The Answer to why NOPOX contains methanol

[flampton]

I've noticed there's a lot of confusion of what NOPOX is and why it contains methanol.

So first not getting into exact ratios but the product is acetic acid (vinegar) and denatured ethanol.

Denatured alcohol has compounds added to it to make it toxic if consumed. Sometimes a bittering agent will be added as well to signal this toxicity. So the toxic compound in this case is methanol (don't know if it has a bittering agent). When we consume methanol it is converted to formaldehyde. This formaldehyde will cause protein cross-linking and death to the cells receiving high concentrations. Blindness and death are common results to poisoning. The only treatment is more ethanol! A hospital will get you drunk because you use ethanol before methanol, and hopefully you'll pee out the methanol before it gets used. Pretty nifty thinking!!)

So back on topic Redsea uses a methanol denatured ethanol for two reasons. 1) they would have to pay liquor taxes to the corresponding states in the US 2) they couldn't sell it to underage users in the US

Even when we buy pure ethanol for the laboratory we still have to pay liquor taxes!!

Oh and quick history is that denaturation was mainstreamed during prohibition. The government required all industrial ethanol produced to be denatured. This was supposedly to keep people from drinking it but unfortunately a lot of alcoholics did not truly understand the toxicity...

 

[taricha]

That's cool to know.
In general, methanol is considered a harmless carbon source for a tank, I think. But we're thoroughly aware of the toxicity to humans - not just ingestion, skin contact too.
Why are humans vulnerable but the organisms in our tank aren't?

 

[flampton]

That's cool to know.
In general, methanol is considered a harmless carbon source for a tank, I think. But we're thoroughly aware of the toxicity to humans - not just ingestion, skin contact too.
Why are humans vulnerable but the organisms in our tank aren't?

Another instance of dose makes the poison. The methanol added to the aquarium will be below the level of acute toxicity. And pretty much everything will run into some methanol. We have varying amounts in our bloodstream because of specific bacteria in our gut will ferment dietary fibers and release methanol.

This methanol will turn into formaldehyde but in such low concentrations the damage will be repaired without issue. However it's when we start pushing this concentration higher that we may run into trouble. Such as using it a lab without safety precautions or drinking it.

 

[ScottR]

Giving this a bump. Useful info. Thanks @flampton

 

[Dennis Cartier]

In the original thread on RC, my contribution was to provide info on a marine stove fuel that you could use that was 90% ethanol, 10% methanol and a touch of blue foodsafe food colouring. It was way cheaper to use than vodka.

I confrmed with a chemist at the manufacturer both the percentages and the reason for the methanol (denaturing).

Dennis

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

As soon as the NOPOX ingredients were determined by NMR and published in 2014 (acetic acid, ethanol, methanol (2%), isopropanol (1.2%), it was evident to me, the professor doing the analysis, and others following the analysis thread that the reason for having methanol and isopropanol was likely to allow use of cheap denatured ethanol.

IMO, folks should not assume that there is a husbandry reason to want to add either the methanol or the isopropanol into the mix. It's a fine experiment, but folks should not assume it is done for an aquarium benefit.

 

[Cnidoblast]

Many sources of carbon can be used in a tank (powdered sugar anyone??) - Products should be judged on the most abundant carbon source in them - Nopox being ethanol and acetic acid

 

[taricha]

IMO, folks should not assume that there is a husbandry reason to want to add either the methanol or the isopropanol into the mix. It's a fine experiment, but folks should not assume it is done for an aquarium benefit.

When I run across something strange in a hobby product, the optimist in me usually assumes that the manufacturer intentionally did it as a clever solution to some problem.

Then later I see something that convinces me it's not, and that my skepticism level needs to be higher.

Many sources of carbon can be used in a tank (powdered sugar anyone??)

Fun rabbit hole I stumbled across a while back...
Take tank water, put it in aerated bottles spiked with PO4 and NO3. give each bottle a different carbon source (equal amounts of C): vodka, vinegar, glucose, whatever.
The visible structure and amounts of biomass that grows in each is different, like naked eyeball different.

(I suspect if we looked closely, we'd find Carbon sources are consumed quite differently in a system)

 

[GlassMunky]

Many sources of carbon can be used in a tank (powdered sugar anyone??) - Products should be judged on the most abundant carbon source in them - Nopox being ethanol and acetic acid

I remember years ago “VSV” was the carbon dose of choice for a lot of folks
Vodka Sugar Vinegar

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I remember years ago “VSV” was the carbon dose of choice for a lot of folks
Vodka Sugar Vinegar

Sugar faired poorly in my tank. Corals browned up.

 

[Cnidoblast]

Sugar faired poorly in my tank. Corals browned up.

I wonder if directly dosing glucose powder dissolved in tank water would be better than the sucrose + whatever else they put into the domino sugar boxes

 

[flampton]

I wonder if directly dosing glucose powder dissolved in tank water would be better than the sucrose + whatever else they put into the domino sugar boxes

Yes I use glucose in my carbon concoction. Sucrose imo is problematic because of various metabolic reasons.