Kalk slurry aeration

OP
OP
Garf

Garf

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Oct 23, 2020
Messages
6,776
Reaction score
7,578
Location
BEEFINGHAM
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Fair enough, stop quibbling over detail with myself and just use what I've got is what I hear.
For what it's worth I've been playing with lowering pH in an effort to see where the threshold is that negatively effects alkalinity consumption. I got it down to pH 8.15 around the clock and didn't notice anything negative. In fact, everything looked rather good. Yesterday I increased pH to 8.3 again to see if consumption increases and I just missed the subtle decrease in consumption due to lower pH. Cheers
 

Randy Holmes-Farley

Reef Chemist
View Badges
Joined
Sep 5, 2014
Messages
89,267
Reaction score
92,320
Location
Massachusetts, United States
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Thank you for answering, but, my understanding was from a materials standpoint, NaOH is more potent and would be more effective at scrubbing co2.

Also, when I said above something about taking the caco3 and putting it in a calcium reactor I was not intending to actually do that as I don't want to run a calcium react and I'm not sure what I would do with all the calcium carbonate. Sprinkle in the sump in the crypt? I'd hate to waste.

I have a water filter housing I was intending to use for this scrubber purpose. Just curious if it's big enough to perhaps not have to fill weekly for a 60 gallons of water system.

Both sodium hydroxide and calcium hydroxide work, despite the mechanism being slightly different. Which is best may depend on lots of factors such as the concentration, flow rate, contact time and degree, and CO2 level in the air.
 

mikst

Active Member
View Badges
Joined
Apr 2, 2024
Messages
237
Reaction score
146
Location
Sacramento Area, California
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
For what it's worth I've been playing with lowering pH in an effort to see where the threshold is that negatively effects alkalinity consumption. I got it down to pH 8.15 around the clock and didn't notice anything negative. In fact, everything looked rather good. Yesterday I increased pH to 8.3 again to see if consumption increases and I just missed the subtle decrease in consumption due to lower pH. Cheers
That is very encouraging, thank you. Know what's even more frustrating? I tested my tap water the other day and it tests at like 8.5.

I know there are plenty of tanks out there that run 7.8 to 8.0 successfully. I will try to work with what ive got.
 

Randy Holmes-Farley

Reef Chemist
View Badges
Joined
Sep 5, 2014
Messages
89,267
Reaction score
92,320
Location
Massachusetts, United States
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
That is very encouraging, thank you. Know what's even more frustrating? I tested my tap water the other day and it tests at like 8.5.

I know there are plenty of tanks out there that run 7.8 to 8.0 successfully. I will try to work with what ive got.

What is that tap pH importance? Water supplies often push it up (mine is higher than that) to reduce release of lead and copper into drinking water from pipes. My local water supply raises the pH from 6.6-7.1 up to 9.6 using sodium carbonate.
 
OP
OP
Garf

Garf

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Oct 23, 2020
Messages
6,776
Reaction score
7,578
Location
BEEFINGHAM
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I increased pH to 8.3 again to see if consumption increases
I can report an increase in alkalinity consumption of 15 to 20% ish when running my tank at pH 8.3, compared to pH 8.15. This is obviously a long way from the 100% increase noted in experiments from a well known sales outlet when increasing pH from 7.8 to 8.3. Strangely they only reported a 39% increase in growth from this 100% increase of alkalinity consumption, I expect there may be a chemistry voodoo at play as this implies corals would be more efficient at lower pH than higher pH (CO2 perhaps). I also found it difficult that one of the 2 systems tested failed to show any increase in consumption. This was glossed over and put down to an algae infestation ruining the experiment, leaving a sample size of 1 tank.
 

drawman

2500 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Feb 27, 2016
Messages
3,695
Reaction score
3,572
Location
Florida
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I can report an increase in alkalinity consumption of 15 to 20% ish when running my tank at pH 8.3, compared to pH 8.15. This is obviously a long way from the 100% increase noted in experiments from a well known sales outlet when increasing pH from 7.8 to 8.3. Strangely they only reported a 39% increase in growth from this 100% increase of alkalinity consumption, I expect there may be a chemistry voodoo at play as this implies corals would be more efficient at lower pH than higher pH (CO2 perhaps). I also found it difficult that one of the 2 systems tested failed to show any increase in consumption. This was glossed over and put down to an algae infestation ruining the experiment, leaving a sample size of 1 tank.
I'm not saying that I trust this sales outlet but the difference may be due to the logarithmic scale of pH? A jump of 8.15 to 8.3 versus 7.8 to 8.3 is a very large difference. I never watched their video or test btw.
 
OP
OP
Garf

Garf

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Oct 23, 2020
Messages
6,776
Reaction score
7,578
Location
BEEFINGHAM
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Due to an "Incident" this morning whilst tinkering, I'm going to be finding out if there are detectable effects from plummeting pH from 8.3 to 7.75, quickly, via CO2 overdose.
 

Randy Holmes-Farley

Reef Chemist
View Badges
Joined
Sep 5, 2014
Messages
89,267
Reaction score
92,320
Location
Massachusetts, United States
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Due to an "Incident" this morning whilst tinkering, I'm going to be finding out if there are detectable effects from plummeting pH from 8.3 to 7.75, quickly, via CO2 overdose.

I had a similar incident when I experimented with dry ice in the sump. I noticed nothing particular in the display, but the CO2 was short lived.
 
OP
OP
Garf

Garf

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Oct 23, 2020
Messages
6,776
Reaction score
7,578
Location
BEEFINGHAM
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
I had a similar incident when I experimented with dry ice in the sump. I noticed nothing particular in the display, but the CO2 was short lived.
Nothing bad to report this morning. PH spent most of the photoperiod yesterday steadily climbing from 7.75 to the dizzying heights of 8.05, where it stayed all night. Alkalinity tested this morning as almost normal, so no rapid decline in Alk consumption, which I found interesting.
 

Randy Holmes-Farley

Reef Chemist
View Badges
Joined
Sep 5, 2014
Messages
89,267
Reaction score
92,320
Location
Massachusetts, United States
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Nothing bad to report this morning. PH spent most of the photoperiod yesterday steadily climbing from 7.75 to the dizzying heights of 8.05, where it stayed all night. Alkalinity tested this morning as almost normal, so no rapid decline in Alk consumption, which I found interesting.

Thanks for the info. :)
 

stambo3

Community Member
View Badges
Joined
Jun 16, 2023
Messages
81
Reaction score
23
Location
Bulgaria
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
pH of 8.3 this morning, where normally it’s dipped to 8.1 ish.

The lamp;

752CEA20-0E18-4AD8-AED7-B3DD14E95A3B.jpeg
Hello,
I see that the topic is very old, but could you provide a little more details about your design. In the picture I can't really understand how exactly you made your project. Thank you in advance!!!
 
OP
OP
Garf

Garf

5000 Club Member
View Badges
Joined
Oct 23, 2020
Messages
6,776
Reaction score
7,578
Location
BEEFINGHAM
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Hello,
I see that the topic is very old, but could you provide a little more details about your design. In the picture I can't really understand how exactly you made your project. Thank you in advance!!!
It's just bubbling air through an alkaline solution. The finer the bubbles, and longer the bubble path, the better it works but also increases maintenance. Since doing this test and measuring Alk consumption and pH on a more mature system, I see little to no evidence that the juice is worth the squeeze. I did have a few giggles on the way though :)
 

TOP 10 Trending Threads

WHAT AMOUNT OF LIVE ROCK AND SAND SHOULD BE PRIORITIZED FOR OPTIMAL BIODIVERSITY/FILTRATION?

  • 100% live rock + bagged sand

    Votes: 38 27.1%
  • 100% dry rock + 100% live sand

    Votes: 47 33.6%
  • 50/50 live/dry rock, 50/50 live/bagged sand

    Votes: 31 22.1%
  • 75% live rock, 25% live sand

    Votes: 14 10.0%
  • 25% live rock, 75% live sand

    Votes: 10 7.1%
Back
Top