Mega Powerful Nitrate and Phosphate Remover - DIY!

Well I thought it couldn't grow any more in two weeks, but this time it reached the top of the window and was getting ready to spill out the end. My other scrubber was not very grown yet, so I did not want to clean this one today, but I thought I better before it spills. Tests today were N02=0, NO3=2, P=.015? (very faint blue). Feeding is one silverside per week to the eel, 4.8 ml/day continuous feeding of Oysterfeast for the corals (very low amount, currently), and misc nori/daphnia for the fish. Pics:













Video:

YouTube - Santa Monica 100 - Max Growth and Screen Removal
.
.
 

mwing04

New Fish
Jun 29, 2010
7
0
0
Georgia
Hello SantaMonica,

Just a quick question for u. I have built a acrylic scrubber similar to yours with the same dimentions, however not nearly as polished as yours. My question is this, I have mine sitting on my sump. Is it normal that millions of microbubbles are released as the water leeves the 1" drain which is pvc'd down toward the bottom of the tank before the bubble trap then thru BT and into the return chamber. Thanks in advance.
 

No you should not have any bubbles. The pvc drain should go to the bottom, and have holes in the sides for water to get out. Then the sump water should go under at least one divider section, which should stop all the bubble. You can adjust the pipe, and scrubber flow, up and down to help too. A more elaborate bubble trap is the under-over-under:

 

Nov 24, 2008
42
0
0
Hey SM, ive been running my skimmer on my 65 now with great success, the only thing is that algea is starting to creep up to the top of the screen to the PVC pipe. My question is, what is then simplest and best way to make a light screen at the top od the scrubber.

Regards, Troy
 

Great Barrier Reef Aquarium

Many people who have not built a scrubber properly (after August 1988) often say how the Great Barrier Reef aquarium was a scrubber "failure" because the corals did poorly. Apparently these people have not done much reading. In the early days of that aquarium, the scrubber was doing it's job great:

1988:

Nutrient Cycling In The Great Barrier Reef Aquarium
ReefBase :: Log In

"The Reef Tank represents the first application of algal scrubber technology to large volume aquarium systems. Aquaria using conventional water purification methods (e.g. bacterial filters) generally have nutrient levels in parts per million, while algal scrubbers have maintained parts per billion concentrations [much lower], despite heavy biological loading in the Reef Tank. The success of the algal scrubbers in maintaining suitable water quality for a coral reef was demonstrated in the observed spawning of scleractinian corals and many other tank inhabitants."

But did you know that they did not add calcium? That's right, in 1988 they did not know that calcium needed to be added to a reef tank. Even five years after that, the Pittsburgh Zoo was just starting to test a "mesocosm" scrubber reef tank to see if calcium levels would drop:

1993:

An Introduction to the Biogeochemical Cycling of Calcium and Substitutive Strontium in Living Coral Reef Mesocosms
An introduction to the biogeochemical cycling of calcium and substitutive strontium in living coral reef mesocosms - Lang - 2005 - Zoo Biology - Wiley Online Library

"It was hypothesized that Ca2+ and the substitutive elements Sr2+ and Mg2+ might [!] have reduced concentrations in a coral reef microcosm due to continuous reuse of the same seawater as a consequence of the recycling process inherent in the coral reef mesocosm."

"The scleractinians (Montastrea, Madracis, Porites, Diploria, and Acropora) and calcareous alga (Halimeda and others) present in the coral reef mesocosm are the most likely organisms responsible for the significant reduction in concentration of the Ca2+ and Sr2+ cations."

"Ca is not normally a biolimiting element, and strontium is never a biolimiting element; HCO3 [alk] can be. It appears that, because of a minor [!] limitation in the design parameters of the mesocosm, these elements and compounds may have become limiting factors. [...] It is surprising that the organisms could deplete the thousands of gallons of seawater (three to six thousand) of these elements even within two or more years [!!].

"The calcification processes are little understood."

So then in the late 90's, the Barrier Reef aquarium start using up it's supply of calcium, and the folks there said "the corals grew poorly". Really. No calcium, and the corals grew poorly. So they "removed the scrubbers" and "experimented with the addition of calcium" sometime after 1998. Then in 2004 it "definitely improved a lot". Really.
 

Low-light Scrubbers

Here is something new, different, and untested. I have not built one yet, but it should work for either SW or FW if the size and flow are correct. It is a vertical scrubber that you hang on the wall, and it requires NO electricity. It is a "low-light" scrubber:






I got the idea when reading a study about algae growth in freshwater streams:

"Algal Response to Nutrient Enrichment In Forested Oligotrophic Streams". Journal of Phycology, June 2008. http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/120083425/abstract

"Algae inhabiting forested streams have the capacity to acclimate to low light intensity. These light conditions affect their photosynthetic efficiency, but do not impair growth rates, in particular, in the case of thin diatom-dominated communities."

In other words, they don't filter as much per square inch (or per square cm) of area, but they do operate on very low light. Apparently it is mostly diatoms that grow in these low-light conditions.

The advantage of a scrubber like this should be obvious: It requires no electricity to power the screen. It still requires a pump, however, since the top of the scrubber would (probably) be high above the top of the tank. The scrubber is designed to operate on the light already available in the room, which would vary greatly depending on how strong the light bulbs are in the room, and how much sunlight comes in through the windows. The more average light the room has, the smaller the scrubber can be. The less light, the bigger it needs to be. Basically, the scrubber uses more area to make up for less light. And since the light is so low, the type of algae that is able to survive is (apparently) mostly diatoms.

Just as with regular scrubbers, the wider the unit it, the more flow is required. So in the spirit of keeping it from consuming too much electricty, a smaller pump could be used if the unit were narrow and tall. But the bottom of the unit will need to drain into either the tank or the sump, so there will be a limit to how low the bottom can be. And the limit to the top will be the ceiling. A tradeoff will need to be made, maybe so that it looks like a vertical picture on the wall. Fortunately the flow does not need to be as much as a regular scrubber, since it is one-sided only.

It will have to be experimented with to see if a clear cover is needed to stop any water dropletts from splashing out. Many people have decorative waterfalls of the same size as these, and they have no cover on them, so maybe water dropletts getting on the floor will not happen. Evaporation would be high though, and this might be reason enough to consider a clear cover.

Cleaning could (apparently) be done by having a removeable screen or porous sheet, just like a regular scrubber has. It would be big though, and would drip as you took it out. Also it probably would not fit into a sink, and so would need a bathtub or shower (or outside) for cleaning. A possible fix for this might be a very flexibe woven plastic mesh, which you could fold up like a towell and easily clean in a sink. A material like this might not lay down flat when it's in the scrubber, however.

This type of scrubber would be easiest to try for somebody with a cement floor, lots of wall space, open widows or skylights, a low sump, high ceilings, and a big sink or patio for cleaning. I have no idea of the size required for the unit.
 

New Feeding Guideline:

Each cube of frozen food you feed per day needs 12 square inches of screen, with a light on both sides totalling 12 watts. Thus a nano that is fed one cube a day would need a screen 3 X 4 inches with a 6 watt bulb on each side. A larger tank that is fed 10 cubes a day would need a screen 10 X 12 inches with 60 watts of light on each side.
 

Although almost no aquarist knows this (athough every marine biologist does), algae produces all the vitamins and amino acids in the ocean that corals need to grow. Yes these are the same vitamins and amino acids that reefers buy and dose to their tanks. How do you think the vitamins and amino acids got in the ocean in the first place? Algae also produces a carbon source to feed the nitrate-and-phosphate-reducing bacteria (in addition to the algae consuming nitrate and phosphate itself). Yes this is the same carbon that many aquarists buy and add to their tanks. In particular, algae produce:

Vitamins:

Vitamin A
Vitamin E
Vitamin B6
Beta Carotene
Riboflavin
Thiamine
Biotin
Ascorbate (breaks chloramines into chlorine+ammonia)
N5-Methyltetrahydrofolate
Other tetrahydrofolate polyglutamates
Oxidized folate monoglutamates
Nicotinate
Pantothenate


Amino Acids:

Alanine
Aspartic acid
Leucine
Valine
Tyrosine
Phenylalanine
Methionine
Aspartate
Glutamate
Serine
Proline


Carbohydrates (sugars):

Galactose
Glucose
Maltose
Xylose



Misc:

Glycolic Acid
Citric Acid (breaks chloramines into chlorine+ammonia)
Nucleic Acid derivatives
Polypeptides
Proteins
Enzymes
Lipids


Studies:

Production of Vitamin B-12, Thiamin, and Biotin by Phytoplankton. Journal of Phycology, Dec 1970:
PRODUCTION OF VITAMIN B12, THIAMINE, AND BIOTIN BY PHYTOPLANKTON1 - Carlucci - 2008 - Journal of Phycology - Wiley Online Library

Secretion Of Vitamins and Amino Acids Into The Environment By Ochromanas Danica. Journal of Phycology, Sept 1971 (Phycology is the study of algae):
SECRETION OF VITAMINS AND AMINO ACIDS INTO THE ENVIRONMENT BY OCHROMONAS DANICA1,2 - Aaronson - 2008 - Journal of Phycology - Wiley Online Library

Qualitative Assay of Dissolved Amino Acids and Sugars Excreted by Chlamydomanas Reinhardtii (chlorophyceae) and Euglena Gracilis (Euglenophyceae), Jounrnal of Phycology, Dec 1978:
QUALITATIVE ASSAY OF DISSOLVED AMINO ACIDS AND SUGARS EXCRETED BY CHLAMYDOMONAS REINHARDTII (CHLOROPHYCEAE) AND EUGLENA GRACILIS (EUGLENOPHYCEAE)1 - Vogel - 2006 - Journal of Phycology - Wiley Online Library
 

Well it took a while to get time to take more pics, but here are the updated ones of my 100 gallon tank. The main thing to mention is that this tank is not for showing... it is for experimenting. Details are at the end of this post. There have been no waterchanges since August 2008. The only dosings are Mrs. Wages Pickling Lime in the top-off (for Cal and Alk), Seachem Reef Advantage mag, and Seachem Reef Advantage strontium. Feeding is 48 ml of skimmate... I mean... blended oysters, per day, 20 square inches of nori per day, and one silverside per week (for the eel). There are no mechanical filters, no chemical filters, and no sand. The only filters are the live rock (now 5 years old), and the algae in the scrubbers. The lighting is 2 X 150 watt halides, and one 96 watt actinic. The tank is 30 inches tall. Tests are Nitrate and Phosphate = 0 (Salifert), pH = 8.3 to 8.6, and the water is contantly filled with food particles:



High-Res: Click here


























continued...