Warner Marine Now Has A Pellet Product

[DJREEF]

Originally Posted by JRaquatics

I just received 1L of the new Warner Marine EcoBAK pellets to experiment on my personal 180gal display. I have been intrigued about the solid vodka dosing for some time know and with the a company like Warner Marine entering this market I just had to give it a shot. With work and summer activities my tank has taken serious neglect so effects of this product will be easily noticed and I plan to keep everything controlled for 4-5 months to evaluate this very promising product. If it works like I imagine it will this will be added to the list of common reef necessities like GFO and activated carbon.

A little about my tank, equipment, livestock and maintenance.
I have a standard AGA 180 gal with a 75 gal sump. The sump contains a DSB of about 8" but I no longer have any macro algae. I have a Reef Octopus XP3000ext on the system and only use activated carbon on occasion. The systems circulation is provided by 3 MP40 Vortechs. I will place the new Warner Marine EcoBAK Pellets in my ATB media reactor and will feed it off of my manifold that is fed off my Reeflo Dart return pump. I plan to test the water parameters tonight and place the media on line.

Here is the most recent shot of the 180gal with the LEDs on. I will get a more up-to-date shot tonight to document the results.

Jeremy,

You may need to dial your skimmer back to keep from having to change the cup every day. The skimmate runs thin after about day 4. If you don't mind the xtra work then disregard.

DJ

[JRaquatics]

Thanks for the heads up. I plan to run things as they do now unless I absolutely had to change a setting due to overflow. I want to keep things as controlled as possible so I can document the changes and experiences as precisely as possible.

[solitude127]

Does anyone have a video of how the pellets should tumble? I just put my pellets online and have it T'd off my pump for my fuge. I have a valve controlling the flow so I can adjust the tumble. TIA

[cmart28]

I have an H&S nitrate reactor, I was thinking of switching the sulphur media with the new Warner Marine Bio pellets. The pump on the reactor is rated at 528GPH, would this reactor be sufficient to use with the bio pellets? My total tank volume is roughly 250 gallons.

[JRaquatics]

So far the only thing I notice with the initial use of the WM Ecobak pellets is that they tend to clump together inside the reactor. Not like the way GFO can turn to rock but more like a soft bond that is easily shifted out of place. I've read this is normal and only temporary as I have only been running them for a few days now.

[DJREEF]

Originally Posted by JRaquatics

So far the only thing I notice with the initial use of the WM Ecobak pellets is that they tend to clump together inside the reactor. Not like the way GFO can turn to rock but more like a soft bond that is easily shifted out of place. I've read this is normal and only temporary as I have only been running them for a few days now.

Sounds about right. Kind of like little tiny marshmallows gooing each other up.

DJ

[JRaquatics]

^ That is exactly what it is like.

[poolkeeper1]

Originally Posted by JRaquatics

^ That is exactly what it is like.

After running them for several months they are getting even more sticky and have now started to channel in the reactor. They do free up if you shake the reactor (BRS) duel but go right back to clumping in short order. Every thing looks great in my tank and since adding the additional 250ml in the second chamber my glass is staying algae free longer, Colors Pop, but i still have Cheato growing at a good clip and some algae in spots on my rocks. The brown Diatoms are still popping up here and there on my sandbed even though I'm running Chemipure Elite 3 units for around 100 gal water volume.
They are not doing any harm and would say they have my SPS looking as good as when I dosed Vodka so No harm No foul, I guess still to soon to make a defined statement on these pellets. I will go 6 months and by then will have a opinion on how good or bad they have done in my situation.
Bill

[Stuart60611]

I have been using them also for a bit, and mine too are still sticky. As indicated, you can shake the reactor a bit, and they separate. However, a day or so later they are back to sticking. My algae has changed since discontinuing the vodka and exclusively using the pellets. I am using 1.5 liters on an estimated water volume of 140 gallon fowlr which is heavily stocked. My algae has completely vanished in some places and actually become greener with more growth in other places. Very strange.

[JRaquatics]

Originally Posted by Stuart60611

I have been using them also for a bit, and mine too are still sticky. As indicated, you can shake the reactor a bit, and they separate. However, a day or so later they are back to sticking. My algae has changed since discontinuing the vodka and exclusively using the pellets. I am using 1.5 liters on an estimated water volume of 140 gallon fowlr which is heavily stocked. My algae has completely vanished in some places and actually become greener with more growth in other places. Very strange.

Is it possible you are leaching nutrients from these areas?

[Stuart60611]

Originally Posted by JRaquatics

Is it possible you are leaching nutrients from these areas?

That was my thought. It would explain why such growth is occuring on rock because the rock in those places absorbed phosphate. However, what is strange is that I am seeing some very green hair algae growth on my overflows and powerheads which I do not think can absorb nutrients.

[DJREEF]

Originally Posted by Stuart60611

That was my thought. It would explain why such growth is occuring on rock because the rock in those places absorbed phosphate. However, what is strange is that I am seeing some very green hair algae growth on my overflows and powerheads which I do not think can absorb nutrients.

It's a flow related issue. The currents hand deliver nutrients to the area of growth. It's just a symptom of not completely stripping the nutrients from the water. I'm coming to the conclusion that while the pellets help, unfortunately they are not a complete solution in many cases.

DJ

[JRaquatics]

Originally Posted by Stuart60611

That was my thought. It would explain why such growth is occuring on rock because the rock in those places absorbed phosphate. However, what is strange is that I am seeing some very green hair algae growth on my overflows and powerheads which I do not think can absorb nutrients.

IME the overflows and powerheads are always the last places algae will grow until its food source is depleted. I believe this is due to the amount of fresh water flow that is drawn to these areas and the position the are from the lighting makes it the ideal last spot for growth. Do you occasionally baste or blow your live rock off?

[Stuart60611]

f

Originally Posted by DJREEF

It's a flow related issue. The currents hand deliver nutrients to the area of growth. It's just a symptom of not completely stripping the nutrients from the water. I'm coming to the conclusion that while the pellets help, unfortunately they are not a complete solution in many cases.

DJ

Thanks, and that makes a lot of sense. I agree that the pellets may simply be unable to handle a particular's systems nutrient load. I have an extremely stocked tank and feed enormous amounts of meaty food daily -- some which definitely breaks into little pieces which rot in the system. Even with this in mind, I am running 1.5 liters which should be able to handle up to a 300 gallon water volume. As such, I do not think adding more pellets is the answer, at least, for me. Now, what I have to figure out is what to use in conjunction with the pellets to solve my nutrient problems. Although I have not been testing because it is pointless in light of the false readings I would get due to the algae, my strong suspicion is that phosphate is my real problem and not nitrate. I just put some GFO on line, but I imagine that it will become saturated fast and pretty expensive to use to reduce my phosphate. I have been looking into alternatives to reduce phosphate, particularlly lantheum, but I have not pulled the trigger on the lantheum because I have yet to find a method to dose which I am comfortable would remove the percipitate and am concerned about those who report fish deaths from its dosing. I wonder if there are other waste water cleaning technologies that could be adapted to aquarium use, like the pellets, which more directly target phosphate?

[DJREEF]

Originally Posted by Stuart60611

Thanks, and that makes a lot of sense. I agree that the pellets may simply be unable to handle a particular's systems nutrient load. I have an extremely stocked tank and feed enormous amounts of meaty food daily - some which definitely breaks into little pieces which rot in the system. Even with this in mind, I am running 1.5 liters which should be able to handle up to a 300 gallon water volume. As such, I do not think adding more pellets is the answer, at least, for me. Now, what I have to figure out is what to use in conjunction with the pellets to solve my nutrient problems. Although I have not been testing because it is pointless in light of the false readings I would get due to the algae, my strong suspicion is that phosphate is my real problem and not nitrate. I just put some GFO on line, but I imagine that it will become saturated fast and pretty expensive to use to reduce my phosphates. I have been looking into alternatives to reduce phosphate, particularlly lantheum, but I have not pulled the trigger on the lantheum because I have yet to find a method to dose which I am comfortable would remove the percipate and am concerned about those who report fish deaths from its dosing. I wonder i there are other waste water cleaning technologies that could be adapted to aquarium use, like the pellets, which more directly target phosphate?

I think what you have to take away from all of this is systems really shouldn't be based on gallons or litres, but instead on total bioload. If your 55 gallon reef setup looks like a freshly stocked feederfish tank then it's certainly going to take more media to bring nutrient levels under control than a 600 gallon peninsular setup with a few neatly placed designer bonsai critters. I think we need to move away from this whole water volume concept when it comes to filtration, and actually look at the amount of energy that's being supplied to a specific volume of water.

DJ

[Stuart60611]

Originally Posted by JRaquatics

IME the overflows and powerheads are always the last places algae will grow until its food source is depleted. I believe this is due to the amount of fresh water flow that is drawn to these areas and the position the are from the lighting makes it the ideal last spot for growth. Do you occasionally baste or blow your live rock off?

I do sometimes powerwash my rock with a maxi jet 1200, but I have not done so in a couple of months.

[DJREEF]

Originally Posted by Stuart60611

I do sometimes powerwash my rock with a maxi jet 1200, but I have not done so in a couple of months.

Do you dose kalk? One of the wonderful side effects of kalk for topoff is the pH induced precipitation of PO4 from the system.

DJ

[Stuart60611]

Originally Posted by DJREEF

I think what you have to take away from all of this is systems really shouldn't be based on gallons or litres, but instead on total bioload. If your 55 gallon reef setup looks like a freshly stocked feederfish tank then it's certainly going to take more media to bring nutrient levels under control than a 600 gallon peninsular setup with a few neatly placed designer bonsai critters. I think we need to move away from this whole water volume concept when it comes to filtration, and actually look at the amount of energy that's being supplied to a specific volume of water.

DJ

Very true. I would add that it is also very unclear at this point how effective the pellets are assisting in the export of phosphate. My reading of the information thus far supplied by others is that it seems fairly clear that they work well at assisting in the reduction of nitrate, but it seems very unclear at this point whether they do much in terms of assisting in the reduction of phosphate which, IMO, is in most systems the major cause of hair algae problems.

[Stuart60611]

Originally Posted by DJREEF

Do you dose kalk? One of the wonderful side effects of kalk for topoff is the pH induced precipitation of PO4 from the system.

DJ

I do not dose kalk because I never saw a need to do so b/c I only maintain fish and no corals, but perhaps now maybe I will consider doing so. In your experience, how effective is dosing Kalk at reducing phosphate? What happens to the perticipate and can it leach phosphate back into the system? Any other concerns about dosing kalk?

[DJREEF]

Originally Posted by Stuart60611

I do not dose kalk because I never saw a need to do so b/c I only maintain fish and no corals, but perhaps now maybe I will consider doing so. In your experience, how effective is dosing Kalk at reducing phosphate? What happens to the perticipate and can it leach phosphate back into the system? Any other concerns about dosing kalk?

Much of the precipitate gets skimmed out of the system in the form of Ca3(PO4)2 - calcium phosphate - so that never makes it back into the system. The remaining bound precip can re-enter the system if the pH drops at the site where the calcium crystals holding the Ca3(PO4)2 begin to disolve, but my thinking is it would be difficult in a reef type setup - even FOWLR - to get the pH low enough to disolve the aragonite source, unless it was in a reactor of some sort, esp if you're dosing kalk on a regular basis. If the systemic pH were low enough to do that, there would be a whole lotta other things going wrong, as to make phosphate leaching seem trivial.

DJ

[Rizup]

Originally Posted by Stuart60611

Very true. I would add that it is also very unclear at this point how effective the pellets are assisting in the export of phosphate. My reading of the information thus far supplied by others is that it seems fairly clear that they work well at assisting in the reduction of nitrate, but it seems very unclear at this point whether they do much in terms of assisting in the reduction of phosphate which, IMO, is in most systems the major cause of hair algae problems.

I have yet to see a reduction in nitrates, but I am hoping I will soon Tomorrow will be 5 weeks of the pellets.

[solitude127]

Originally Posted by Rizup

I have yet to see a reduction in nitrates, but I am hoping I will soon Tomorrow will be 5 weeks of the pellets.

You may have posted it, but what were/are your nitrates at?

[Stuart60611]

Originally Posted by DJREEF

Much of the precipitate gets skimmed out of the system in the form of Ca3(PO4)2 - calcium phosphate - so that never makes it back into the system. The remaining bound precip can re-enter the system if the pH drops at the site where the calcium crystals holding the Ca3(PO4)2 begin to disolve, but my thinking is it would be difficult in a reef type setup - even FOWLR - to get the pH low enough to disolve the aragonite source, unless it was in a reactor of some sort, esp if you're dosing kalk on a regular basis. If the systemic pH were low enough to do that, there would be a whole lotta other things going wrong, as to make phosphate leaching seem trivial.

DJ

What is interesting to me about your comment is I recently read an article (cannot remember where) where the author discussed his study indicating that at various places within a given aquarium the ph can measure substantially lower than the rest of the system. In other words, the ph in the back right corner of your tank may under certain circumstances be much lower at times than the ph on the other side of the tank. As such, I wonder if the percipitate has more of a potential of releasing phosphate.

[Reefflections]

Stuart,
I'm seeing this algae also only on my Tunzes.None on the rocks or panes.I'm BB and there is none there either.This is not hair algae what I'm seeing.It's almost like a natural type of algae is nomal if that makes sense?I was told their are healthy algae within our system.Which shows us a healthy tank.But I can say,the Bac has made my system a big winner.The before and after changes are huge.But again I'm still running GFO also.Which I really don't want to do,because of cost factor.I just have some extra GFO and been running it before BAC was started.

[DJREEF]

Originally Posted by Stuart60611

What is interesting to me about your comment is I recently read an article (cannot remember where) where the author discussed his study indicating that at various places within a given aquarium the ph can measure substantially lower than the rest of the system. In other words, the ph in the back right corner of your tank may under certain circumstances be much lower at times than the ph on the other side of the tank. As such, I wonder if the percipitate has more of a potential of releasing phosphate.

Absolutely, pH can vary from place to place - which is why circulation is so important. Dead zones, or cryptic zones can read lower in scale, but would more than likely be higher still than the 6.8 (or lower) that would be necessary to break down the calcium/phosphate matrix. Like I said before, if you have systemic zones of considerable size dropping that low, without the accompanying water volume and surplus alkalinity to back them up then you've got way bigger problems than phosphate leaching.

DJ