What is in skimmate?

[skriz]

UNless I missed it, he doesn't sample the tank water (control) in the same manner as he does the skimmate. If he did, he would have an anlysis of how much organic material is in the water colum of the aquarium.

The skimmate contained 318 mg of water-soluble organics and approximately 2.12 gms of water-insoluble organics. How many mg and gms of each existed in the water column to begin with? If 318 and 2.12 respectively, then the skimmer pulled out 100%! If a sample volume of tank water (same sample size as the skimmate) yielded the exact same analysis as the skimmate, then the skimmer simply pulled out a "cup" of tank water.

If you know how much was in the tank and then how much was removed by his skimmer, then you can take that information to calculate how many water changes and of what size would you have to do to acheive the same results as the skimmer. At that point you can determine which is a more cost efficient way to proceed.

IMO, I'd rather have a skimmer running constantly..even if it's a seaclone

 

[grouper therapy]

Skriz;594989 wrote: UNless I missed it, he doesn't sample the tank water (control) in the same manner as he does the skimmate. If he did, he would have an anlysis of how much organic material is in the water colum of the aquarium.

The skimmate contained 318 mg of water-soluble organics and approximately 2.12 gms of water-insoluble organics. How many mg and gms of each existed in the water column to begin with? If 318 and 2.12 respectively, then the skimmer pulled out 100%! If a sample volume of tank water (same sample size as the skimmate) yielded the exact same analysis as the skimmate, then the skimmer simply pulled out a "cup" of tank water.

If you know how much was in the tank and then how much was removed by his skimmer, then you can take that information to calculate how many water changes and of what size would you have to do to acheive the same results as the skimmer. At that point you can determine which is a more cost efficient way to proceed.

IMO, I'd rather have a skimmer running constantly..even if it's a seaclone

I think I understand what you are saying but I thought for some reason this was the skimmate that he pulled from the skimmer testing that he done which revealed somewhat of a percentages of toc removal. Good point Raj. I will read back and see if I can find that out. I agree with you I like a skimmer on my system. I think there are other benefits other than DOC removal. If i could sell some stands I would probably bite the bullet and by a super skimmer. That is if I could find a source.

 

[misu]

here you go, great timing:

 

[skriz]

misu;596610 wrote: here you go, great timing:

http://reefbuilders.com/2011/01/04/sreef-stunning-skimmerless-reef-tank-marko-haga/#more-27935">http://reefbuilders.com/2011/01/04/sreef-stunning-skimmerless-reef-tank-marko-haga/#more-27935</a>[/QUOTE]


That guy has negative fish! He's putting in very little (food, poop, etc). I'd like to see what results he would have if he had a more normal fish bioload.

 

[acroholic]

I have always considered protein skimming to be a part of an overall strategy of waste removal/nutrient export, including pre-filtration, protein skimming, water changes, judicious feeding, macro algae cultivation and removal, sulfur denitrification, GFO/GAC use, and moderate fish stocking levels.

Pick your choices from the above menu. Do them all and the burden on each one is less. The fewer you do, the greater the burden on the ones you do use.

For me, the main question is: does what I do for nutrient export keep up with the waste production of my reef system?

Don't use a skimmer, and you'll probably spend more on salt for increased water changes. That adds up $-wise in a 1000 gallon system, Dave. A skimmer is a one time expense outside of electricity to run it. Or maybe have a larger area for macro algae cultivation and removal instead, and you have lighting and other expenses related to that, in addition to larger salt expense without a skimmer.

I try to use all methods I can that I can reasonably employ, including skimming. But there are many paths to the same destination, which for us is a healthy reef system.

 

[rbredding]

confused..


negative fish?

how's that work exactly?

 

[misu]

-4 fish, it was funny

 

[skriz]

Rbredding;596633 wrote: confused..


negative fish?

how's that work exactly?

Have you ever talked with somebody that was so obtuse that you felt dumber when you walked away? It works just like that :lol2:

 

[rbredding]

Skriz;596645 wrote: Have you ever talked with somebody that was so obtuse that you felt dumber when you walked away? It works just like that :lol2:

well... I AM in Construction.....

 

[grouper therapy]

Acroholic;596622 wrote: I have always considered protein skimming to be a part of an overall strategy of waste removal/nutrient export, including pre-filtration, protein skimming, water changes, judicious feeding, macro algae cultivation and removal, sulfur denitrification, GFO/GAC use, and moderate fish stocking levels.

Pick your choices from the above menu. Do them all and the burden on each one is less. The fewer you do, the greater the burden on the ones you do use.

For me, the main question is: does what I do for nutrient export keep up with the waste production of my reef system?

Don't use a skimmer, and you'll probably spend more on salt for increased water changes. That adds up $-wise in a 1000 gallon system, Dave. A skimmer is a one time expense outside of electricity to run it. Or maybe have a larger area for macro algae cultivation and removal instead, and you have lighting and other expenses related to that, in addition to larger salt expense without a skimmer.

I try to use all methods I can that I can reasonably employ, including skimming. But there are many paths to the same destination, which for us is a healthy reef system.

Yes I see your point. I think skimming is a excellent way to remove OCs. I am researching my options of skimmers now big enough to be as effective as (additional) water changes would be and try to do a cost comparison. I think that is where I sidetrack sometimes forgetting the water changes that I would do anyway.. I will have to consider how much of an advantage do water changes offer in the replacement of elements vs. skimming removing them. The cost of operating a skimmer large enough for the system as well. Like I said It will be several thousand dollars initial investment.
i also use IO salt which is way cheaper than a lot of other brands. If bought in volume I can double up the water changes for the same cost as using some of the other salts.

 

[grouper therapy]

Acroholic;596622 wrote: I have always considered protein skimming to be a part of an overall strategy of waste removal/nutrient export, including pre-filtration, protein skimming, water changes, judicious feeding, macro algae cultivation and removal, sulfur denitrification, GFO/GAC use, and moderate fish stocking levels.

Pick your choices from the above menu. Do them all and the burden on each one is less. The fewer you do, the greater the burden on the ones you do use.

For me, the main question is: does what I do for nutrient export keep up with the waste production of my reef system?

Don't use a skimmer, and you'll probably spend more on salt for increased water changes. That adds up $-wise in a 1000 gallon system, Dave. A skimmer is a one time expense outside of electricity to run it. Or maybe have a larger area for macro algae cultivation and removal instead, and you have lighting and other expenses related to that, in addition to larger salt expense without a skimmer.

I try to use all methods I can that I can reasonably employ, including skimming. But there are many paths to the same destination, which for us is a healthy reef system.

Have you ever tried a path to that destination without a skimmer?

 

[ralph atl]

I do think skimmers are important, because that's what I've been told.

It does make sense to have a skimmer as a "just in case" scenario comes up like a dead fish or bacterial bloom.....

I really do feel that they are so overrated & overpriced for the ounces of actual DOC removed on a weekly basis.

I bought my skimmer because it's pretty....lol.

 

[mikesommers]

FWIW I know I would have never tasted my skimmate! My wife would not even let me rinse it in the sink. I always dumped it out back. Now that being said I have ran a system with no skimmer with bad luck BUT I was also not the best at changing water every week. My last system had some super looking corals in it with a decent skimmer on it. Maybe just luck. Right now the holding tank I am using does not have any filtration at all and frags are doing great. So not to confuse you Dave but I have no answer for you bud. I do understand the cost of a skimmer that size is large.

On a side note I have always looked at the waves hitting the beach when I am at the beach house and my thought is that there is a lot of foam that gets left behind to seep into the sand. Maybe thats natures skimmer. Dose that mean you need one? I still have no clue!