that could prevent this.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I can’t get a reading so not sure if deficient or not, but my macro algae grows well. How can you tell iron deficiency?

you can’t, except possibly by observation of organisms after dosing. Natural levels are too low to measure by kit or icp.

 

[Dr. Dendrostein]

I learned this the other day if you have hydrogen peroxide in a container 3% , forsake of argument in that container drop a lead Sinker the ones we use for fishing, the gas it will give off is oxygen pure oxygen. Pretty cool.

 

[atoll]

you can’t, except possibly by observation of organisms after dosing. Natural levels are too low to measure by kit or icp.

Hence why I asked about his algae as it's deterioration is a possible cause of iron deficiency. I have always dosed iron when running an ATS.
A few years back I didn't add iron and the algae in my ATS started to decline. I read about iron and followed a similar recipe to yours with the result the algae picked up and grew as normal. I have to harvest my Ulva intestinalis every 5 days now or it outgrows my scrubber. I harvested it today and got 390 grams just 5 days after my last harvest. I have amazing growth.

 

[atoll]

I learned this the other day if you have hydrogen peroxide in a container 3% , forsake of argument in that container drop a lead Sinker the ones we use for fishing, the gas it will give off is oxygen pure oxygen. Pretty cool.

Many metals will act as a catalysts but I would never recommend lead for obvious reasons.
A small amount of silver is reported to work well, in fact, the catalysts in the Oxydator contain silver as well as ceramic.

 

[Dr. Dendrostein]

Hence why I asked about his algae as it's deterioration is a possible cause of iron deficiency. I have always dosed iron when running an ATS.
A few years back I didn't add iron and the algae in my ATS started to decline. I read about iron and followed a similar recipe to yours with the result the algae picked up and grew as normal. I have to harvest my Ulva intestinalis every 5 days now or it outgrows my scrubber. I harvested it today and got 390 grams just 5 days after my last harvest. I have amazing growth.

I think we can eat it, can't we

 

[atoll]

I think we can eat too, can't we

Not sure what that means but I'll buy it. Am English and don't get many of the US slang sorry.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Not sure what that means but I'll buy it. Am English and don't get many of the US slang sorry.

that’s not the problem lol

 

[Dan_P]

I can’t get a reading so not sure if deficient or not, but my macro algae grows well. How can you tell iron deficiency?

A placebo. That's an interesting thought. I and many more have been using Oxydators for more years than many here have been on this earth and only witnessed good things using Oxydators. So proving or suggesting what we have experienced over all those years isnt really valid because we or somebody hasn't published scientific data means little to those who swear by them. The technology is proven and patented and what many see and witnessed counts to us. People mainly those who have never used an Oxydator can continue casting doubts on them but unless somebody does lots of scientific tests and proves what we are witnessing is a placebo effect then I don't see anybody removing them any day soon. My tank speaks for itself that that of many more, would my tank be any better off without an Oxydator, I don't think so, in fact I know it wouldn't.

No offense meant. I understand my skepticism could get on anyones nerves.

A patent does not necessarily prove the validly of claims for an invention, but protects them. I believe what people tell me about what they observed, e.g., I put in an Oxydator and then observed X. As for the claim of a cause and effect relationship between the Oxydator and observed effect, that is where we disagree.

The scientific data that I would consider reasonable to back up the Oxydator claims is fairly straight forward to collect: the rate of H2O2 consumption, the leakage rate and the rate of oxygen production. There is something more difficult to test for but maybe just as interesting is the rate of formation of the very reactive hydroxyl radical. With this data, one could then determine whether there is even a chance that the Oxydator could do what is claimed or produce the effects observed by owners.

Dan

 

[atoll]

No offense meant. I understand my skepticism could get on anyones nerves.

A patent does not necessarily prove the validly of claims for an invention, but protects them. I believe what people tell me about what they observed, e.g., I put in an Oxydator and then observed X. As for the claim of a cause and effect relationship between the Oxydator and observed effect, that is where we disagree.

The scientific data that I would consider reasonable to back up the Oxydator claims is fairly straight forward to collect: the rate of H2O2 consumption, the leakage rate and the rate of oxygen production. There is something more difficult to test for but maybe just as interesting is the rate of formation of the very reactive hydroxyl radical. With this data, one could then determine whether there is even a chance that the Oxydator could do what is claimed or produce the effects observed by owners.

Dan

What we appear to disagree with is many people observe the same results but you cast doubt on them because you haven't seen any scientific study to back them all up.

 

[atoll]

that’s not the problem lol

In that case, enjoy your christmas dinner lol.

 

[Dan_P]

What we appear to disagree with is many people observe the same results but you cast doubt on them because you haven't seen any scientific study to back them all up.

You sum up my position nicely if we add a clarification around what I am doubting.

I believe what people are observing and report about their aquarium, but I doubt their conclusion that the Oxydator is the explanation. This doubt arises from the size and design of the Oxydator.

 

[atoll]

You sum up my position nicely if we add a clarification around what I am doubting.

I believe what people are observing and report about their aquarium, but I doubt their conclusion that the Oxydator is the explanation. This doubt arises from the size and design of the Oxydator.

There are always sceptics but unless the use of Oxydators can be disproved then the many people who use them and witness what they observe in thier aquariums then we will continue to believe our own eyes and along with using a redox meter show the increase in water clarity among others.
Now if somebody wishes to disprove Oxydator's and what people see and are convinced it is due to thier use I am sure we will take note. Most don't have either the scientific knowledge or equipment to prove either way. Perhaps there is scientific evidence one way or another and the manufacturers themselves may have scientific evidence to prove thier claims and what we witness. Oxydators have been around at least 35 years probably much longer used by thousands in all kinds of aquariums esp in Europe so the evidence scientifically may be out there.

 

[lavoisier]

Its Christmas so I'm feeling a little philosophical this morning but for what it is worth I'll put this out there. Science (we used to call it Natural Philosophy) is inductive in its nature because we observe particular events. Its is not deductive logic and so certainty is elusive at best. The arguments we make (theories) are stronger or weaker, not certain.

In our home, hobby, enormously complex aquariums, there are few rigorous controls so our particular observations must always be tenuous in regards to other's tanks. A number of us make similar observations, we share them in our wonderful forums, and so we begin to formulate theories. The more observations the stronger the argument becomes but without rigorous controls the argument must in its nature always be weak when making general statements. This is not to say a weak argument is not true but unintended consequences can be quite damaging to our systems. Hence, the participation of folks like Randy and our other chemical engineers with years and years of observations behind them, are a great gift to amateurs such as myself (I teach classical Rhetoric and Great Books) who are seeking ever more stable and efficient reef tanks.

I am so grateful to everyone who is willing to share their experiences and their tanks. Merry Christmas and keep the observations coming...

 

[atoll]

Its Christmas so I'm feeling a little philosophical this morning but for what it is worth I'll put this out there. Science (we used to call it Natural Philosophy) is inductive in its nature because we observe particular events. Its is not deductive logic and so certainty is elusive at best. The arguments we make (theories) are stronger or weaker, not certain.

In our home, hobby, enormously complex aquariums, there are few rigorous controls so our particular observations must always be tenuous in regards to other's tanks. A number of us make similar observations, we share them in our wonderful forums, and so we begin to formulate theories. The more observations the stronger the argument becomes but without rigorous controls the argument must in its nature always be weak when making general statements. This is not to say a weak argument is not true but unintended consequences can be quite damaging to our systems. Hence, the participation of folks like Randy and our other chemical engineers with years and years of observations behind them, are a great gift to amateurs such as myself (I teach classical Rhetoric and Great Books) who are seeking ever more stable and efficient reef tanks.

I am so grateful to everyone who is willing to share their experiences and their tanks. Merry Christmas and keep the observations coming...

Of course and we should also note simple hobiest have made many discoveries in this hobby esp when you go back 30/40 years ago most with little scientific knowledge, equipment or know how. The hobby is driven my the hobiest to which others serve. I would like to know if mine and that of so many more observations are a result of what we believe but in truth to many scientific proof is secondary. We aren't talking blind faith after all but the observations of doing something and seeing the results of what we believe we have done. It would be fully to dismiss the experience of probably thousands if not hundreds not that you are dismissing it of course. We aren't even talking some new technology with Oxydators but something that's been in the hobby for decades and respected by so many people. So, let somebody disprove thier usefulness or reasoning, in the meantime let's share the popcorn and see if anybody is prepared to investigate the time etc in proving the worth of Oxydators one way or another. Until then all we have to go on is the experience of all those people who firmly believe in thier worth.