Reasons for Doing Water Changes?

[Lasse]

What should these folks do? In these cases, regular water changes may well have limited the peak levels attained, and ozone may not reduce them.

In this sense, it is insurance.

High Si levels
https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/high-si-levels.317519/#post-3922521

/

In my case (high Si levels) I´m rather sure that the readings are correct and I´m rather clear why I have these high levels. Its probably caused by using Siporax in anaerobic environments. The levels slowly declines but are still very high. However – I can´t see any apparently negative effects of it. It could still be negative with these high levels but nothing that I know for sure.

For the moment – I do not use regular water changes – but I test with Triton tests and I have built my system in a way so the biological part is maximized- I use a fuge, DSB, sponges, bacteria and so on. I also try to minimize toxic organics with the use of a Oxidator (do the same job as Ozon).

Its also known from terrestrial plants that they can minimize some very toxic organic substances – if macros in my fuge can do the same – I do not know – but its not unlikely.

The Triton test gives not the answer 42 but it’s a useable tool in reefing. If I´m not able to use a IPC test – I probably should use water changes more regular as an insurance – but if it is the best way – I do not know.

With water changes in saltwater – another question arise – the purity of the commercial salts blend and the long-time quality of them. When you try to discuss WC as a method contra WC as a tool –argue about concentrations of toxic waste in the water will come as fast as some tweets appear when something happen a Friday night in Sweden. But we seldom hear anything about the quality of the salt mixes that we normally knows very little about. Its also a risk – and it has happens that bad batches has been sold – at least I Sweden

Also – the food we give our fishes – most of the modern fish foods is developed from commercial recipe (fish farming) and one of the metals that’s normally is high in these foods is zinc but also other heavy metals.

For me – with the tank I have now – its important to know what I lack and if there is any up build of known and measurable compounds – A ICP test is the best tool for that as it is now. Even if it has its limitations. Even if I´m should use WC as a regular method – I will continue to send in an ICP test each 3 months.

WC for me is a tool, ICP test is a tool, fuge is a tool, DSB is a tool, skimmer is a tool and so one. The method is observation and to combine what I see with my measurements.

I think that all of us that has been in the hobby for a while agree on that the first year of a reef aquarium is a type of maturation process. After a year – things start to happen. I´m always start my aquarium very fast and with the goal that speed up the biological process as fast as possible but I still believe that it will take a year or two before everything is stable. The water does not only content chemical active compounds – its also content biological active compounds – waste and metabolites from breakdown processes and other biological processes. It take time to build this up in the water. IMO – to use the WC as regular method to get a good water quality (with all meanings of the word) is not the best way. I have never doing any regular WC in my aquariums in the start-up phase – it means the first 1 – 3 months.

And my use of the ICP test as a tool also means that I test when things looks good – not only when its look bad. I need some references how it was when I was satisfied with the aquaria in order to judge what to do when it looks bad.

Sincerely Lasse

 

[MnFish1]

You mean something we can't measure? I can understand that argument, but at the same time it feels wrong to do all that water changes for something you don't know, if all the corals looks well. If all the ICP parameters looks good and the tank isn't well, then I probably would do a large water change, sure. Do you have any tip for other things to measure other then ICP and all the usual stuff? Maybe could get some from the university to check our water Sorry about the English, this would be so much easier to write about in Swedish for me..

/ David

I agree with this - except often waiting until something 'looks bad' and then trying to adjust things - especially in a smaller tank (you guys have a large system) for the average person may be a recipe for disaster.

I would be interested to hear from some of the people with 'longstanding no water change tanks' - how newly added coral/fish adjust to those systems and how biodiverse they are.

Another variable people don't consider is that bioload/types of coral/fish in a tank where water is not being changed. Having one anemone and 2 clownfish (a ridiculous proposition) in a 100 gallon tank may not need to have much water changed. Having several fish/various corals (lps/soft/sps) in the same tank may be a different issue. The amount of filtration needed for each tank is also important. If I have a 100 gallon display tank and a 500 gallon sump - I dont need as many water changes. One thing I haven't seen clearly in the 'no water change aquariums is an estimate of the time required, the amount of filtration (carbon/ozone/etc). that they are using. Some of these filtration systems may just not be realistic for the average hobbiest.

I guess for me it comes down to 'just because something can be done (no water changes)', does that make it a better method? (cost/workload/complexity).

 

[Lasse]

My tank has been going for 10 months without a normal WC (only the amount that Balling give. The tank is 16 months old and i did two WC the first 6 months) I do not know if its long enough and I do not either know what you think of my biodiversity. Its only around 90 gallon in the display tank, 10 gallon in the fuge and around 25 gallon in the sump. You can found my tank here. In this tank I introduce a pipefish last week and for once - it seems like it will work out well

But I do not rule out WC but I prefer to do them when I need to do them. After the next Triton test - I will decide if i´m doing one or not.

Here is two pictures from the display part of Davids (sallstrom) 45 000 l tank - it has run for 4 years without regular WC. Some smaller because of backflushing sandfilters - but no regular

​

(David does not know about these pictures )

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Lasse]

One more - just to show the diversity

​

Sincerely Lasse

 

[MnFish1]

One more - just to show the diversity

​

Sincerely Lasse

Beautiful tanks yours and his. Interested to know how many backwashes of the sand filter are done - and how much water is involved (probably not much). By diversity - I meant ablility to keep soft/lps and SPS together. As well as a larger load of fish/inverts. certainly - though a great tank (both of them)

 

[MnFish1]

Still, people performing regular water changes are experiencing those same problems. The partial regular water changes are only partially reducing the problem. Just how much water needs to be changed on a weekly basis to negate this problem? 50% ?

No - there are actually calculators out there that tell you how much water you need to change - to reduce/increase a certain element. Here is one of them https://www.hamzasreef.com/Contents...Contents/Calculators/EffectiveWaterChange.php

Its probably best to do any changes slowly in a reef tank anyway - right.

 

[MnFish1]

A very interesting discussion , unfortunately with a lot of attacking to Tbyz. But I am now used to the fact, that in any reef discussion , whenever someone comment "out of the box" will receive "flames" . I was doing regular weekly water changes for a long time , with NSW, just because everybody do them. After gaining some experience, see other successfull tanks with rare or no water changes, better understanding reef keeping generally, start measuring and dossing potassium additionally to KH, CA and Mg, adding also TM trace elements to 3 part ,I am now doing sparse water changes of 15% in winter and 2 big ones of 40% during the summer with the same results as earlier, and if I could make ICP tests I would probably make just 2 big water changes /year. If I haven't easy access to NSW I don't know what route I would have followed, because how can you trust artificial salts as far trace elements? If they can not keep constant concentrations to the major elements how can you trust them for trace elements? And they add whatever they consider crucial?

When asking someone to back up their assertions becomes an 'attack' or a 'flame', well I dont know. In any case - I dont speak polish - so I can't interpret your table - but what are you sparse 15 % winter changes (how often). Whats in your tank - what other filtration/export do you use? Thanks

 

[Larry L]

The Triton test gives not the answer 42

 

[Newb73]

In my case (high Si levels) I´m rather sure that the readings are correct and I´m rather clear why I have these high levels. Its probably caused by using Siporax in anaerobic environments. The levels slowly declines but are still very high. However – I can´t see any apparently negative effects of it. It could still be negative with these high levels but nothing that I know for sure.

For the moment – I do not use regular water changes – but I test with Triton tests and I have built my system in a way so the biological part is maximized- I use a fuge, DSB, sponges, bacteria and so on. I also try to minimize toxic organics with the use of a Oxidator (do the same job as Ozon).

Its also known from terrestrial plants that they can minimize some very toxic organic substances – if macros in my fuge can do the same – I do not know – but its not unlikely.

The Triton test gives not the answer 42 but it’s a useable tool in reefing. If I´m not able to use a IPC test – I probably should use water changes more regular as an insurance – but if it is the best way – I do not know.

With water changes in saltwater – another question arise – the purity of the commercial salts blend and the long-time quality of them. When you try to discuss WC as a method contra WC as a tool –argue about concentrations of toxic waste in the water will come as fast as some tweets appear when something happen a Friday night in Sweden. But we seldom hear anything about the quality of the salt mixes that we normally knows very little about. Its also a risk – and it has happens that bad batches has been sold – at least I Sweden

Also – the food we give our fishes – most of the modern fish foods is developed from commercial recipe (fish farming) and one of the metals that’s normally is high in these foods is zinc but also other heavy metals.

For me – with the tank I have now – its important to know what I lack and if there is any up build of known and measurable compounds – A ICP test is the best tool for that as it is now. Even if it has its limitations. Even if I´m should use WC as a regular method – I will continue to send in an ICP test each 3 months.

WC for me is a tool, ICP test is a tool, fuge is a tool, DSB is a tool, skimmer is a tool and so one. The method is observation and to combine what I see with my measurements.

I think that all of us that has been in the hobby for a while agree on that the first year of a reef aquarium is a type of maturation process. After a year – things start to happen. I´m always start my aquarium very fast and with the goal that speed up the biological process as fast as possible but I still believe that it will take a year or two before everything is stable. The water does not only content chemical active compounds – its also content biological active compounds – waste and metabolites from breakdown processes and other biological processes. It take time to build this up in the water. IMO – to use the WC as regular method to get a good water quality (with all meanings of the word) is not the best way. I have never doing any regular WC in my aquariums in the start-up phase – it means the first 1 – 3 months.

And my use of the ICP test as a tool also means that I test when things looks good – not only when its look bad. I need some references how it was when I was satisfied with the aquaria in order to judge what to do when it looks bad.

Sincerely Lasse

I suggest you look at the QA testing procedures done on Fritz pro salt.

 

[Newb73]

I don't get the "water change is too hard" logic.

If you set your system right, a water change is literally one of the easiest things to do.

I flip a switch, make 40 gallons of RODI using my 150gpd BRS unit, it shuts off by itself and sends me a text. I turn off the line, put the recommended salt in with a mixing pump. Drop a few drops on a digital reader, and my DOS does the rest changing 3.5gpd. 11 days later, I flip the switch to fill it again.

Changing filter socks is harder.

Way easier than sending off a test, running several dosers for trace elements, and doing all that extra testing and harvesting.

The Red Sea method is way easier...amd you can still harvest a ton of macro with large grow lights and dose trace elements.

How do I do it safely without all the testing? I dose 1/3rd to 1/2 the standard dose and there are no worries about overdosing with 40% water change per month.

 

[Lasse]

Do not misunderstand my pictures from Sjöfartsmuseet Akvariet (Sallstroms workplace) and the link to my build. With them - I do not say - do this way and you get these results. You can achieve exactly the same results with regular WC – no doubt of this. I´m only want to show examples of aquarium there WC is a tool not a method.

The assumption that we do not use regular WC as a method because we are lazy is total wrong Regular WC as a methods is much less work – believe me.

There are other reason why – will come back to that later

Sincerely Lasse

 

[Sallstrom]

Beautiful tanks yours and his. Interested to know how many backwashes of the sand filter are done - and how much water is involved (probably not much). By diversity - I meant ablility to keep soft/lps and SPS together. As well as a larger load of fish/inverts. certainly - though a great tank (both of them)

Thanks! About the sand pressure filter:
In this system (this aquarium plus some coral propagation systems, algae fuge, 3 smaller tanks with cuttlefish = ca 12000 liters) we have a small sand pressure filter. We backwash twice a week, so its about 200 liters water change a week, about 7 % water change a month. We could reuse the water from the backwash, but right now we don't have room to treat that water. So instead we choose to fill up with newly mixed saltwater.

It's mostly SPS in this system, but also some LPS and soft corals. And cuttlefish Haven't used ozon for 3 years I think. And no active carbon yet.

/ David

 

[dz6t]

Great system you have there.
Can you please give more detail about your sand pressure filter? Thanks

 

[ksed]

Thanks! About the sand pressure filter:
In this system (this aquarium plus some coral propagation systems, algae fuge, 3 smaller tanks with cuttlefish = ca 12000 liters) we have a small sand pressure filter. We backwash twice a week, so its about 200 liters water change a week, about 7 % water change a month. We could reuse the water from the backwash, but right now we don't have room to treat that water. So instead we choose to fill up with newly mixed saltwater.

It's mostly SPS in this system, but also some LPS and soft corals. And cuttlefish Haven't used ozon for 3 years I think. And no active carbon yet.

/ David

How do you maintain water clarity without activated carbon and no ozone? Usually yellow tannins will begin to accumulate.

 

[Sallstrom]

Great system you have there.
Can you please give more detail about your sand pressure filter? Thanks

Thanks!
It's a sand pressure filter for pools. Water pumps in from the top, down through a bed of silica sand, and out to the tank again. Like a external filter for fresh water tank, but bigger and with sand. When the pressure goes up you need to backwash. Then you change the direction of the water flow so the water goes through the sand from the bottom and the water goes out in an other pipe to the drain. Thats why we loose some water and need to replace it. And it's a particle filter only. Maybe some biological activity, I don't know. And it's no problems with silica sand as long as it's not anaerobic

How do you maintain water clarity without activated carbon and no ozone? Usually yellow tannins will begin to accumulate.

I don't think it looks yellow so far, thats why we don't use any of thoose. But we have some ozone I can install on one of the skimmers if we need it. But otherwise I don't know any other trick Well, we use a little phosphate remover(Fe), mayby that does some, I don't know.

Feels like I'm stealing the tread a bit now. Sorry about that. I will start a tread about this tank soon

And this is a tank where we do water changes, even if they are small ones. We do have a SPS tank where we havn't changed water for 4 years(only one time when I needed some good water to start up a new tank). I can see if I have any pics of that tank.

/ David

 

[dz6t]

Can you please post a photo of the sand pressure filter? Is it a commercial filter that I can buy? I thinking about getting one for my system.thank you very much.

 

[Sallstrom]

Can you please post a photo of the sand pressure filter? Is it a commercial filter that I can buy? I thinking about getting one for my system.thank you very much.

I found an old picture, the filter was a lot cleaner three years ago
I have no idea what the brand on this one is, it's been here for at least 15 years I think. But just search for sand pressure filter or pool filter then you will find a lot. They are not that expensive(compared to all other equipment for coral tank..).
The pump on the picture is connected to the filter. About 6000L/h I think.

Edit. Now I have started a tread for this tank. Please feel free to ask more there. It's in the section for large tanks.
/ David

 

[Sealion]

So why do you think this is? & what improvements exactly have you noticed?
Did you changed anything else in regards to tank maintenance since doing a 30% water change every 2 weeks ?

Any improvement can't be aligned with DOCs, in your case, (can it?) so it must be something to do with element replenishment

I'm going with element replenishment. Also the overall health of the tank seems to be better.

 

[Lasse]

The WC as a method is built on an assumption that you always get a perfect salt – with all ingredients blended 100 % right. Is this possible?

Let us look at some more or less important substances. I have chose zinc, lithium, iodine, strontium and potassium. In a perfect saltwater - zink has a concentration of 4 microgram’s/l (4 ppb), lithium 200 microgram´s/l (200 ppb), Iodine 60 microgram´s/l (60 ppb), strontium 8 mg/l (8 ppm) and potassium 400 mg/l (400 ppm). In my calculation I have calculated that it needs 39 grams of our salt mix to reach around 34.8 PSU (1.026). Let us say the salt producer makes batches of 1 metric ton every time. The question is now – how much of our 5 compounds should he/she add to this 1 ton batch?

Zink – he/she need to add 0.1 gram´s

Lithium - he/she need to add 5.12 gram´s

Iodine - he/she need to add 1.5 gram´s

Strontium - he/she need to add 205 gram´s

Potassium - he/she need to add 10256 gram´s – little more than 10 kg

Next step is to blend this ton in a way that each kilo of it content 0.0001 g Zink, 0.0051 g Lithium, 0.0015 g Iodine, 0.205 g Strontium and 10.2 g Potassium.

Is this possible? IMO even to blend so well that each kilograms content 10.2 g Potassium is difficult. – The other compounds I have mentioned here – its ridiculous to believe that they will be evenly mixed in big batches.

Is it possible to blend a perfect salt – yes but it has to be in very small batches and with very good scales and the whole batch has to been used at the same time – but the price will be high – very high

Its late in the evening (Swedish time) so if I have done some miscalculation please let me know

The reason why I have left the WC as a method is not because that I´m lazy - the reason is pure mathematic

Sincerely Lasse

 

[DSC reef]

I would think salt manufacturers would have a pretty good idea on how to make salt pretty close to perfect, I'm not fully understanding what your saying here? The reason water changes aren't as good as a method/tool is because no salt manufacturer can make perfect salt and your able to come to a conclusion on what needs to be done to make a perfect salt? Seems like a broad claim. I prefer water changes, just me and I trust that these salt manufacturer have a pretty good idea at what they are making. Not trying to be sarcastic, I just don't understand your claim. To be honest, I trust my abilities with water changes versus breaking down the math like you have, lol. Impressive tank @Lasse