UV Sterilizer Any Downsides?

[tpirovol]

Hi Everyone,

Any downside to a UV sterilizer? Does it kill coroline algae, pods or good bacteria?

Thanks T

 

[Spare time]

Here is what I wrote on a similar thread https://www.reef2reef.com/threads/are-uv-sterilizers-worth-it.895598/

Pros:
-Clears up bacteria/phyto blooms
-can eleminate certain dinos
-water can be unnaturally clear

Cons
-removes coral food (though not significantly removing bacteria)
-removes zooplankton food (phytoplankton)
-following the above, makes it more difficult to keep NPS organisms and other filter feeders
-does not prevent disease
-removes competition for algae that live on the rocks
-can make algae situations worse


They are very much a tool for the right job. Sorta like antibiotics. They definitely have their uses, but daily consumption can become harmful if done for very long periods of time and can even become counter productive.

 

[Sean Clark]

I'll just add that a uv doesn't remove anything. It can damage cells to limit or eliminate reproduction. It does not remove anything from the water. All of that good coral food may no longer be able to reproduce, but it can still be consumed by the corals after exposure to uv.

 

[Miami Reef]

I believe a skimmer removes more “food” than UV sterilizers could.

Reef tanks are often phyto limited, so whether you have a UV or not, you still need to feed.

Here’s my pros and cons list:

Pros:
Extreme water clarity
Eliminates bacteria blooms
Makes front glass stay cleaner from algae longer
Does not produce possible toxins (unlike Ozone)
Excellent “ich management” tool

Cons:
Expense (unit, ongoing bulb replacement cost)
Maintenance (pump cleaning; quart sleeve cleaning)
Some bacteria will “explode” when under exposure to UV - may limit availability of food to organisms (subjective)

I’m personally extremely fond of UV. I think it’s a great tool to mimic the “dilution” of the vast ocean. Parasites and bacteria won’t be able to reproduce to overwhelming amounts.

The biggest benefit is water clarity IMO. It’s like going from an old television to a brand new HD one. Fish will look like they are floating and it’s sure to bring a lot of comments from people. You can’t ignore the pristine clarity of UV, and most public aquariums and show tanks use it (and for good reason).

 

[Maddlesrain]

I believe a skimmer removes more “food” than UV sterilizers could.

Reef tanks are often phyto limited, so whether you have a UV or not, you still need to feed.

Here’s my pros and cons list:

Pros:
Extreme water clarity
Eliminates bacteria blooms
Makes front glass stay cleaner from algae longer
Does not produce possible toxins (unlike Ozone)
Excellent “ich management” tool

Cons:
Expense (unit, ongoing bulb replacement cost)
Maintenance (pump cleaning; quart sleeve cleaning)
Some bacteria will “explode” when under exposure to UV - may limit availability of food to organisms (subjective)

I’m personally extremely fond of UV. I think it’s a great tool to mimic the “dilution” of the vast ocean. Parasites and bacteria won’t be able to reproduce to overwhelming amounts.

The biggest benefit is water clarity IMO. It’s like going from an old television to a brand new HD one. Fish will look like they are floating and it’s sure to bring a lot of comments from people. You can’t ignore the pristine clarity of UV, and most public aquariums and show tanks use it (and for good reason).

What brand(s) do you recommend for UV users?

 

[BanjoBandito]

UV is real touchy with flow and what you want it to do with it. Kill bacteria or kill bigger organisms. Can’t do both. I’ve had success with the coralvue turbo twists on small tanks, but for a larger tank I can’t say. I looked at the ones BRS sells, I assume the gold standard, and eventually decided against it. Mainly financial, but it’s a little “snake oil” feeling to me at the larger wattage prices.

 

[tharbin]

I would add that it depends. For public aquaria or any other aquarium system with thousands of gallons of inter-connected systems and hundreds or even thousands of fish specimens, UV is almost required. For most home systems, I view it as a tool to be used when needed to help with a particular issue. The overuse can actually make it harder to maintain a well-managed system by limiting some natural elements of the reef like bacteria and plankton. For commercial systems I would tend toward having UV as you also usually also have dedicated support staff keeping everything in balance.

The big question is the question that should be asked for any piece of gear being added to an aquarium: 'what is the reason I am adding this' or 'what problem am I trying to solve with this'? If you are relying on the UV as part of your general filtration, what happens if it fails?

 

[dwest]

I feel that the only negatives of UV sterilizers are the upfront and maintenance costs as well as maintaining the unit in general.

 

[Miami Reef]

I feel that the only negatives of UV sterilizers are the upfront and maintenance costs as well as maintaining the unit in general.

I agree with you.