Poll: UV Sterilizer on reef - Yes or No?

[thegrimreefer]

And once you've answered, explain...

Waste of money?

Outstanding investment?

Size for a 400 gallon system?

Brand recommendation?

[David Grigor]

Been wanting to get one for a while just never have pulled the trigger. Not really concerned about fish diseases as I don't have any plans of adding new fish but really getting lazy and would like to go longer between periods of cleaning the glass........

[Redwinger]

I answered "yes I use one" as I used to with the big tank and will be incorporating one in the new tank again. IMO it made a big difference with not only keeping sickness in check with the fish but also keeping algae under control. On that size system you would need a relatively large one up towards 100 watts minimum. Emperor aquatics and Aqua ultraviolet are the two top brands.

[sea monkey]

I use one and it does a good job of keeping algae down in a system that intentionally has high nutrient levels . I would use one for both the reasons posted above.

If algae is your main concern it doesnt need to be huge but if sickness is your goal go big or don;t do it at all. I would maybe think about the High Output 50/80W UV that Emperor aquatics makes http://www.emperoraquatics.com/aquasmarthouv.php I got my 40W from KOI acres : ) "I think" the High output ones are cheaper than getting the equivalent strength normal output.

[markymark]

Were is everyones placed?

[Redwinger]

Were is everyones placed?

I prefer to have mine placed inline with the skimmer. I have found that this works best.

[mtfatwork]

I will be running one on my system as well, and it sounds like our setups are going to be pretty close in both display size, and sump volume... ;)

[redlion4]

Yes, we run one. It's a 15W for our 55 gallon tank.

Aqua Ultraviolet replaced the housing under a lifetime warranty last year (the unit is ~5 years old). In roughly 4 weeks without the UV unit installed, algae took off like gangbusters! Took another 2-3 weeks to get back under control after the replacement unit arrived and was installed. It is located in line of the return pump from the sump to the main display, powered by a Rio 2100. The new housing is re-designed and removes the fail point where our original unit began to leak.

I would also comment extensively regarding the excellent health of our fish, however *IF* I was to do so it would certainly jinx our success...:doh:

Ryan.

[Soltaker]

I'm going to run one soon. :smile:


EDIT: you should get this one :icon_rock:

http://www.marinedepot.com/md_viewItem.asp?idproduct=AV2393

http://www.marinedepot.com/IMD/150/AV2393.jpg

[David Grigor]

Of course coming from a guy who operates big machines.......

[Jubei]

Running one right now and have not had a break out of ICK since.

[stuckey_t]

Currently my system is well over 400 gallons and I've ran the tank with one and without. Personally I didn't see that big of a difference with it either way. I've witnessed much better success using a cheap ozone unit injected into my skimmer than anything the UV ever did. As far as fish diseases go etc, once they hit that ozone in the skimmer they are gonna get knocked out anyway. My hippo and brown tang had ich, ozone added and boom no more tomites/larvae/whatever the hell they are! in the water column. 2 days later no more ich on the fish. Since running the Spazz Volcano I skim my tank super wet and have my bubbles in the skimmer just breaking up at the top of the neck. I think having a huge skimmer has made all the world for me in keeping tank organic loads down so nusiance algae has a much harder time taking hold. Frequent water changes (40-50 gallons twice a month), quality (liquid drained) food, and letting coralline take hold everywhere with proper calcium and carbonate addition and the algae doesn't have much of a chance anyway. I'm not saying UV doesn't maybe help some things but there are cheaper ways to skin a cat than justify the cost for the sized unit you would be talking on your setup....again just my 2 cents....spend that $300-$400 bucks on a cool coral you frag me a piece of:rotflmao:

[coralreefer]

The only way that I would want one is if I had an aiptasia filter. I'd use it to kill any aiptasia that would enter my fuge/display. I like the idea that I'm creating somewhat of a foodweb, even though it's nothing like that of a reef. Last week in my plant biology lab at the U, I brought in aiptasia to disect and we could see the dinoflagellates within (they compromise most of the mass on their tentacles!). When we looked at the water we saw many different kinds of single-celled organisms (green algae, diatoms, bacteria, etc.). In a system with a UV sterilizer you would probably not see the diversity.

[stuckey_t]

If you want cheap water purification on top of a big skimmer, activated carbon, and water changes check out the ENALY units from china mentioned by Farley in this link:

http://www.reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-04/rhf/index.php

Always here to help ya save some $$$$$$ or make ya spend it on corals:lol_hitting:

T.

[thegrimreefer]

In my continuing research on the subject, I now see that Anthony Calfo also recommends ozone over UV for most home systems.

[sea monkey]

i used one of them enaly units. generated too much ozone and shut down foam production in my skimmer : (

the ozone would completely melt the nylon tee's in days and that was without the air drier.

prolly work great in a ozone reactor or a really big skimmer. even in a big skimmer id watch how it effected the skimmer performance.

good thing is they are super cheap so if you don't like it there is no big loss : )

[sea monkey]

In my continuing research on the subject, I now see that Anthony Calfo also recommends ozone over UV for most home systems.

for the most part ozone and UV really are for different things . the most common use for ozone is for water clarity and UV is for sterilizing and algae control.

keep in mind that ozone will only sterilize the water in a reactor . you could put enough ozone into your skimmer that it would also sterilize but it will be at the expense of your skimmers production . if you use sterilizing levels of ozone in skimmer it will change the electrical charge of all the waste to same charge which causes them to repel each other rather than clump together. It is much harder for the skimmer to remove these smaller particles. It will also break the carbon chains on the bubbles which will cause them to prematurely burst.

[tico mike]

for the most part ozone and UV really are for different things . the most common use for ozone is for water clarity and UV is for sterilizing and algae control.

keep in mind that ozone will only sterilize the water in a reactor . you could put enough ozone into your skimmer that it would also sterilize but it will be at the expense of your skimmers production . if you use sterilizing levels of ozone in skimmer it will change the electrical charge of all the waste to same charge which causes them to repel each other rather than clump together. It is much harder for the skimmer to remove these smaller particles. It will also break the carbon chains on the bubbles which will cause them to prematurely burst.

What if you can increase the bubble production by adding an extra pump to a skimmer? Or are you saying it effects production in another way? Or am I just confused?

[wes]

is a skimmer the only way to run ozone? what about a second skimmer for ozone so that the first would be unaffected? Then maybe if you didn't want to run ozone all the time you could double skim. (excuse me if that's a rediculous suggestion, still a newbie)

[oyam123]

http://www.uvcomparison.com/aquauv_rhetoric.php

[mattb]

I think there are better things to spend your $$$ on, like Troy said, corals..... If you're using for fish disease treatment, that's cool. Seems like overkill though if you're using for algae control, as you're not treating the root cause. I am going to be running light ozone though so that may be a bit hypocritical of me :)

[Redwinger]

Having run both in the past. I would rather run UV over ozone. As ryan stated after a while the ozone seemed to slow the skimmer way down. I also noticed to visible difference in anything whether I was running ozone or was not.

[morty]

In Sprung's Reef Aquarium vol 3, he mentions that levels of dissolved organic nitrogen and carbon are several times higher in a tank than in nature, and that UV can help break down these molecules. Also, bacterial levels in the water can be many times higher, so UV can reduce them and lower the overall level of DOC (but probably not as well as carbon).

Bottom line is that in addition to helping control algae and pathogens, UV can also reduce DOC.

[mattb]

DOC is better removed by using ozone and/or carbon.... I'd check the quote as far as more bacteria in aquaria than on the reefs.

[morty]

Sprung cites Harker 2001, in saying that bacteria levels can be several times higher in some aqauria than on a natural reef -- he goes on to say that using UV may prolong the useful life of carbon (p254)

[thepollock]

how good are the uv for getting rid of sickness. i want one but $$$ is the thing that is holding me back.

[wkjames]

Currently my system is well over 400 gallons and I've ran the tank with one and without. Personally I didn't see that big of a difference with it either way. I've witnessed much better success using a cheap ozone unit injected into my skimmer than anything the UV ever did. As far as fish diseases go etc, once they hit that ozone in the skimmer they are gonna get knocked out anyway. My hippo and brown tang had ich, ozone added and boom no more tomites/larvae/whatever the hell they are! in the water column. 2 days later no more ich on the fish. Since running the Spazz Volcano I skim my tank super wet and have my bubbles in the skimmer just breaking up at the top of the neck. I think having a huge skimmer has made all the world for me in keeping tank organic loads down so nusiance algae has a much harder time taking hold. Frequent water changes (40-50 gallons twice a month), quality (liquid drained) food, and letting coralline take hold everywhere with proper calcium and carbonate addition and the algae doesn't have much of a chance anyway. I'm not saying UV doesn't maybe help some things but there are cheaper ways to skin a cat than justify the cost for the sized unit you would be talking on your setup....again just my 2 cents....spend that $300-$400 bucks on a cool coral you frag me a piece of:rotflmao:

In my continuing research on the subject, I now see that Anthony Calfo also recommends ozone over UV for most home systems.

i used one of them enaly units. generated too much ozone and shut down foam production in my skimmer : (

the ozone would completely melt the nylon tee's in days and that was without the air drier.

prolly work great in a ozone reactor or a really big skimmer. even in a big skimmer id watch how it effected the skimmer performance.

good thing is they are super cheap so if you don't like it there is no big loss : )

for the most part ozone and UV really are for different things . the most common use for ozone is for water clarity and UV is for sterilizing and algae control.

keep in mind that ozone will only sterilize the water in a reactor . you could put enough ozone into your skimmer that it would also sterilize but it will be at the expense of your skimmers production . if you use sterilizing levels of ozone in skimmer it will change the electrical charge of all the waste to same charge which causes them to repel each other rather than clump together. It is much harder for the skimmer to remove these smaller particles. It will also break the carbon chains on the bubbles which will cause them to prematurely burst.

is a skimmer the only way to run ozone? what about a second skimmer for ozone so that the first would be unaffected? Then maybe if you didn't want to run ozone all the time you could double skim. (excuse me if that's a rediculous suggestion, still a newbie)

I think there are better things to spend your $$$ on, like Troy said, corals..... If you're using for fish disease treatment, that's cool. Seems like overkill though if you're using for algae control, as you're not treating the root cause. I am going to be running light ozone though so that may be a bit hypocritical of me :)

Having run both in the past. I would rather run UV over ozone. As ryan stated after a while the ozone seemed to slow the skimmer way down. I also noticed to visible difference in anything whether I was running ozone or was not.

DOC is better removed by using ozone and/or carbon.... I'd check the quote as far as more bacteria in aquaria than on the reefs.

Ozone in the atmosphereis good... Ozone in your house is poison. Ozone = Smog.

Read this, especially the second to the last paragraph: http://www.cal-iaq.org/o3_fact.htm


If you are really interested in checking more into this, here is a Google search that lays this out: http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&aq=t&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLR,GGLR:2006-18,GGLR:en&q=ozone+generators+health+hazard

I love aquariums, but as a healthcare professional, there is NO WAY ON EARTH I would ever put one of these POISON MACHINES in my house. I don't care how good it may or may not be for my tank. My health and the health of all of those I welcome into my home is too important.

[sea monkey]

Home ozone unit : )

http://www.scinet.cc/articles/ionicbreeze/images/ionicbreeze.jpeg

[wkjames]

Home ozone unit : )

http://www.scinet.cc/articles/ionicbreeze/images/ionicbreeze.jpeg

Read the links. It is unbelievable that these are still for sale. Read the links.

[sea monkey]

i read somewhere that the ionic breeze makes up for like 80% of sharper images sales, if they lost that thing it would be curtains for them.