• You are viewing the forum as a Guest, please login (you can use your Facebook, Twitter, Google or Microsoft account to login) or register using this link: Log in or Sign Up

Is it possible?

At the very minimum, it certainly shows there are many ways to build, maintain and grow aquariums!
 
Last edited:
More messages from Eric:

I saw that some sentences were placed twice by the computer, which was of course not the intention. I'm going to respond once to wookii's response, precisely because the essence of everything is in his question! Obviously and without a doubt, a weekly water change is by far the easiest way to keep an aquarium. Fish, plants and especially our micro-organisms prefer constant values! Unwanted algae always benefit from fluctuations, changing the water is easy but is clearly not the best option for a stable aquarium. The majority of aquarists worldwide use regular tap water. Tap water is contaminated worldwide. The list of pharmaceutical compounds found in tap water, drugs, chemicals... is unfortunately quite spectacular in a negative sense. Experts worldwide disagree whether all this contamination found in our drinking water is actually harmful to humanity. One says no because the concentrations are very low, the other is more moderate and states that even experts don't know the long term effects!
What we do know with absolute certainty has been proven in microbiology. Is that fish react very negatively to all these contaminants. Many aquarists who only focus on nitrate values, well-intentionedly replace harmfully contaminated water. Many inexplicable problems are caused by water changes with bad water. By the way, water will be the problem of the future. Like it or not, we will all have to deal with water differently. In more advanced countries, wastewater is already filtered into fresh tap water. In 2023, most water purification companies will have to make enormous investments to put this into practice. The cost of water will increase enormously. As aquarists we should be more aware that water always eventually returns in filtered form. Why not take filtration into your own hands, use contamination as plant fertilizer, and offer our fish constant values without fluctuations.
 
Hi all,
nijat11 said:
The majority of aquarists worldwide use regular tap water. Tap water is contaminated worldwide. The list of pharmaceutical compounds found in tap water, drugs, chemicals... is unfortunately quite spectacular in a negative sense. Experts worldwide disagree whether all this contamination found in our drinking water is actually harmful to humanity. One says no because the concentrations are very low, the other is more moderate and states that even experts don't know the long term effects!
Click to expand...
I think he is right there, there is plenty of contamination in tap water, and we have no real idea of <"whether hormones"> etc are <"coffee or froth">.
nijat11 said:
Many inexplicable problems are caused by water changes with bad water. By the way, water will be the problem of the future. Like it or not, we will all have to deal with water differently.
Click to expand...
That is one of the reasons <"I've used"> (and pushed the use of) rainwater <"If it's yellow, let it mellow and RO is the devil">.

I honestly think rainwater is both <"safer than tap water">* and more sustainable than RO - <"excessive water changes?">.

*edit, just so this isn't misconstrued this is for the tanks, not for drinking. I strongly recommend not drinking rain-water.

cheers Darrel
 
Last edited:
dw1305 said:
Hi all,

I think he is right there, there is plenty of contamination in tap water, and we have no real idea of <"whether hormones"> etc are <"coffee or froth">.

That is one of the reasons <"I've used"> (and pushed the use of) rainwater <"If it's yellow, let it mellow and RO is the devil">.

I honestly think rainwater is both <"safer than tap water"> and more sustainable than RO - <"excessive water changes?">.

cheers Darrel
Click to expand...
Where to get 400 liters of rain water every week 😀
 
Hi all,
nijat11 said:
The same waste, in the form of very small particles, is also a necessity for our filter to function efficiently. The proponents of major water changes are shooting themselves in the foot here, because without nutrition a biological filter cannot function. The enormous planting provides sufficient oxygen for aerobic filtration, additionally supported by 4 oxidizers filled with hydrogen peroxide. Plants consume contamination, ammonium contains more and easily absorbable nitrogen than nitrate. Plants will therefore first consume the ammonium, relieving The same waste, in the form of very small particles, is also a necessity for our filter to function efficiently.
Click to expand...
I'd agree with that as well, I'm not sure that the H2O2 <"oxydators"> make much difference.
nijat11 said:
Sponges, zeolite and purigen do the work here
Click to expand...
I can see the sponges <"as a sustainable option">, but I'm not sure the zeolite or purigen have a smaller environmental footprint than water changes would.
nijat11 said:
Plastic bioballs ensure optimal mixing of the organic contamination, so that enzymes can catalyze the biological filtration by cracking the pollution. Sponge and cotton wool provide mechanical filtering that is easy to clean. Afterwards, the water passes through glass bead filters for filtration up to 5 microns. Just as in professional water purification, I use the MLE configuration, denitrification before nitrification. As a by-product, a base is created that provides more alkalinity, for better nitrification. Zeopool filters are used to extract very fine particles from the water and break them down biologically. An anoxic reactor filled with zeolite is used to house anammox bacteria. Here, ammonium is immediately converted into nitrogen gas N2 in the presence of nitrite as an oxygen source. No more nitrate build-up as in the classic nitrogen cycle. UV is used as disinfection and to crack organic contamination through photolysis. Hydroxyl radicals are generated through a hydra filter to oxidize contamination, viruses and germs. Purigen adsorbs the last residues that have not been filtered out. A large amount of sera siporax ensures very efficient biological filtration, which we never have to clean due to the pre-filtration. A 1 micron filter provides ultra-fine filtration.
Click to expand...
I'll be honest, I can't see <"any advantage to this"> over water changes. This may be because <"I'm a luddite">, but this just seems to have added a lot of potential <"single points of failure">.

cheers Darrel
 
nijat11 said:
More messages from Eric:

I saw that some sentences were placed twice by the computer, which was of course not the intention. I'm going to respond once to wookii's response, precisely because the essence of everything is in his question! Obviously and without a doubt, a weekly water change is by far the easiest way to keep an aquarium. Fish, plants and especially our micro-organisms prefer constant values! Unwanted algae always benefit from fluctuations, changing the water is easy but is clearly not the best option for a stable aquarium. The majority of aquarists worldwide use regular tap water. Tap water is contaminated worldwide. The list of pharmaceutical compounds found in tap water, drugs, chemicals... is unfortunately quite spectacular in a negative sense. Experts worldwide disagree whether all this contamination found in our drinking water is actually harmful to humanity. One says no because the concentrations are very low, the other is more moderate and states that even experts don't know the long term effects!
What we do know with absolute certainty has been proven in microbiology. Is that fish react very negatively to all these contaminants. Many aquarists who only focus on nitrate values, well-intentionedly replace harmfully contaminated water. Many inexplicable problems are caused by water changes with bad water. By the way, water will be the problem of the future. Like it or not, we will all have to deal with water differently. In more advanced countries, wastewater is already filtered into fresh tap water. In 2023, most water purification companies will have to make enormous investments to put this into practice. The cost of water will increase enormously. As aquarists we should be more aware that water always eventually returns in filtered form. Why not take filtration into your own hands, use contamination as plant fertilizer, and offer our fish constant values without fluctuations.
Click to expand...

Eric, if you are reading, you really should consider joining the forum. You obviously have a wealth of knowledge beyond filtration - and the forum would benefit adding your knowledge and experience to the 'collective'.

To answer your points directly, I don't believe water changes have ever been associated with algae - indeed they are often the solution to dealing with an algal outbreak. However I do agree on stability - I am an advocate of maintaining a system that is as stable as possible. I personally change 10% of my tank water daily in part for that reason. In a tank your size I would probably implement a continuous drip water change system giving the ultimate in stability.

You may well be correct about the spurious compounds in our tap water, but its still likely cleaner than water in the majority of our tanks - perhaps your system cleans the water to a level higher than tap water, that's above my pay grade. However those issues can also be mitigated though by using HMA/RO systems or rain water.

The danger for me here is that other people go away from reading all this focusing only on trying to maintain a tank with no water changes - employing none of your advanced filtration techniques - then they end up with the worst of both worlds.

I think the nitrate thing is a red herring for the most part. Most of us have to add additional nitrogen in a planted tank - the system rarely generates enough through biological filtration to sustain healthy plant growth, and certainly not in a CO2 enriched aquarium. Indeed I'm surprised you employ an anoxic reactor (if indeed it works - my understanding is that is is very difficult to achieve water with low enough oxygen levels, particularly in a planted tank that is constantly saturating the water column with oxygen) given you, like many of us, intentionally add nitrogen based fertiliser salts on a regular basis.

I agree on your point in respect of waste water in our hobby from an environmental stand point, but in turn the additional electric consumption of your filter system, application of H2O2, and presumably use of Sodium hypochlorite to recharge the purigen together with presumably regular replacement of single use micron filtration at various stages, likely far exceed the carbon footprint of water changes.

The above doesn't detract from the fact that I am interested in your system, and I'd like to know more about it, even if I wouldn't necessarily consider 'no water changes' as best practice. This forum thrives on interesting and often conflicting approaches.
 
Last edited:
Hi all,
nijat11 said:
Where to get 400 liters of rain water every week
Click to expand...
That is obviously an issue, but I don't think the only options are "1/3 of the tank volume" or "no water changes at all". I'd just like "some". For most of us, with smaller volume tanks, it is less of an issue.

In NW Europe you could easily collect 10,000 litres of rainwater in the winter, you would just need somewhere to store it <"Enduramaxx 10,000 Litre Rainwater Tank">.
Wookii said:
I personally change 10% of my tank water daily in part for that reason.
Click to expand...
I'm a <"10% man as well">.

cheers Darrel
 
Hi all,
I should say I think he (Eric) has a lot of good ideas and in terms of the contribution of plants he is very much talking to the converted.

Eric if you are reading this, you might be interested in <"What is the “Duckweed Index” all about?">
Wookii said:
The danger for me here is that other people go away from reading all this focusing only on trying to maintain a tank with no water changes - employing none of your advanced filtration techniques - then they end up with the worst of both worlds.
Click to expand...
That would be the real worry for me. I get some correspondence from people asking me about <"FatherFish"> or <"Kevin Novak">, and often they've failed to fully understand the processes involved and are <"fixated on one small factor">.
Wookii said:
Indeed I'm surprised you employ an anoxic reactor (if indeed it works - my understanding is that is is very difficult to achieve water with low enough oxygen levels, particularly in a planted tank that is constantly saturating the water column with oxygen) given you, like many of us, intentionally add nitrogen based fertiliser salts on a regular basis.
Click to expand...
You would need to have a separate vessel where the anaerobic denitrification happened <"The nitrifying microbes in aquariums and cycling">
aquaponics_paper-png.png
cheers Darrel
 
Message from Eric.

Yes, that's right, I could say a lot more. But unfortunately I am limited in time. I work 7/7, and that in combination with all the maintenance of the aquariums is often mission impossible. I also receive endless questions from all over the world, to which I respond less and less simply because the time is simply not there. I responded exceptionally this time, because I had the feeling that it was a serious forum. Unfortunately, many Facebook groups and forums are not ready for more knowledgeable people like me. Very often everything I say is cut short, and people react very negatively because everything I say is completely unknown and too complex for them. This then leads to pointless discussions and insults, and I cannot invest my time in that anymore.
 
Hi all,
Bradders said:
So how long can you store rainwater for? (I don't know if the water stagnates etc).
Click to expand...
Pretty much eternally, if you stop <"organic pollution"> getting in to the container.

Rainwater is naturally distilled <"Water cycle">, so is pretty much devoid of nutrients and it is the nutrients (fixed nitrogen, organic carbon (C) etc,) that fuels the growth of micro-organisms.

All the water on the Earth has just endlessly recycled for the last 4.5 billion years - <"Scientists Discover The Water You Drink May Be 4.5 Billion Years Old | nyruralwater.org">

The <"Daphnia Bioassay"> is a pretty fool-proof method of telling whether your water is OK to use.

Some people will get rainwater with single figure conductivity values, in my case it never goes much below 30 microS. / cm, mainly because of limestone dust , moss and lichen on the roof.

cheers Darrel
 
Last edited:
John q said:
So basically we can avoid water changes providing we have a water treatment plant in our house! Cool.
Click to expand...
Wookii said:
Interesting! I'll let others provide more detailed analysis on whether the above seems credible. I still maintain though, that is a huge amount of effort to go through , just to avoid draining off a bit of water and adding a bit more fresh water back in! Almost the entirety of that incredibly complex system could be avoided with a simple automated daily water change system.
Click to expand...

I agree...

It raises the question, what it means to not change water... ? To me this all sounds so intricate and elaborate to the point where I would say that he is in-effect changing water.... it's just that the waste water never leaves his house but instead is treated at his house and re-used in the tank.


Its an interesting topic and there are a tremendous amount of R&D efforts going into this in arid regions of the USA, to reuse waste water and put it back into the house hold taps on a large scale... does that mean that future aquarists living in such regions will also not be changing water? 😉 ... I guess so... 🤷‍♂️

Cheers,
Michael
 
Last edited:
Hi all,
MichaelJ said:
To me this all sounds so intricate and elaborate to the point where I would say that he is in-effect changing water.... it's just that the waste water never leaves his house but instead is treated at his house and re-used in the tank.
Click to expand...
I think that is pretty much where we are. It is a proxy for changing water, without actually changing any water.
MichaelJ said:
Its an interesting topic and there are a tremendous amount of R&D efforts going into this in arid regions of the USA, to reuse waste water and put it back into the house hold taps on a large scale... does that mean that future aquarists living in such regions will also not be changing water? 😉 ... I guess so..
Click to expand...
I'm sure you are right, even in the famously wet UK <"2024 United Kingdom floods - Wikipedia"> we have real issues with <"drought and water abstraction in S.E. England"> and it is only going to get worse as the <"Earth warms"> and we (are likely to) have drier summers (and wetter winters). I wrote this in 2012 ....
....... I think for those of us who live in the South and East we are going to have to get used to both water shortages and higher prices for the water that we use. As an example Cambridge has a very low rainfall "At the Botanic Garden, the 30-year average annual rainfall from 1970 to 2000 was just 557 mm" almost exactly the same as Jerusalem, and making it drier than Rome, Perth or Seville.......
Click to expand...
but it wasn't really prophetic, <"more inevitable">.

cheers Darrel
 
It's removing cleaning and returning [the same] water. Rather than changing out water for different water.

A philosophical question would be whether the cleaned returned water is really and truly 'not changed'.

There are many very interesting and intelligent and capable individuals in and around this hobby. It's deep.
 
LFNfan said:
A philosophical question would be whether the cleaned returned water is really and truly 'not changed'.
Click to expand...

Any question can be turned into a philosophical question even without any merit what so ever (Georg Friedrich Hegel didn’t live in vain) , but Yes, the water is indeed changed if you consider the processes . Granted, he recycles the water to conserve it which is commendable. He recycles the water by sending it through an elaborate treatment system and of course he replenish evaporated water from an outside source (I assume) - which over the course of 13 years would amount to quite a few water changes, but I digress.

Without further ado, I will claim with bluster that this is not what anyone in the hobby would consider no water change. Claiming that it is, is just silly... If he would have had some unique strategy within the means and resources of even an advanced hobbyist that didn't include turning your home into a water treatment plant I would probably be more interested to learn more.

Cheers,
Michael
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top