New sulfur denitrator working great!

[legionofdoon]

Sorry didn't realize that 4fxsk would be censored.

 

[legionofdoon]

Sorry didn't realize that 4fxsk would be censored.

***

 

[Belgian Anthias]

Proof of me being wrong? I’ve been wrong about a tremendous number of things in my life, but I don’t recall ever being wrong about anything relating to sulfur denitrators.

Let’s ignore my opinion for now, and assume I’m ignorant of anything relating to sulfur in a reef tank.

You claimed that every biofilm in a reef tank produces elemental sulfur. Why?

What is the evidence that every biofilm in a reef tank produces elemental sulfur?

what is the evidence that many biofilms in a reef tank produce elemental sulfur?

what is the evidence that ANY biofilms in a reef tank produce elemental sulfur?

Note that I am not asking if there is a biofilm somewhere in some unusual part of the ocean that produces elemental sulfur (like a hydrothermal vent, or a cave, or a on a metal oil well pipe, or deep in sediments) but some evidence that every biofilm on a coral reef does, or that many biofilms in a coral reef do would be nice to see and would support your suggestion.

We had the discussion before. all info is available for reading.

Because i have explained to you beforei how elemental sulfur is produced in a chemical process called "partial H2S oxidition " your remark suggesting hydrothermal vents shows you do not accept the basics of the BADES process taking place in a normal nitrifying biofilm,, a process taking place in an alkaline pH range; But it is posible in hydrothermal vents because not all hydrotermal vents in the ocean are accidic, So, BADES may take place but only if nitrate and or nitrite production takes place, a process needing oxygen. Coming from a scientist this is a very poor argumentation.
In the past you also questioned the fact elemental sulfur is oxydized by T,denitrificans only when using nitrate or nitrite; You claimed it also used free oxygen and did not accept the prove you where wrong. That time you argument BADES was not safe to use, having no experience using BADES, based on your believe and obviously not on research about the issue. I thank you for this discussion because you being a scientist and chemist had convinced me and made me doubt my findings. it made me a better researcher, and my doubts where taken away finding 5 papers proving you where wrong. T;denitificans seemed that time to be one of the most researched bacterium, it was not difficult to find the correct answers. Since then a try to find at least 3 sources before using it as a reference;

Let me be the one to have doubts about your arguments and now and in the future I leave it to you to prove the obvious is not true.

i do not claim a thing. I explain how and why, and provide the source with the references. Readers can make up there own mind and use the information for personal use.
One does not need any scientific prove to know BADES does NOT take place in every biofilm present in an aquarium. Why asking for prove? Did I said the opposite? But BADES may take place in ALMOST every biofilm present in the aquarium. Bades may take place in all biofilms where HS is produced and nitrate and or nitrite is present. In ALMOST every biofilm present in an aquarium some HS is produced. BADES is one of the many essential processes needed to keep a biofilm healthy., it helps neutralizing the side effects of anaerobic remineralisation; Maybe you do not believe anaerobic remineralization takes place in nitrifying biofilms, well, do the research before using arguments without any logical or scientific backgrounds.

The point to make is that anoxic conditions must NOT be created for BADES to take place, It can take place anywhere and everywhere in the aquarium.

As science is based on questions, theories and suggestions made we do need researchers to give answered, to find out if those theories and suggestions can be backed up. We do make that information available; i never will say to someone his argument does not stick or something he claims is not correct if i can not bring prove., i never will come up with an explanation completely besides the question, it is very not scientific.

Not a politician, a scientist. HUGE difference. Politicians say whatever they want and hope it sticks.

Yes, scientists nit pick. That's EXACTLY how science works. False claims or hyperbole to make a point, even if the underlying point is correct, are unacceptable to me.

My point was to ensure claims are justified. Not just the overall idea, such as that sulfur denitrators work.

I'm sorry if you do not like it, but I wont ignore things that are posted that I do not believe are correct. If you believe they are correct, then of course you should fire back.

if i, being a reasearcher apply your opinion being a scientist on your previous posts, i must find them unacceptable.

 

[legionofdoon]

Case in point.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

In the past you also questioned the fact elemental sulfur is oxydized by T,denitrificans only when using nitrate or nitrite; You claimed it also used free oxygen and did not accept the prove you where wrong. That time you argument BADES was not safe to use, having no experience using BADES, based on your believe and obviously not on research about the issue.

Before I go ballistic at several misleading things you are attributing to me, I challenge you to show where I ever claimed a sulfur denitrator was "not safe to use".

Seriously, did you just make that up? If not, show exactly what I said and where I said it, or retract that claim, I cannot imagine making a claim that they were unsafe (assuming they are used properly), but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt enough to ask you to show what I said.

You have been a member here since 2017. I presume you are not looking to something that happened before you joined. I have certainly not thought they were unsafe at any time in the past 20 years.

In 2015, I published at reef2Reef one of my nitrate articles that clearly describes sulfur denitrators and that the only concern is that alkalinity is depleted, or if you pass the effluent over aragonite, calcium may rise. I had a similar article in 2003 that said essentially the same thing: https://reefs.com/magazine/aquarium-chemistry-nitrate-in-the-reef-aquarium/

Thus, there are nearly 20 years of my articles that show how they work and NOT ONCE stating they are unsafe.

Here's exactly what I did say, do say, and stand by:

Nitrate in the Reef Aquarium - REEFEDITION

Nitrate is an ion that has long dogged aquarists. It is typically formed in aquaria through the digestion of foods, and in many aquaria it builds up and can be difficult to keep at natural levels. In the past, many aquarists performed water changes with nitrate reduction as one of the primary...

www.reefedition.com

from it:

Sulfur Denitrators

In these systems, bacteria use elemental sulfur and produce N2 from the sulfur and nitrate according the following equation (or something similar):

2 H2O + 5 S + 6 NO3– → 3 N2 + 5 SO42- + 4 H+

The production of acid (H+) in this reactor can tend to reduce the aquarium alkalinity. It has also been suggested to pass the effluent of such a reactor through a bed of aragonite to use the acid (H+) produced to dissolve the calcium carbonate, and thereby provide calcium and alkalinity to the aquarium. While that is a fine idea, it doesn’t add much calcium and alkalinity to most aquaria.

To estimate the magnitude of the effect, we start with a liberal estimate of how much nitrate might be removed. Say 10 ppm of nitrate per week.

10 ppm nitrate = 0.16 mmole/L of nitrate

Since 4 moles of H+ are produced for every 6 moles of nitrate consumed, this will produce

0.107 mmoles/L of H+ per week

How much calcium this could produce?

Assume that it takes one proton to dissolve one calcium carbonate:

CaCO3 + H+ → Ca2+ + HCO3–

Clearly, this is a substantial overestimate because much of the acid will be used up driving the pH down to the point where CaCO3 can even begin to dissolve. Consequently, we have an upside limit of 0.107 mmoles of Ca2+ per week. Since calcium weighs 40 mg/mmol, that’s 4.3 ppm Ca2+ per week.

For comparison, an aquarist adding 2% of the tank volume in saturated limewater daily is adding on the order of 16 ppm of calcium per day. Consequently, this method may not be especially useful for maintaining calcium. Additionally, the acid produced will have a long term lowering effect on the alkalinity. In fact, it is double dipping on the alkalinity depletion since alkalinity is consumed when the nitrate is produced, and again when it is removed in the denitrator. So if you use a sulfur denitrator, be sure to monitor the alkalinity in the aquarium.

 

[Tang22]

@Belgian Anthias if I wanted to try this how would I?
Can I just put a bed of this sulfur substrate in my sump? Or in a few mesh bags and expect it to do its thing? what is the ratio of substrate to NO3 reduction? As this won't be in a dedicated reactor will this also lead to a lower alkalinity? Can I mix the substrate with ARM media to help buffer any potential PH? drop?

A description of a practical use of BADES in a reef aquarium would be helpful.

 

[c-horse]

@Belgian Anthias if I wanted to try this how would I?
Can I just put a bed of this sulfur substrate in my sump? Or in a few mesh bags and expect it to do its thing? what is the ratio of substrate to NO3 reduction? As this won't be in a dedicated reactor will this also lead to a lower alkalinity? Can I mix the substrate with ARM media to help buffer any potential PH? drop?

A description of a practical use of BADES in a reef aquarium would be helpful.

I am not Belgian Anthias, but will answer your question anyway, since I use the BADES system once I figured it out. You want to put the sulfur in a mesh bag, along with any calcium source you wish to. This is so that you can pull the mesh bag out and rinse it once a month or so. It will still deplete alkalinity. You can mixed it with other media, but the only one that is useful is so calcium source.

I have my sulfur pellets is a mesh bag mixed with coral skeleton rubble, my calcium source. It is in a my sump located at a high flow rate spot. Once a month I pull it out and rinse it under tap water, then return it to its spot. Sometime I smell a little of the sulfide smell.

 

[kboogie]

Before I go ballistic at several misleading things you are attributing to me, I challenge you to show where I ever claimed a sulfur denitrator was "not safe to use".

Seriously, did you just make that up? If not, show exactly what I said and where I said it, or retract that claim, I cannot imagine making a claim that they were unsafe (assuming they are used properly), but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt enough to ask you to show what I said.

You have been a member here since 2017. I presume you are not looking to something that happened before you joined. I have certainly not thought they were unsafe at any time in the past 20 years.

In 2015, I published at reef2Reef one of my nitrate articles that clearly describes sulfur denitrators and that the only concern is that alkalinity is depleted, or if you pass the effluent over aragonite, calcium may rise. I had a similar article in 2003 that said essentially the same thing: https://reefs.com/magazine/aquarium-chemistry-nitrate-in-the-reef-aquarium/

Thus, there are nearly 20 years of my articles that show how they work and NOT ONCE stating they are unsafe.

Here's exactly what I did say, do say, and stand by:

Nitrate in the Reef Aquarium - REEFEDITION

Nitrate is an ion that has long dogged aquarists. It is typically formed in aquaria through the digestion of foods, and in many aquaria it builds up and can be difficult to keep at natural levels. In the past, many aquarists performed water changes with nitrate reduction as one of the primary...

www.reefedition.com

from it:

Sulfur Denitrators

In these systems, bacteria use elemental sulfur and produce N2 from the sulfur and nitrate according the following equation (or something similar):

2 H2O + 5 S + 6 NO3– → 3 N2 + 5 SO42- + 4 H+

The production of acid (H+) in this reactor can tend to reduce the aquarium alkalinity. It has also been suggested to pass the effluent of such a reactor through a bed of aragonite to use the acid (H+) produced to dissolve the calcium carbonate, and thereby provide calcium and alkalinity to the aquarium. While that is a fine idea, it doesn’t add much calcium and alkalinity to most aquaria.

To estimate the magnitude of the effect, we start with a liberal estimate of how much nitrate might be removed. Say 10 ppm of nitrate per week.

10 ppm nitrate = 0.16 mmole/L of nitrate

Since 4 moles of H+ are produced for every 6 moles of nitrate consumed, this will produce

0.107 mmoles/L of H+ per week

How much calcium this could produce?

Assume that it takes one proton to dissolve one calcium carbonate:

CaCO3 + H+ → Ca2+ + HCO3–

Clearly, this is a substantial overestimate because much of the acid will be used up driving the pH down to the point where CaCO3 can even begin to dissolve. Consequently, we have an upside limit of 0.107 mmoles of Ca2+ per week. Since calcium weighs 40 mg/mmol, that’s 4.3 ppm Ca2+ per week.

For comparison, an aquarist adding 2% of the tank volume in saturated limewater daily is adding on the order of 16 ppm of calcium per day. Consequently, this method may not be especially useful for maintaining calcium. Additionally, the acid produced will have a long term lowering effect on the alkalinity. In fact, it is double dipping on the alkalinity depletion since alkalinity is consumed when the nitrate is produced, and again when it is removed in the denitrator. So if you use a sulfur denitrator, be sure to monitor the alkalinity in the aquarium.

This was a great read! I learned so much!