Seriously - I have no skimmer...isn't that ok? - Page 2

RichConley · 09/10/2007, 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by TWallace
If that's your reasoning, then you've provided me a good argument towards not using a skimmer. Mine never produced much skimmate at all, and it didn't stink badly. I've had a Remora (really poor performance) and an ASM Mini G with gate valve mod (better, but still didn't produce much). At the same time, my nitrates were always less than 1ppm, usually 0. I removed my ASM skimmer from my tank about 6 weeks ago and haven't noticed a difference in the tank yet. Nitrates are still under 1ppm, water is still clear. Argument resolved for me.

So, the fact that you bought two crappy skimmers, and they didnt perform, is reason to not use skimmers? Thats some logic.

TWallace · 09/10/2007, 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by RichConley
So, the fact that you bought two crappy skimmers, and they didnt perform, is reason to not use skimmers? Thats some logic.

No, the fact that nitrates are still near zero without a skimmer is my reasoning. Nice comprehension.

RichConley · 09/10/2007, 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by marinelife
Critters: Hippo Tang (donated to me by a friend in 2005), Hippo Tang (purchased 1995), 3 Green Chromis (purchased 1/2001), Orange Shoulder Tang (April 27, 2007), 2 6-line Wrasse (male and female purchased 1/2006), Chocolate Tang (May 2007), Red Sea Emperor Angel (June 14 2007), Sailfin Tang (May 2007), Flame Fin Tomini Tang (May 2007), Coral Beauty (May 2007), several Serpent Stars, few Hermit Crabs, few snails, Variety of mushrooms, Acroporas, Montiporas, Button Polyps, Turbinaria, Montipora foliosa, Fire Coral, Derasa Clam( 5/2001), Crocea Clam (3/2006), Tear Drop Maxima (5/2006) some Macroalgae, other SPS Corals and more. There is also a few other crabs and items growing on the rocks.

How big of a fuge you running?

You've got 6 tangs and a large angel. The 6-lines, CB, and chromis are pretty much negligible. Thats not a whole lot of bioload for 400+ gallons of water.

Aquabucket · 09/10/2007, 12:07 PM

Please explain to me how a skimmer helps with chemical warfare?

Running activated carbon is much more effective for this than a skimmer.

RichConley · 09/10/2007, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by TWallace
No, the fact that nitrates are still near zero without a skimmer is my reasoning. Nice comprehension.

And nitrates are important how? They seem pretty irellevant to me. I've seen gorgeous SPS tanks running 50ppm, and algae filled tanks running 0.

Of course you can run a tank without a skimmer... its just more difficult, you have to keep a lower bioload, and you're much more likely to have chain-reaction type failures. Me, I'd rather spend the $200 or so it takes now to buy a skimmer that will run a 200g tank.

RichConley · 09/10/2007, 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Aquabucket
Please explain to me how a skimmer helps with chemical warfare?

Running activated carbon is much more effective for this than a skimmer.

I'm sorry aquabucket, but this is a totally hollow claim. Unless you've got research saying that alleopathic chemicals AREN'T skimmable, then you're just adding confusion, and misdirection to an already confusing subject.... and who says you can't run carbon with a skimmer?

Aquabucket · 09/10/2007, 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by RichConley
I'm sorry aquabucket, but this is a totally hollow claim. Unless you've got research saying that alleopathic chemicals AREN'T skimmable, then you're just adding confusion, and misdirection to an already confusing subject.... and who says you can't run carbon with a skimmer?

The original OP wanted reasons to run a skimmer. I am suggesting that fighting chemical warfare is not one of them when better and more proven methods are available.

RichConley · 09/10/2007, 12:23 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Aquabucket
The original OP wanted reasons to run a skimmer. I am suggesting that fighting chemical warfare is not one of them

Which is a claim you have presented no evidence for.

goldmaniac · 09/10/2007, 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by kevinohio
What else are you looking for other than to improve water quality? I am not sure what you are searching for here?

Pulling out waste into a collection cup helps nitrates. Obviously. But I'm wondering what other kinds of pollutants might get pulled out to the benefit of the system.

I think the big, generalized goal is to 'improve water quality' but I was looking for insight on ways a protein skimmer helps, other than waste and detrius --> Nitrates.

i.e. other dissolved solids, someone else mentioned extra oxygen in the water as a benefit, etc.

generally I am asking for any other pollutants that naturally build up in a system that might be removed by a skimmer.

G.

Aquabucket · 09/10/2007, 12:32 PM

There are plenty of writings that suggest what skimmers remove and what they can't. Quite frankly I don't have the time to track them down right now.

I could say the same to you. Show me proof that skimmers can remove chemicals from warring corals.

RichConley · 09/10/2007, 12:32 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by goldmaniac
Pulling out waste into a collection cup helps nitrates. Obviously. But I'm wondering what other kinds of pollutants might get pulled out to the benefit of the system.

I think the big, generalized goal is to 'improve water quality' but I was looking for insight on ways a protein skimmer helps, other than waste and detrius --> Nitrates.

i.e. other dissolved solids, someone else mentioned extra oxygen in the water as a benefit, etc.

generally I am asking for any other pollutants that naturally build up in a system that might be removed by a skimmer.

G.

Goldmaniac, a Protien skimmer will pull out anything that has a hydrophobic end, and anything thats poorly soluble. As to what its actually pulling out, theres no way to test that, as we dont have test kits to test the levels.

It WILL lower nitrates/phosphates/etc.

kevinohio · 09/10/2007, 12:32 PM

well a lot depends on how good a skimmer you are using and how aggressive you are skimming.
I am planning on upgrading my skimmer. since I only started with a once pice wet/dry unit and a marginal skimmer.
But I think that with a good quality skimmer, and an aggressive skim. I am currently doing a wet skim, that it will pull out a lot of waste. I know that it works by the particales sticking to the airbubbles. I think it is mainly waste it is pulling out. But I am for sure no expert here. I just know that my water looks crystal clear since I have opened up the skimmer so to speak and let it skim pretty aggressive.

RichConley · 09/10/2007, 12:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Aquabucket
There are plenty of writings that suggest what skimmers remove and what they can't. Quite frankly I don't have the time to track them down right now.

I could say the same to you. Show me proof that skimmers can remove chemicals from warring corals.

I wasn't claiming that they can. I don't know. I was saying that you shouldn't make the claim that they can't without presenting evidence. The burden of proof is completely on you, as you're the only one trying to prove something.

Aquabucket · 09/10/2007, 12:36 PM

Tell me this than Rich how effective is carbon at removing these chemicals? There are plenty of articles out there suggesting that carbon can be very effective. Show me one article that states a skimmer has that same ability.

kevinohio · 09/10/2007, 12:39 PM

why do you both try to prove something which there are no facts to support. I think we can agree that there is nothing solid out there saying that it will help in chemical warefare and leave it at that, rather than to continue to banter back and forth about something neither can prove.

RichConley · 09/10/2007, 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Aquabucket
Tell me this than Rich how effective is carbon at removing these chemicals? There are plenty of articles out there suggesting that carbon can be very effective. Show me one article that states a skimmer has that same ability.

I never claimed it did. You're claiming it doesn't. I dont need to provide articles BECAUSE I'M NOT MAKING ANY CLAIMS.

You're the one claiming skimmers can't pull out alleopathic chemicals. I'm not saying they can. I'm saying you should provide evidence of your claim.

Aquabucket · 09/10/2007, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by kevinohio
why do you both try to prove something which there are no facts to support. I think we can agree that there is nothing solid out there saying that it will help in chemical warefare and leave it at that, rather than to continue to banter back and forth about something neither can prove.

O please! A many things in this hobby can't be proved.

The most commonly employed scientific methods at removing these compounds is activated carbon. The wastewater industry uses activated carbon, they also employ activated clay.

Skimmers can not remove many of the secondary metabolites found in these compounds and that is a fact.

A skimmer is not an RO/DI unit and can not remove many compounds, chemicals, etc. from the water.

Do I have to prove that too?

RichConley · 09/10/2007, 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Aquabucket
Skimmers can not remove many of the secondary metabolites found in these compounds and that is a fact.

Post proof if you're going to call something a fact.

kevinohio · 09/10/2007, 12:56 PM

thats my point, why keep posting the same thing if it cant be.Post the opionion and let it go, why be so defensive? Just my opinion, doesnt make me right, and I wont comment on it again since I would then be gulty of the same thing

I like my skimmer, but thats me.

Aquabucket · 09/10/2007, 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by RichConley
Post proof if you're going to call something a fact.

If you want the proof do the research yourself and come back to us. I can assure you its out there. I've already researched the topic of chemical warfare in aquariums at length but don't have the time to hunt down all the articles right now.

Skimmers can be effective at removing some of the toxic compounds but not nearly as effective as activated carbon. This seems to be the consensus among the scientific community and hobbyists like Borneman, Calfo and others.

marinelife · 09/10/2007, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by RichConley
How big of a fuge you running?

You've got 6 tangs and a large angel. The 6-lines, CB, and chromis are pretty much negligible. Thats not a whole lot of bioload for 400+ gallons of water.

fuge is the middle section of a 45 gallon tank that is half full, the cheato is about the size of a volleyball.

I had about the same fish in my 180 with no skimmer, upgraded because I got a deal but yeah it is a low load for now until they grow.

pikachusalad · 09/10/2007, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Travis L. Stevens
The same can be said about water changes

Indeed.

pikachusalad · 09/10/2007, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by TWallace
If that's your reasoning, then you've provided me a good argument towards not using a skimmer.

Heh...oops - it's a good enough argument for me - there's crap in the water, I'm taking it out.

I guess I'd be open to a good argument against using a skimmer (not that you are trying to make one - just saying, if there was one I'd listen).

RichConley · 09/10/2007, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Aquabucket
If you want the proof do the research yourself and come back to us. I can assure you its out there. I've already researched the topic of chemical warfare in aquariums at length but don't have the time to hunt down all the articles right now.

Skimmers can be effective at removing some of the toxic compounds but not nearly as effective as activated carbon. This seems to be the consensus among the scientific community and hobbyists like Borneman, Calfo and others.

If you're going to make the claim that skimmers don't pull out aleopathic chemicals, you have to back it up.

And I'm sorry, but neither one of those two are experts on skimmers.

u418936 · 09/10/2007, 02:12 PM

I have a 120g reef tank that's fairly heavily stocked. My biggest fish are two 5"+ foxfaces and a 5" marine betta. I even had a 6" porcupine puffer for a couple of years, but I had to remove him when he learned how to crush hermit crabs' shells.

I have a PM bullet 2 skimmer (it cost $400 and is rated for 250g), but it's never really skimmed anything. The neck gets a little scummy each week, but I never have to empty the collection cup. My nitrates and phosphates are always zero, and all my hard corals have done really well, so my crappy skimmer doesn't seem to be causing any problems.

09/10/2007, 12:07 PM	#29
Aquabucket Premium Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Green Bay, Wi. Posts: 4,455	Please explain to me how a skimmer helps with chemical warfare? Running activated carbon is much more effective for this than a skimmer. __________________ "Just a drop in the bucket"

09/10/2007, 12:32 PM	#35
Aquabucket Premium Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Green Bay, Wi. Posts: 4,455	There are plenty of writings that suggest what skimmers remove and what they can't. Quite frankly I don't have the time to track them down right now. I could say the same to you. Show me proof that skimmers can remove chemicals from warring corals. __________________ "Just a drop in the bucket"

09/10/2007, 12:32 PM	#37
kevinohio Registered Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: mayfield ohio Posts: 514	well a lot depends on how good a skimmer you are using and how aggressive you are skimming. I am planning on upgrading my skimmer. since I only started with a once pice wet/dry unit and a marginal skimmer. But I think that with a good quality skimmer, and an aggressive skim. I am currently doing a wet skim, that it will pull out a lot of waste. I know that it works by the particales sticking to the airbubbles. I think it is mainly waste it is pulling out. But I am for sure no expert here. I just know that my water looks crystal clear since I have opened up the skimmer so to speak and let it skim pretty aggressive. __________________ kevin Current Tank Info: 75 gallon FOWLR

09/10/2007, 12:36 PM	#39
Aquabucket Premium Member Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Green Bay, Wi. Posts: 4,455	Tell me this than Rich how effective is carbon at removing these chemicals? There are plenty of articles out there suggesting that carbon can be very effective. Show me one article that states a skimmer has that same ability. __________________ "Just a drop in the bucket"

09/10/2007, 12:39 PM	#40
kevinohio Registered Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: mayfield ohio Posts: 514	why do you both try to prove something which there are no facts to support. I think we can agree that there is nothing solid out there saying that it will help in chemical warefare and leave it at that, rather than to continue to banter back and forth about something neither can prove. __________________ kevin Current Tank Info: 75 gallon FOWLR

09/10/2007, 12:56 PM	#44
kevinohio Registered Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: mayfield ohio Posts: 514	thats my point, why keep posting the same thing if it cant be.Post the opionion and let it go, why be so defensive? Just my opinion, doesnt make me right, and I wont comment on it again since I would then be gulty of the same thing I like my skimmer, but thats me. __________________ kevin Current Tank Info: 75 gallon FOWLR

09/10/2007, 02:12 PM	#50
u418936 Registered Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: NY Posts: 117	I have a 120g reef tank that's fairly heavily stocked. My biggest fish are two 5"+ foxfaces and a 5" marine betta. I even had a 6" porcupine puffer for a couple of years, but I had to remove him when he learned how to crush hermit crabs' shells. I have a PM bullet 2 skimmer (it cost $400 and is rated for 250g), but it's never really skimmed anything. The neck gets a little scummy each week, but I never have to empty the collection cup. My nitrates and phosphates are always zero, and all my hard corals have done really well, so my crappy skimmer doesn't seem to be causing any problems.