Grain Alcohol?
- Thread starter Jerome
- Start date
Craig Manoukian
Well-Known Member
ldrhawke said:
How was this arrived at as the prescribed dosage?
ldrhawke
New Member
I came up with the dosing rate based on several good articles on Vodka dosing from Europe. One was based on dosing for 18 months at about 1ml/100L average.
Initially I started using the ZEO process and I started to better understand what it was doing, and I then started I coming up with my own ideas in an attempt to improve or make easier. The ZEO process does a great job of making any user aware of the importance and dramatic affect from adding a few drops of anything. It emphases the importance of controlled feed and good observation. I believe the main reason for shaking the zeolite rock several times a day is as much for putting the bacteria into suspension, so that the skimmer can export N&P bacteria, as it is to feed the coral with enriched bacteria.
Initially I replaced ZEO food, an acetic acid base product, with Vodka. I am considering blending some vinegar with my Vodka to get more diverse bacteria population.
When I used the ZEO process, I used zeolite rock in the filter bags and covered them with filter floss. I did not notice any negative results. What I did notice was the filter floss was a better home for bacteria biomass than the zeolite rock. I quickly discovered more bacteria was growing heavier on the floss than on the rock.
In the ZEO process the zeolite rock has an affinity for grabbing ammonia and I assume feeding the bacteria with it. I believe the Vodka acts directly on grabbing ammonia and is probably working as well on direct ammonia removal.
It was also visually apparent that tossing the bacteria laden floss, rather than shaking the zeolite rocks, was a more efficient method of exporting N&P laden bacteria.
Using the ZEO process also made me aware of the importance of feeding amino acids to keep the system from becoming depleted by the pulling out too much along with the N&P laden bacteria. I use Reef Crystal salt that has more trace elements and I do 25% water changes every two weeks to address trace element depletion.
I found 1/2 ml per 100L works well the way I was using it with floss in NPR. I cut the normal dose in half because it didn't require a higher dose to work. Dosing more just caused more bacteria to bloom inside the tank on the walls and rock. I want some bloom on the tank rock and wall to pull out the residual P, but not a lot. Using only 1/2 ml per 100L slows down the export process. Too fast a rate of change, good or bad, is what often causes havoc in a reef tank.....except for water changes :turntable
It may take a month or two before you see measureable change. What you will notice is any problem algaes (bryopsis, cyano, dino, bubble, hair, etcalgaes) slow down in growth and then turn white over weeks as phosphate is removed. The Tangs and fish that wouldn't eat it bryopsis before start to eat the white bacteria covered remains.
DO NOT even consider using NPR unless you have a great skimmer.
It would be a waste of Johnny Walker Black or Red, and I'm not sure if the bacteria likes the taste of peat or oak.
Initially I started using the ZEO process and I started to better understand what it was doing, and I then started I coming up with my own ideas in an attempt to improve or make easier. The ZEO process does a great job of making any user aware of the importance and dramatic affect from adding a few drops of anything. It emphases the importance of controlled feed and good observation. I believe the main reason for shaking the zeolite rock several times a day is as much for putting the bacteria into suspension, so that the skimmer can export N&P bacteria, as it is to feed the coral with enriched bacteria.
Initially I replaced ZEO food, an acetic acid base product, with Vodka. I am considering blending some vinegar with my Vodka to get more diverse bacteria population.
When I used the ZEO process, I used zeolite rock in the filter bags and covered them with filter floss. I did not notice any negative results. What I did notice was the filter floss was a better home for bacteria biomass than the zeolite rock. I quickly discovered more bacteria was growing heavier on the floss than on the rock.
In the ZEO process the zeolite rock has an affinity for grabbing ammonia and I assume feeding the bacteria with it. I believe the Vodka acts directly on grabbing ammonia and is probably working as well on direct ammonia removal.
It was also visually apparent that tossing the bacteria laden floss, rather than shaking the zeolite rocks, was a more efficient method of exporting N&P laden bacteria.
Using the ZEO process also made me aware of the importance of feeding amino acids to keep the system from becoming depleted by the pulling out too much along with the N&P laden bacteria. I use Reef Crystal salt that has more trace elements and I do 25% water changes every two weeks to address trace element depletion.
I found 1/2 ml per 100L works well the way I was using it with floss in NPR. I cut the normal dose in half because it didn't require a higher dose to work. Dosing more just caused more bacteria to bloom inside the tank on the walls and rock. I want some bloom on the tank rock and wall to pull out the residual P, but not a lot. Using only 1/2 ml per 100L slows down the export process. Too fast a rate of change, good or bad, is what often causes havoc in a reef tank.....except for water changes :turntable
It may take a month or two before you see measureable change. What you will notice is any problem algaes (bryopsis, cyano, dino, bubble, hair, etcalgaes) slow down in growth and then turn white over weeks as phosphate is removed. The Tangs and fish that wouldn't eat it bryopsis before start to eat the white bacteria covered remains.
DO NOT even consider using NPR unless you have a great skimmer.
It would be a waste of Johnny Walker Black or Red, and I'm not sure if the bacteria likes the taste of peat or oak.
Last edited:
Craig Manoukian
Well-Known Member
Good stuff, thanks again ldrhawke!
I'm currently doing a test on two identical 20 gallon tank. The only occupants are large crustaceans and a few damsels. Nitrate is at around 30 and both systems don't have skimmers.
Tank One: http://www.marinedepot.com/md_viewItem.asp?idproduct=CP2151.
Tank Two: Absolute Vodka (large bottle from Costco $15).
I'll let you guys know in a month.
Tank One: http://www.marinedepot.com/md_viewItem.asp?idproduct=CP2151.
Tank Two: Absolute Vodka (large bottle from Costco $15).
I'll let you guys know in a month.
ldrhawke
New Member
gussy said:
What are you trying to measure? What are you trying to evaluate?
If you don't skim or filter, you don't remove anything from the tanks. You are just reprocessing nutrients.
At least when you get done you will have a good bottle of Vodka.....I won't drink that other stuff even if it cost $4 more a bottle.:drooool: A lot of flowery descriptive words for a dilute bottle of vinegar or alcohol with a few additves. Your Vodka was a much better buy.
Here is a typiclal curve on the application of Vodka in an estabished reef tank with skimming. :
Attachments
Testing Nitrate reduction. Both have the Berlin Airlift skimmer. I have that Azo No3 thing from a long time ago. Purchased when I didn't know anything about anything.
The vodka is a bigger bottle too! Unfortunately I don't drink. I have an open bottle of Patron sitting in the fridge for two years. It's open only because the person who gave it to me insist that I try it immeidately. Maybe I can try Patron instead?
The vodka is a bigger bottle too! Unfortunately I don't drink. I have an open bottle of Patron sitting in the fridge for two years. It's open only because the person who gave it to me insist that I try it immeidately. Maybe I can try Patron instead?
Craig Manoukian
Well-Known Member
Can't read the legend. What do each of the colored lines represent and what are the X and Y axes? Thanks!
ldrhawke said:
You better believe it!!!
BTW...I love your tank. I'm also curious if at one time you were the same person doing a draw through a plenum in your tank some time back. If so, I applaud you and I'm sorry that people can sometimes be not be so nice. Also, Kudos for showing how to do the Zeovit system "on the cheap"
There are great risks if you overdose or quit dosing quickly. I feel that it is important that people understand these issues with this method and that they take GREAT care if they decide to pursue dosing Carbon (whether it is ethanol or acetic acid or any other additional Carbon source). Through careful observation, testing, and experimentation, Ldrhawke has found something that works for him/her. However, please understand that this method requires running the razor's edge with the Redfield Ratio so if you want to pursue this, RESEARCH, RESEARCH, RESEARCH.
I would not do this to my tank....especially if I had a sandbed. However, if you do your research, this is possible. It's also possible to achieve the same results with aggressive skimming, great flow, good chemical filtration, yada, yada, yada.
Here's why...adding a Carbon source to fuel a bacterial bloom has associated risks and good husbandry does not. Especially if you have a sandbed. You cannot pick and choose which bacteria use that Carbon source....they will ALL use it. Sure the AOBs and NOBs will use it but so will the Sulphate Reducing Bacteria (SRB) and Sulphate Oxidizing Bacteria (SOB). Who wants to promote a Sulphide zone in their sandbed??? Most people who follow the "drop sand in and never touch it again because matter can magically disappear"
have a sulphide zone and don't even know it. They think that because they cannot see a grey line indicating a sulphide zone, they don't have one. However, once enough Iron gets introduced via waterchanges, feedings, etc., the grey line will magically appear. If you were at your wits end and wanted to try this, why use Vodka? You would be much better off with moonshine or Everclear http://www.webtender.com/db/ingred/71 . (Note the warning for humans.....I think they should update their webpage to include corals too LOL). It is a lot more pure than Vodka and the Carbon is right on the front (CH3CH2OH).
Assuming you don't accidentally overdose, the affects on N and P are temporary. Bacteria are primarily food limited (but also somewhat housing space limited). There are bacteria that are motile and run around the water column that you can skim out as well as bacteria growin on his floss, but for the most part, they live in biofilms on a surface. After the bacterial bloom, how many of the bacteria are we really skimming out vs creating thicker biofilms? What do you think is going to happen once you stop adding a Carbon source? The nutrient-limited bacteria will die and release N and P into the water column but it will be all in one day (most bacteria don't live more than 24 hours). Yikes...would you collect skimmate for a couple of months and then dump it into your tank all at once?
There are additional risks. If you stray too far from the Redfield Ratio and you become N or P limited, you are going to have a REAL MESS on your hands. If you don't know what the Redfield Ratio is, have a ball. http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=redfield+ratio&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en Ldrhawke has found ways of addressing these issues in his/her tank but make sure you have enough knowledge before willy nilly start dumping Carbon in your tank.
I'm sure that LDRHawke will tell you that he or she did a lot of research and a lot of experimentation. In his/her posts, there are some of the risks laid out and his/her method of combatting them. Be cautious if you decide to pursue this.
ldrhawke
New Member
fishcrazy said:
Yes I am the same guy that started CPW ( controlled plenum wasting), which does work. I stopped using CPW when I realized that by improving on methods to physically export waste and nutrient laden bacteria just made more sense, plus it was easier to control. It is more efficient, and less apt to get unbalanced than trying to biologically treat waste inside the system. But, thanks for the nice comments.
Most all of your comments about adding any external carbon source are correct and should be heeded. It is easy to over dose and is the primary reason failures have occurred. It is why I mentioned it is important to have a high degree of control and patience, like the methods used in apply the ZEO process.
Your comments on it's potential negative effects on other types of bacteria within a DSB are also well taken. The potential for bacterial upset in a DSB can also be caused many other things, which will bring on the same problems you described alcohol causing, which is a large part of my reasoning for becoming a BB advocate.
My recommended Vodka dosing is much lower than most have prescribed in using alcohol in the past and much closer to how the ZEO process is applied. Your comments on producing bacteria and then simply allowing the bacteria to die is exactly why I say to remove the bacteria laden floss after 8 hours and don't simply shake it to break it loose and allow the skimmer to do.
Most everyone acknowledges that phosphates, in some form, does slowy saturate DSB and even live rock (reason for cooking live rock) in all reef tanks. Using only conventional process only, and not also keeping up with phosphate removal, is also walking a tightrope. The potential for phosphate being slowly or even suddenly released; caused a temperture,pH, or DSB becoming unbalanced, is also a very real danger. In my mind the question is, not will it happen,but when will it happen. To address it you can go bare bottom and every couple of years cook all your live rock, but I'm hoping to find a better answer.
I disagree that EverClear alcohol is any more pure than Vodka, it is just a higher proof. It is cheaper where I live to buy Vodka than EverClear, even taking into account it's higher proof.
I believe adding a clean carbon source properly administered will help keep phosphates under control. I'm hoping the increased bacteria film that develops on the live rock helps to slowly extract phosphate or at least keeps them from becoming an unwanted source of increase nutrient release. The success of the ZEO process by many advocates demonstrates carbon addition and increased bacteria extraction has merit in maintaining a low nutrient tank.
Maybe NPR can take it another step.....maybe not. At this point it works for me. As you so well stated, using alcohol with a DSB may cause other issues I have not taken into account. I believe using NPR to extract phosphate has more potential reward than risk if done cautiously. Unlike the ZEO process, I have no commercial interests in the Vodka or filter floss business. I'm only trying to stimulate thought and advance the hobby.
Last edited:
ldrhawke
New Member
fishcrazy said:
Additional response......With all of the tank water passing through the floss at a high rate, coupled with low rate dosing of Vodka directly, I beleive that risk is minimal. The filter floss continuely collects excess food and detrius, which contains unprocessed nitrates and phosphate, the risk of becoming phosphate or nitrate limted is greatly reduced. You are right though.....if you dose excess Vodka that could be come an issue.
ldrhawke
New Member
fishcrazy said:Sounds like a great concept to prevent limitation.
Ever thought of marketing HawkeVit???
HawkeVit, sounds like a great idea......I could buy a gallon of cheap Vodka cut it with Vinegar, add a few drops of other amino acids, and put it into 64- 2 oz bottles that sell for $19.95 each. I'll make $1000.00 plus per gallon.
Any ideas on what I can do to disguise and repackage the filter floss?
ldrhawke said:
LOL!!!
Well let's see. Zeovit experimented with a bunch of zeolites which is the same thing that kitty litter is made of. They seem to make a big deal out of the fact that zeolites occur in nature. Theirs is man-made but many of them are not.
Maybe you could describe it as a Fibrous Redfield Ratio Regulator. It is man-made as well but it is entirely composed of natural elements. http://www.fibersource.com/f-tutor/polyester.htm
Last edited:
ldrhawke
New Member
fishcrazy said:LOL!!!
Well let's see. Zeovit experimented with a bunch of zeolites which is the same thing that kitty litter is made of. They seem to make a big deal out of the fact that zeolites occur in nature. There's is man-made but many of them are not.
Maybe you could describe it as a Fibrous Redfield Ratio Regulator. It is man-made as well but it is entirely composed of natural elements. http://www.fibersource.com/f-tutor/polyester.htm
I think we've got something going here, this is our secret.......
Fibrous Redfield Ratio Regulator is made by reacting ethylene glycol with either terephthalic acid or its methyl ester in the presence of an antimony catalyst. The reaction is carried out at high temperature and vacuum to achieve the high molecular weights need to form useful fibers. It is long-chain man made polymer composed of at least 85% by weight of an ester of a substituted aromatic carboxylic acid, including but not restricted to substituted terephthalic units, p(-R-O-CO- C6H4-CO-O-)x and parasubstituted hydroxy-benzoate units, p(-R-O-CO-C6H4-O-)x.
Strong
Resistant to stretching and shrinking
Resistant to most chemicals
Quick drying
Crisp and resilient when wet or dry
Wrinkle resistant
Mildew resistant
Abrasion resistant
Retains heat-set pleats and crease
Easily washed
Wow!!!
It sounds sufficiently scientific so that's a plus. There's also a list of a lot of advantages that it provides and that has to help. Congratulations...you could easily market this product to reefers.
If you really wanted to have a good advertising plug, you can legally say that your product complies with FTC regulations.
It sounds sufficiently scientific so that's a plus. There's also a list of a lot of advantages that it provides and that has to help. Congratulations...you could easily market this product to reefers.
If you really wanted to have a good advertising plug, you can legally say that your product complies with FTC regulations.