Limitations of DSB's

[Spanky]

Somehow people have gotten the idea that DSB's will process wastes indefinitely. That they miraculously just keep going and going and going like the energizer bunny. Not true.

Think of them like a septic tank, you can add all the RidEx and critters you want but you're still going to end up with endproduct detritus eventually and have to pump it out.

How's that for opening a can of worms?

[cyberchef]

You definately like to start trouble don't you?

But what your saying does make sense. Everything that consumes waste also produces waste, albeit the more it's processed the more it's broken down, and that waste has to end up somewhere. Since the density of the waste is usually higher than the density of SW, all the skimming in the world won't remove it... So it has to settle somewhere, can anyone guess where the most logical place for it to settle will be???

Actually where the 2 most logical places for the end detritus to settle???

[galleon]

"Think of them like a septic tank, you can add all the RidEx and critters you want but you're still going to end up with endproduct detritus eventually and have to pump it out.

How's that for opening a can of worms? "

LOL, more like, "How's that for giving a basic example of the law of conservation of matter."

Something can't come from nothing, something can't go to nothing. It loses stability. It can't miraculously be transformed into non toxic, non-leaching glass detritus. Even amazing transformatinos like photo and chemosynthesis have to have all the specific beginnings and endpoints, with a logical process that still follows the laws of nature, which is something that Ron's almighty DSB hypothesis doesn't do

[Spanky]

Since those critters and mostly bacteria are found in rocks and more importantly DSB's. That's where most of the processing goes on, and that's where most of it is going to stay.

So what's the argument for DSB's?

>LOL, more like, "How's that for giving a basic example of the law of conservation of matter."<

Somebody's doing real good this year! Now I know why your peers are giving you a hard time. They're jealous! and probably feeling a little threatened.

[Geoff]

Originally posted by Spanky
So what's the argument for DSB's?

there is more surface area in a DSB then in a similarly sized big rock.

this could be more wrong information, but i thought in the lower levels of the DSB the sand is slowly disolved, giving another source of CA for the system. i thought this was a reason why a DSB needed to be at least 4" deep.

G~

[mojoreef]

Not quite Geoff the reason for a depth of at least 4 inches was to give enough enviroment for the growth of Anoxic bacteria.

[mojoreef]

Ah nothing finer then the smell of a freshly opened can of worms in the morning.lol BUt but I never read that in the sandbed secrets handbook

MIke

[mojoreef]

OK having had this conversation with the so called experts I have recieved the following argument. From Eric B his arguement is that the denitrifing and the microenviroment of infuana out weight any problems down the road.
and from the girthed one he says that DSB's are great for binding metals in the carbonate, which then you will be able to remove once you change out your DSB and rock every 4 years.

So I will let you feed on that for a while, lol


MIke

[Spanky]

>there is more surface area in a DSB then in a similarly sized big rock.<

Nope, more on a rock. It's just easier to create this with sand.

>at least 4 inches was to give enough environment for the growth of Anoxic bacteria.<

Which can and hopefully does produce an environment that will dissolve CaCo3. It's not much.

>From Eric B his arguement is that the denitrifing and the microenviroment of infuana out weight any problems down the road.<

Denitrifying is the one plus. That can also be remedied several other ways. Fauna has been highly overrated by people that support DSB's.

>he says that DSB's are great for binding metals in the carbonate, which then you will be able to remove once you change out your DSB and rock every 4 years.<

He has no understanding of how bacteria come into play here. Bacteria are the driving force, not CaCo3. It's much more important to remove the bacteria.

[uurt]

VACUUM!!!!!!

Of course what comes out is then end result. Ever see the "skimmate" from a septic tank???? Thank god it doesn't smell llike it too!





Lee

[cyberchef]

Originally posted by Spanky
Since those critters and mostly bacteria are found in rocks and more importantly DSB's. That's where most of the processing goes on, and that's where most of it is going to stay.

Hey your cheating, you opened the can and read the label I see..

[uurt]

I prefer the cans with no label, It's more interesting!
lee

[Green Chromis]

Yea, thats just what I want to do every 4 yrs. replace the sand, rock, corals, gorgonians and anything else that is attached to the rock. Why not just stir up the top 1"or so of sand everytime you do a water change, hopefully once a month or so and put filter material in your sump to collect the detritus that you suspended in the water column. You could aso use a turkey baster or power head to clean the rock. You may not remove 100% of the detritus this way but it sure helps. Way to go Jerel, great post.

[cyberchef]

Originally posted by Geoff

this could be more wrong information, but i thought in the lower levels of the DSB the sand is slowly disolved, giving another source of CA for the system.

In the ocean this works due to the size of the DSB versus the size of the areas that have heavy Calcium use. I don't know the % but Reefs probably take up a very small portion of the ocean let alone when you compare it to the size of the "DSB" contained in that ocean...

On the other hand, we take a very small ecosystem, cram it full of calcium loving creatures and then realize that the Ecosystem cannot supply the demands of the creatures so we then have to supplement. Not to mention that we also keep the % elevated to "optimize" growth.

[cyberchef]

Originally posted by mojoreef
Ah nothing finer then the smell of a freshly opened can of worms in the morning.lol BUt but I never read that in the sandbed secrets handbook

MIke

Hey Mike, I'll bet it's pretty difficult to put into words/print what you don't know. Can we say "clueless" or at least to an extent?