Why cant they come up with a bio-media that can breakdown nitrates?

[spruce]

Sure seems like manufactures making those typical wet/dry/sumps could make a bio-media that could handle the breakdown of Nitrates.
Anyone know why this isn’t being done, or can’t be done?
This is ironic to me: From my experience, 100 percent of marine LFSs (At least in the Atlanta area) sell these really cool looking Wet/Dry sumps with Bio-Media and other chambers. Yet it seems around 90 percent of the Internet message boards, articles and chat rooms absolutely hate a wet/dry filtration system.
About seven Tropical Marine stores are within a 30-mile radius of me. The stores range from around 2500 square feet to 5000 square feet and all of them have a healthy section dedicated to their wet/dry/sump filtration systems.
I do understand how LFS’s benefit from selling more stuff and the Internet message boards do not. But it still seems odd to me that absolutely no one on the Internet supports a wet/dry system. Also, it seems that if wet/dry systems were truly as bad as the Internet claims them to be, then the LFS’s could easily change the bio-media to something else… (LR, DSB chambers, New Marine Widget 101 (sarcasm there) or what ever) and still be able to profit just as much.
**Please dont get me wrong. By no means am I a hard core Wet/Dry supporter. At the moment I am simply inderferent to them. Yet completely confused what causes this extreem difference of opinion. One group claims they are great, and another group claims they are horrible, yet there is no group inbetween?**
So what truly causes this extreme difference of opinions between the Internet and LFSs?
Off the top of my head here are my theories:
a) Atlanta is way behind the times and most other cities are not?
b) The Internet is somewhat brainwashed, believing the wet/dry/sump is the devil instead of it just being useless?
c) The Marine hobby industry’s, marketing departments haven’t figured how to sell a “new version” of their wet/dry/sumps with new anaerobic bio-media. Or simply change their sump design around a bit, making sure it has many benefits, yet no disadvantages such as the “Nitrate Factory.”
d) Many people have had Nitrate problems with the wet/dry/sump, and the manufactures blame it on inadequate maintenance while the end users find out their LR and DSBs can handle biological filtration just as well, and doesn’t require the maintenance of the wet/dry/sump
Hmmm, now after reading what I just wrote, option D seems extremely likely. Yet, it still doesn’t explain why marine manufactures haven’t adapted their sump to acomidate the best of both worlds. And it also doesn’t explain why there is virtually no one on the Internet arguing a Wet/Dry's benefits if properly maintained, or at least some people arguing Wet/Dry bio-media are at worst a useless item.
At any rate, I got off the original topic about manufactures making a media with enough pores or what ever to handle the Nitrate break down as well as the Ammonia, and Nitrites.
Thanks,
B

 

[plum70rt]

by the time I read all that I forgot what you orginally asked
but I use a denitrator that gets rid of the nitrates, it uses menthol to start the process and works great for me ,7 months no water changes, water is always 0 for nitrate ,nitrites

 

[finland]

I will bite on this topic. You raise an interesting question why manufacturers can't develop a wet dry that will reduce nitrates. I believe that it would be very difficult to do with a traditional wet dry. Doesn't matter what type of media. There is too much oxygen present due to the current and contact with air. Wet dry are excellant in reducing ammonia and nitrites. My oppinion as to why they are considered trate factories is because of lack of maintenance. It is a real pain to clean bio balls or what ever media is in it. They collect debris and because of the high level of bacteria, the ammonia and nitrites from rotting debris is quickly converted to trites. and because of the high level of oxygen in a wet dry system, the anerobic bacteria needed to convert trates to nitrogen gas is not present. I use a wet dry system and am happy with it, but I clean the bio balls when I do water changes. I read somewhere, that during the nitrification cycle, if the anerobic bacteria is in close contact with the aerobic bacteria(such as in a DSB) the nitification cycle is a lot more efficient. With a wet dry, that is not the case. As to designing anerobic bio balls, I suppose it would be possible to make, they would have to really slow down the flow in the wet dry, but would it be economical, where people could afford to buy it?

 

[gregzbobo]

Actually, denitrator units ARE manufactured, but they are fairly costly to run, and they require lots of maintenance, mostly in adding food for the bacteria to metabolize. Some of them use alcohol I believe to fuel the bacteria, so that makes these units somewhat risky if you use too much of the alcohol or the unit fails and alcohol gets into the tank.

 

[plum70rt]

90 days of menthenol costs 12 dollars , not to much to run, no mantainence at all is needed

 

[jonthefb]

funny story here. i recently took a trip with my lfs owner to the aquamedic wholsaler in th enext town over. they are one company who actually manufacturer a denitrator. the gentlemans name was barry, and he was australian. and had been a whosale rep for about 14 years. they had previously had their warehouse in texas but instead moved to colorado. anyhow, aqua medic is a german made company and most of their product is made/meant for the german market. we were looking at a few of their high end wet/dry filters, chock full of compartments, with bio balls, etc etc. and barry said that they dont sell worth a damn here in the states, however the european market eats them up. he says that here in the u.s. everyone wants an empty sump so that they can do a natural bio filter with a fuge or whatever. he said that he would also like to see them come out with a nice unit that used a combo of the two, but i thought it was kinda interesting, that us americans, just wnat an empty tank that we can do whatever we want with, while the germans liek all these high tech, goodie-goodies that they can fiddle with!
anyhow, just thought id share a story
good luck
jon

 

[blondenaso1]

The companies that market saltwater aquariums had to find something they can market. Most people when they start out n the hobby start out with a wet/dry. I myself walked into the LFS and wanted to know what I needed for a SWA. If the guy began to ramble on about a refugium and denitrator and LR/LS I probably would not have fallen into the hobby. Wet/drys are affordable, easy to maintain/explain, and effective. There are companies out there that sell custom wet/drys that have a whole smorgasborg of stuff on them; places for probes, refugium, bioballs, skimmer, calium reactor, ect. but as expected these units are very expensive. I think everyone who really gets into the hobby uses a wet/dry in conjunction with other forms of filtration or does away with them all together.
As for the media question, I believe jon was right when explaining the limitation of the wet/dry by using aerobic bacteria. I believe that a conjunction of both aerobic and anaerobic bacteria are necessary for full denitification. Half of my bioballs are submerged under water. How this affect denitrification I have no idea. It could be bad...but with my refugium, skimmer, and large ammounts of LR/LS I have little to worry about.

 

[scubamedic]

They do make it. It's called SeaChem Matrix and SeaChem Pond Matrix.
I use a supposed evil nitrate factory canister filter with matrix and my nitrates have never been above 2.

 

[broomer5]

One way to look at this is that " It All Depends".
The wet/dry bioballs do not produce nitrates - the action of the bacteria do.
Where we house these bacteria is our choice - as is the number of animals we keep in the tank AND the type tank we keep.
Be it a reef tank with DSB, live rock and corals.
A FO tank with a lot of large waste producing fish.
An aggressive tank with extremely messy meat eaters.
A 30 gallon tank with 10 large well fed fish
A 300 gallon tank with 1 tiny lightly fed fish.
Each type of filtration works well with each type of tank and it's bioload. The level of nitrates that are either produced or reduced by natural processes or store bought equipment depends on the load of the tank - and the caretaker's cleaning/maintenance habits.
It all depends.
Way too many variables to make generalized statements.
The internet is full of generalized statements, as are our LFS's and family rooms.

 

[madd catt]

There is a product called cell-pore, that in the center is designed for anarobic bacteria that goes in many differant filters and in kents wet dry filter called the bio rocker.its on thier website.

 

[jonthefb]

madd catt, have you ever used teh cell-pore stuff? i was jsut looking through our wholesale who carries the kent stuff and i think the owner of our shop is gonna try to get some in. anyone ever used these things, or the kent bio-rocker for that matter?
good luck
jon

 

[ophiura]

The real issue is that there are many types of salt water hobbyists, and very few of them are well read, and disciplined enough to do a LR/LS tank. Most overstock and overfeed, and don't care about water quality. In this case, I would rather have a system that deals with ammonia and nitrite (the most toxic) very rapidly. While it is the bacteria that produce nitrates, and not the filter, it is the amount of food and the bioload in the tank that is ultimately responsible for it.
Many many people successfully use wet/dry filters, and I am one who is a bit annoyed with the apparent hatred of them encountered on the net, and the implication that people who are selling them are outdated or downright idiots. They are a good efficient filter, tried and tested.
I felt much more confident selling wet/dry filters to most of my customers than going on about LR and LS, refugia, etc. Most didn't want to hear about the number of fish they were approximately looking at, let alone telling them that they would have to be more conservative and careful with a LR/LS system. The idea of getting a water test every month seemed excessive to most people. If you look at people running LR/LS tanks, they tend to be pretty conservative and conscientous about the type, size and number of fish in their tanks, not to mention what they are feeding and how often. Look at all of these boards! Most new hobbyists are not, and so I feel more confident with a system that will rapidly and efficiently break down ammonia and nitrite. Would I use a wet/dry myself? Not likely on a reef tank (I only have nanos at the moment and prefer inverst anyway), but if I had a predator tank, I would certainly consider it. As already mentioned, the point about different types of tanks, eg aggressive tanks with lots of waste producers etc should also be taken into account.
I think in many cases the LFS are selling to the majority of hobbyists, which, frankly, does not include people on boards like this. If I had people come in and ask about it, or who seemed capable of handling the concept, then I would provide it as an alternative. Generally I was trying to guage whether or not I should talk people out of the hobby or not. There were people who asked about different options, and went with different options. We generally sell wet/dry filters, but have ecosystems and biorockers as well.
It really comes down to the hobbyist. If I could get people to use a wet/dry and LR for their 75g instead of an undergravel or power filter, then I was pretty darn happy about things.
Also, and this is a fact, it is easier to convince new folks to buy a fancy looking filter than to spend a the same amount on a bunch of rocks. Sounds silly, but it was very true for me.

 

[jonthefb]

ophi i agree with you totally. for an agressive, FO setup i think that wet/drys work great but would go with ls/lr/fuge on a reef. ive used both in the past, and just feel that the fuge works much better on a reef tank!
p.s. have you or anyone you know ever used the bio rocker? i am interested in this new product by kent marine
good luck
jon

 

[benj420]

Originally posted by plum70rt
90 days of menthenol costs 12 dollars , not to much to run, no mantainence at all is needed
Let's see. Over 90 days you would normally change a total of 50-60% of your water, in your case ~130-150 gallons. That's about $30-40 in salt alone, not to mention all of the messing around that you avoid.
What model do you have? How much do they cost?

 

[plum70rt]

its custom made, cost ? came with setup, here it is,
the tank behind the skimmer hold 5 gallons or so, that quart bottle hold the menthenol, drips 5 min worth at 820pm, every nite ,there is a flusher pump that comes on at 8pm flushes out nitrate , nitrite free water every nite , is a 24 hr cycle uses a rainbird sprinkler control to control the timer , has battery back up , so once it is setup, seasoned and tuned your done,
I think that my friend sells these for 700 or so,