What are the actual observed drawbacks of long-term GFO use?

[Muffin87]

I was watching this video with @Lou Ekus; he says he personally doesn't like seeing people running GFO 24/7.
What are the observed (rather than theoretical) drawbacks with the long term use of GFO?

Obviously, a sudden drop in PO4 will cause issues, but this is not what we're talking about.
What issues could you run into, if you're using GFO long-term to keep a stable, low PO4 level, while dosing trace elements to prevent depletion?
Is there some anecdotal evidence, like someone was using GFO and something bad which could be attributed to GFO happened to their corals/tank?

I'm honestly curious, because I've been reading here and there about people ditching GFO for cheato, or carbon dosing.

 

[Crabby48]

I’m here for peoples thoughts. I stock heavy with heavy feedings. Fuge works great but po4 is a problem.
When I use gfo 24-7 I can hold po4 low .1 but my coral reacts poorly until dead. Not sure why. I don’t tumble it much at all and it clogs in a 1 1/2 weeks.

 

[Dolphins18]

Unless you fine tune the dose perfectly it strips the system completely. I am not a fan of this happening. Just start out using half the recommended amount and never let your phosphates get all the way to 0.
I once used it for 7 years straight without any problems at all. I always used a much lower and was patient with it. If I ever need to I would do it again.

 

[Muffin87]

Unless you fine tune the dose perfectly it strips the system completely

Fauna Marin PHOS 0.04 Review

Never tried this, fascinating claims tho. It is expensive. If I were to use it, it'd probably combine it with low doses of Lanthanum Chloride to lengthen its lifespan.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I ran GFO 24/7 for years, along with organic carbon dosing, GAC, growing macroalgae, and skimming.

I am not aware of any long term or short term problems if you do not over do the amount, and are aware that it might cause some abiotic precipitation of calcium carbonate on it ow downstream of it.

This has more:

Iron Oxide Hydroxide (GFO) Phosphate Binders by Randy Holmes-Farley - Reefkeeping.com

I did not dose any trace elements except iron. I also dosed silicate (not a trace element). I did 1% daily automatic water changes.

These are the trace element profiles in my tank showing after using that methodology for years:

My Triton Testing Results: By Randy Holmes-Farley - REEFEDITION

Recently, Triton GmbH in Germany has initiated a method of testing many ions at once for a single price. In the US, that service is coordinated by Unique Corals. For $49 they will send you a couple of tubes to collect a tank water sample, and a prepaid mailer to send the sample back to them...

www.reefedition.com

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

Unless you fine tune the dose perfectly it strips the system completely. I am not a fan of this happening. Just start out using half the recommended amount and never let your phosphates get all the way to 0.
I once used it for 7 years straight without any problems at all. I always used a much lower and was patient with it. If I ever need to I would do it again.

I do not think "fine tuning" is the operative term for use.

"Not overdoing it" is more appropriate terminology, IMO. Underdoing it causes no problems.

 

[Muffin87]

I ran GFO 24/7 for years

why did you stop?
Did you ever measure your flow rate through the GFO reactor?

 

[mdb_talon]

I realize not what what you are talking about but the longterm negative impact for me is cost lol. That crap is expensive.

 

[xxkenny90xx]

I did not dose any trace elements except iron. I also dosed silicate (not a trace element). I did 1% daily automatic water changes.

These are the trace element profiles in my tank showing after using that methodology for years:

1% daily auto water changes = dosing trace elements imo

 

[Muffin87]

That crap is expensive.

Foiling Phosphate: A Look at Lanthanum Chloride Use in the Aquarium - CORAL Magazine

Look back to the introduction of lanthanum chloride as a phosphate reducer in marine reef aquariums, first discussed in CORAL Magazine in late 2009.

www.reef2rainforest.com

You can decrease the cost by using GFO to keep PO4 at a low level, while removing a good amount of PO4 with Lanthanum chloride.

 

[mottomegl]

I ran it for years at 1/4 of the recommended then i increased the amount in the tumbler to 3/4 of the recommended and very quickly stripped the water and the birdnests the size of basketballs were dead and lps were not happy either if you run it start 1/4 of recommended also a lot of people that were pushing it years ago are against now

 

[mmw64]

I realize not what what you are talking about but the longterm negative impact for me is cost lol. That crap is expensive.

+1

 

[Big E]

I was watching this video with @Lou Ekus; he says he personally doesn't like seeing people running GFO 24/7.
What are the observed (rather than theoretical) drawbacks with the long term use of GFO?

Obviously, a sudden drop in PO4 will cause issues, but this is not what we're talking about.
What issues could you run into, if you're using GFO long-term to keep a stable, low PO4 level, while dosing trace elements to prevent depletion?
Is there some anecdotal evidence, like someone was using GFO and something bad which could be attributed to GFO happened to their corals/tank?

I'm honestly curious, because I've been reading here and there about people ditching GFO for cheato, or carbon dosing.

You have to understand the context of when to use GFO especially in reference to carbon dosing. Their products are designed for certain P04 levels. Using it full time would short circuit a balance their products try to maintain, especially Bacto balance.

You can't just generalize the use of GFO. A lot also depends on your fish bioload, how much you feed and many other variables.

If you're just running a skimmer and GFO there isn't a down side..............I've done it for many years. You just have to regulate the flow and the amount used to fit your tank. Once you get that down you can run it 24/7 and create a balance. You won't strip the tank because the P04 is being produced faster than the GFO can strip it clean. Basically the GFO is taking up the excess after the corals get their share. As it loses it capacity to reduce P04 over the weeks more algae will grow to keep a balance.

A lot of people with smaller tanks have a problem with GFO because they don't have a big enough fish load and don't put in enough food in the tank daily. In a case like this you may have to add foods such as Reefroids to add more P04 to the system.

It's all about creating a balance regardless of what you use. Some people do this same thing with lanthium chloride or a well thought out bacterial system whether it's homemade or a commercial system.

To me the downside is that it's messy and has to be changed usually on a monthly basis and as mentioned by others you have to keep buying it.

 

[Dkeller_nc]

From the standpoint of the expense of GFO, yes, it's pricey stuff on a per-pound basis compared to GAC and other common materials that reefers use. However, it is possible to reduce the cost substantially if you're willing to do some kitchen chemistry and you're using a hard-particle GFO like BRS' high-capacity product.

The kitchen chemistry part is regenerating GFO for re-use. You can do this many times, though eventually the particles get eroded and/or broken up to the point where they're no longer practical for use in a reactor.

The basics is driving off the adsorbed inorganic phosphate with an excess of hydroxide ions, which is accomplished with the use of 1N sodium hydroxide. Depending on your tank, you may need to soak the GFO in 0.1N hydrochloric acid before the 1N sodium hydroxide treatment to remove precipitated calcium carbonate. The high level summary of the procedure is:

1) Wash the used GFO to remove entrained organic material/detritus.
2) Soak the GFO in 0.1N HCl (if needed)
3) Rinse the GFO if using 0.1N HCl
4) Soak the GFO for at least several hours in 1 N NaOH
5) Rinse the GFO; repeat steps 4 and 5 for a total of 3 cycles
6) Give the GFO a final, thorough rinse with RODI to ensure that most NaOH is removed, and so that you don't get a spike of alkalinity when it's used in the reef tank.
7) For long-term storage, I recommend drying out the GFO in a low-temp oven, but if you're going to use it quickly, wet storage is OK too.

If you google GFO regeneration you may pull up an old article where the person put GFO in a reactor and circulated 1N NaOH through it for several hours. I strongly recommend that you don't do this. If you have a plumbing leak, there's a chance of getting sprayed with 1 N sodium hydroxide, and that concentration will definitely damage your skin and eyes. Instead, simply use 1 quart or 1.5 quart glass mason jars for your regeneration - they're cheap, available and won't break down in the presence of concentrated bases over time. BTW - the GFO doesn't need to be stirred or otherwise manipulated while in the 1N NaOH soak so long as it's left to set for several hours - diffusion will take care of any inhomogeneity.

 

[fishhead1973]

I was watching this video with @Lou Ekus; he says he personally doesn't like seeing people running GFO 24/7.
What are the observed (rather than theoretical) drawbacks with the long term use of GFO?

Obviously, a sudden drop in PO4 will cause issues, but this is not what we're talking about.
What issues could you run into, if you're using GFO long-term to keep a stable, low PO4 level, while dosing trace elements to prevent depletion?
Is there some anecdotal evidence, like someone was using GFO and something bad which could be attributed to GFO happened to their corals/tank?

I'm honestly curious, because I've been reading here and there about people ditching GFO for cheato, or carbon dosing.

I with you on that thinking about a cheato reactor and carbon only the natural approach always seem better brs has some good YouTube videos about that will keep a I on this post for sure

 

[fishhead1973]

You have to understand the context of when to use GFO especially in reference to carbon dosing. Their products are designed for certain P04 levels. Using it full time would short circuit a balance their products try to maintain, especially Bacto balance.

You can't just generalize the use of GFO. A lot also depends on your fish bioload, how much you feed and many other variables.

If you're just running a skimmer and GFO there isn't a down side..............I've done it for many years. You just have to regulate the flow and the amount used to fit your tank. Once you get that down you can run it 24/7 and create a balance. You won't strip the tank because the P04 is being produced faster than the GFO can strip it clean. Basically the GFO is taking up the excess after the corals get their share. As it loses it capacity to reduce P04 over the weeks more algae will grow to keep a balance.

A lot of people with smaller tanks have a problem with GFO because they don't have a big enough fish load and don't put in enough food in the tank daily. In a case like this you may have to add foods such as Reefroids to add more P04 to the system.

It's all about creating a balance regardless of what you use. Some people do this same thing with lanthium chloride or a well thought out bacterial system whether it's homemade or a commercial system.

To me the downside is that it's messy and has to be changed usually on a monthly basis and as mentioned by others you have to keep buying it.

question thought if you run a reactor or scrubber would that not take gfo out of the equation still going to be messy but I feel like one could save a lot of money. and let nature take its place. I know its all about balance. the reason really ant about the money every month but if you think about it the ocean don't have GFO.

 

[Big E]

question thought if you run a reactor or scrubber would that not take gfo out of the equation still going to be messy but I feel like one could save a lot of money. and let nature take its place. I know its all about balance. the reason really ant about the money every month but if you think about it the ocean don't have GFO.

I'm not trying to duplicate the ocean as much a having a thriving colorful acropora system.

The natural comments are so lame.............large chaeto balls don't grow within a small area next to acropora. Have you ever fed your fish pellets/flakes, used chemicals? Do you use synthetic salt for your aquarium?

Alage filters take out way more elements in the water than GFO does. Algae directly competes for these same elements that corals need. Why do you think there a dozens of fish and inverts that naturally keep all algae mowed down to nothing over a reef.

I don't use algae filters........a lot of times you get to a point of nitrate limitation and then you have to dose nitrate. Chaeto only filters take out a ratio of 100-1 so you can still have a problems with P04.

I would like to eliminate GFO but find it hard to find substitutes that work as well. My second choice is carbon and bacteria dosing and I'm looking to find the right combo to keep both N03 and Po4 in check to my satisfaction.

A lot of people like algae filters and that's fine but I consider them more harmful than good.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

why did you stop?
Did you ever measure your flow rate through the GFO reactor?

I stopped only when I took the tank down .

No, I did not measure the flow.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

1% daily auto water changes = dosing trace elements imo

Of course it adds or exports a tiny bit of trace elements, depending on whether the elements are above or below the level in the salt. That amount of water change is quite typical of reefers usage.

 

[Randy Holmes-Farley]

I with you on that thinking about a cheato reactor and carbon only the natural approach always seem better brs has some good YouTube videos about that will keep a I on this post for sure

Just a comment on the term "natural".

Almost everything we do in a reef tank happens naturally in the ocean. We just choose to enhance certain processes over others.