ECO-Aqualizer, My Review, Locked and Loaded...

Just stopped in, sorry been busy,,
I will post some answeres the best I can.
Gresham,
I am not getting touchy and no reason to desensitize myself, thanks for your input.
See yas later

 

[quote author=CheckMateKingll link=board=Product;num=1050800333;start=30#36 date=10/08/03 at 06:51:01]Hi Yikes,
The pic. that is shown is when I started my ECO, in that post I explained where and how I was setting up the unit.
It is not a pic with the unit set up, only a reference shot.
That wasn't a dumb question, by the way, that is a UV sterilizer in the pic. on the left. I no longer use it..
HTH[/quote]

Actually CheckMateKingll, you still are using a kind of sterilizer (just not a UV one). If you go to this link:

http://www.zeewaterforum.net/forums/index.php?board=37;action=display;threadid=5968;start=45

you'll notice near the bottom that Habib (owner of Salifert) states that the Eco-Aqualizer is likely producing ROS's (Reactive Oxygen Species). The majority of the page is in Dutch, but parts are in English. I've spoken with Habib and he is preparing a full English translation. ROS's include a number of compounds including: ozone, peroxide, superoxide , bleach and others. This would go a long way towards explaining clearer water and the killing of cyano, algae and parasites. On the 5th page of the thread, Habib posts an interesting patent that was recently granted for the magnetic treatment of water.

I think this certainly sheds some much needed light on this subject, but it doesn't explain your necessity for less additives. Please elaborate if you would. If this is in fact an unintended side-effect that would be great. Like I said though, I'm interested in the how's and why's behind it if its true.

If you're really interested in the rest of the thread, don't speak Dutch, and don't want to wait for Habib, then cut and past messages into this page: http://www.freetranslation.com/ Its not perfect, but you can at least get a sensible translation.

Reefguy

 

Great Stuff Reefguy,
I will research it further and try to get some of your answeres about less consumption of additives in my tank.

 

As some additional followup to this:

Habib posted the following in Randy Holmes-Farley's forum on RC:
From: http://www.sgnis.org/publicat/7236.htm
"Preliminary studies indicate that magnetically treated water may cause tissue degeneration associated with the gill and other structures specialized for gas exchange and feeding. In the laboratory, 200 mussels were randomly assigned to two 30-L aquaria, one equipped with a water treatment device, the other with an inactive (dummy) unit. Over 78 days, the mussels were harvested, measured, and dissected. Twenty-six mussels from the experimental group displayed aberrations in gill tissue, whereas only four specimens from the control group exhibited similar deviations. The difference was significant (X2 = 18.98, df = 1, P < 0.0001), suggesting that tissue degradation might have resulted from the effects of exposure to magnetically treated water."

In addition, I found some interesting sources of information on the effects of one of our favorite ROS's (Hydrogen Peroxide)

- Hydrogen Peroxide as algae treatment

- I know that its reviewed here, but in light of the effects of ROS's, the Oxydator seems to have benefits similar to the Eco-Aqualizer (note the use of a "Special Ceramic" as a catalyst).

- Here's a little bit of information on ROS's

- Habib points out in another post on RC that EcoAqualizer basically admits that their product "frees" up chlorine (an ROS). Here, they make the statement about clorine.

Interesting stuff.

 

I have been investing time looking into the Eco-Aqualizer as well. And from what I have read thus far, I can understand why you are not having to dose cal/alk as often as before. It is quite simple really and I am surprized that so many have questioned it, if they infact have done as much research as I have. This system acts as a catalyst, by breaking up molecules before being removed by your protein skimmer/ refugium ( nitrate/ nitrite removal system) In systems that do not use the Eco-Aqualizer, calcium molecules will get attached or tangled up with proteins and nitrates/ nitrite molecules and then are removed by your skimmer. In traveling through the Eco-Aqualizer, these molecules break apart and only the proteins are removed and the needed calcium and other elements remain in the water. Therefore you do not need to dose additives as often as before. This is just my opinion of this product. I have yet to order one, as I have a rather large system and will have to have two for it to function properly.

TK

 

"It is quite simple really and I am surprized that so many have questioned it, if they infact have done as much research as I have. This system acts as a catalyst, by breaking up molecules before being removed by your protein skimmer/ refugium ( nitrate/ nitrite removal system) In systems that do not use the Eco-Aqualizer, calcium molecules will get attached or tangled up with proteins and nitrates/ nitrite molecules and then are removed by your skimmer. In traveling through the Eco-Aqualizer, these molecules break apart and only the proteins are removed and the needed calcium and other elements remain in the water. Therefore you do not need to dose additives as often as before. This is just my opinion of this product."

Katspaw,
Thanks for your input, you have jogged my memory in that I was told, but did not read, about the molecular benefit which then allows better and more effecient absorption of additives resulting in lesser dosages.
This review was of my opinion with valid questions asked, I have been ultra busy and did not have the time to find some of the answeres that I have been asked. You had just helped me answere the question that seemed so hard to understand why.
Thanks for the help.

 

Hey Katspaw,

This is a really interesting idea and it sounds very simple; however I'd like to see some analysis of the outflow of one of these units and compare that against the water flowing into it.  Its nice to say that it ought to work this way, but just like the proof that the device is producing ROS's, it would be nice to see data showing an increase in available calcium and other elements in the water after passing through this device.  Like I said before, I'm not bashing here, I'm just trying to ferret out all the facts and create an undeniable analysis that will explain how this thing works and why.  So far I'm comfortable in understanding the effects of the ROS's and why they work (don't know that I want or need that in my tank, but that's me).  Given these facts, it makes sense why some of the benefits that the manufacturer lists are valid.

Let's take a look at what we now know about what this unit is doing and add to that the possibility that it has the added benefit of making calcium and trace elements more available.

We now know that the unit is likely producing ROS's like hydrogen peroxide and chlorine.  Its freeing those up to act on things like algae, phytoplankton, cyano, etc. in the water column.  These substances are also known to increase dissolved oxygen and raise ORP.  The claims made on the manufacturers site are as follows:

- Keeps aquarium water crystal clear  
- First I guess you could say it increases water clarity by removing suspended organisms and possibly other nutrients.  The only bad thing about this is that H2O2 isn't picky about what organisms it kills, so you'll be inadvertently wiping out beneficial things as well. This has pretty much been the crux of the debate against the use of UV sterilizers in reef aquariums over the years.  Just like everything else in this hobby though, there are those that swear by it and those that won't use one.

- Enhances filtration & skimming
- It seems to accomplish this by creating more skimate because these dead organisms will be removed (so its not exactly increasing the efficiency of a skimmer, its just giving it more to skim)... which isn't a bad thing necessarily depending on which side of the UV Sterilizer argument you're on.  Its not clear at this point how the unit free's up nutrients and if that is something that is a benefit or not.  The manufacturer claims that the unit frees up nutrients... are these used by organisms or are they removed via skimming (or both)?

- Prevents & disrupts diseases
- This one is pretty simple... hydrogen peroxide has been proven to Kill disease causing organisms in the water column (again, see this link)

- Increases ORP and stabilizes pH
-   The stabilization of pH is another question?  What do they mean by this?  Does pH not fluctuate corresponding to the rise and fall of CO2 in the tank?  The formation of more free oxygen will assumably have a positive effect on pH.  I have not (as yet) seen any studies done on this.

- Increases Dissolved Oxygen
- Its been proven that the addition of hydrogen peroxide has the benefit of raising dissolved oxygen.

- Increases availability of both nutrients and trace elements
- Ok so this is the claim (at the moment) in question.

Katspaw you said you did a lot of research on this that made this statement very clear.  Can you share some of that research (links, study references, etc) to demonstrate that this was the case?  During your research, what is the average amount of calcium (or other beneficial molecules) that gets "attached or tangled up with proteins and nitrates/ nitrite molecules"?  Would frequency of this "attaching" or "tangling" correspond in a predictable fashion to the level of dissolved organic compounds in a system?  

If the device was enhancing the removal of DOC's over time, wouldn't the level of additives required vary according to the level of DOC's?

Its again interesting to note that the more I look at this device, the more I notice similarities to the Oxydator.  Check out their FAQ.

 

Good analyzes Reefguy,
I use both items, Aqualizer and Oxydator, all the life in my tank looks healthy and no problems, knock on wood, so far. Could be overkill though, I would like to see Katspaw contribute more to this thread.
TIA
Good discussions going on here.

 

[quote author=CheckMateKingll link=board=Product;num=1050800333;start=45#47 date=10/16/03 at 10:33:21]
I use both items, Aqualizer and Oxydator, all the life in my tank looks healthy and no problems, knock on wood, so far. Could be overkill though[/quote]

It might indeed be overkill, however (once again) it would require some testing to see what exactly is happening to the water after it is exposed to both devices.  I guess my next question for you would be: why strive for such sterility in a reef tank?  I have a 180 gallon reef tank as well that (unlike the 55) I run skimmerless with only a 55 gallon sump.  Now granted it has a 5" DSB and about 200 lbs of live rock as a biological filter, but other than the sump (which has its own DSB and about 20 lbs of LR and macro algae) there is no other filtration.  I feed the tank quite often with phytoplankton and some homemade mush (the recipe is from Dr. Eric Borneman).  Despite all the added organics, the tank doesn't have nuisance algae and the rocks are covered with coralline and all kinds of filter feeding life forms (dusters, sponges, tunicates, etc.).  I shudder to think what would happen to all this life if I were to sterilize that tank's water that much.  Now, I don't want to open the whole debate of skimmer vs. skimmerless up, so let's not go there.  Understanding that everyone has their own way of managing their tanks (and everyone is different in what they find aesthetically pleasing), my question remains... why would someone want to achieve a level of (for a lack of a better term) hyper-sterility?  What's healthier for a reef tank: a sterile environment or one that has just enough DOC's and microbial life in the water column to support the filter feeder population?