Do any of you use Ozone?
- Thread starter BrettE2
- Start date
Redox potential is important but at the end of the day ozone seems more useful for large systems, 1000g+, than smaller ones. Basically no altitude has zero effect on ozone. All it is is a 3 oxygen molecule that is highly unstable and due to the strong desire to bind immediately with anything it can it breaks off of the O3 and the O-² is then going to try and rip apart any molecule it can to form the necessary bonds to fill its outer L shell up with a total of 6 electrons because two are still missing.
The oxidizing power of ozone is about twice that of chlorine. It strips cilia from small organisms and eventually kills them, and once it enters can do lethal damage. It works by oxidizing those dissolved organics, as I explained in more layman's terms above, along with managing bacteria populations and breaking up small particles like detritus... When it does this, it's taking those complex mineralized organics and making them into more active compounds in the water column that are removable via skimming. This is sort of a compounding effect because whenever you introduce ozone to a system with a skimmer, and you add the air from the skimmer with ozone, the result is also a more stable foam.
Downsides include reacting with bromide, chloride, forming hypo-bromite, hypo-chlorite. These are also oxidants and extends the power of the ozone into potentially hurting fish and gill tissue, larvae, and other micro organisms that would otherwise be a little more protected against just ozone.
Ozone will also react with calcium in your water, can kill macro algae at high levels, and can oxidize medications or chemical additives, meaning their effects may (and will) potentially change as well. So if you have ozone, you have to turn it off if you ever intend to treat the system with medications.
On top of all this, it's not good for us (humans) when it's smellable in the room itself, and it destroys things like rubber and certain plastics in a hurry. This shortens the use life of your skimmers, for example, depending on the plastic they are made from, and is something to be aware of. Some people pass the ozone through a carbon filter, or running the ozone air from the skimmer back through wet carbon, to prevent some of these drawbacks, but I've never ran ozone myself to speak to this. You however can't run dry ozonated air through a dry activated carbon bag like the people who put them on top of their skimmers however because it can spark a fire. In the beginning of reefing, ozone was a big deal.
This all said, generally speaking the less nuclear option with some of the same benefits rests within UV sterilizers as they naturally generate some amount of ozone. Adding a UV sterilizer will marginally improve how much you can remove with protein skimming.
UV is a different subject entirely but I suspect the vast majority of people running UV are not replacing their bulbs often enough for the argument against UV to have any meaningful difference on their tanks. UV bulbs typically have a 5000 hour lifespan and after that, the bulb is useless. Some bulbs made today might be more effective, but be aware that regardless of manufacturer direction, this is the reality of using UV is every 6 months you'll need a new bulb even if it's a low pressure high intensity bulb.
Then there's the issue of energy production. Bigger ones work better because there's more time to bombard your water. Some things are destroyed around 35k uw sec cm² and some like cryptocaryon aren't destroyed until over 100k uw sec cm², and lower low= better kill rate, especially if the bulb is older. This is because UV bulbs have higher efficiency at higher operating temperatures and the difference is as much as 50% loss in efficiency operating at 72° as opposed to say 106° of the bulb itself. You can always measure your flow rate by testing the sterilizer in a bucket at similar head pressure to your tank, and then measuring the amount of water and doing the conversion from liters or gallons to gallons per hour, or if you're lazy, allow it to fill between two 5g buckets, time it, and then calculate:
(60 minutes/minutes to fill) X 5gph =flow gph
To walk back to part of your original question, oxy redox potential is always going to help a tank at higher levels, -- to a certaine extent. You don't want over 400 millivolts. 200-360 is probably fine. That said, generally redox potential goes down as pH and temperature rise, but most people run skimmers or other ways to incorporate oxygen into their tanks to raise it. Mike Paletta wrote an article for Seascope in 1988 about his experiences, which I'll attach, though due to its age if you have any further questions it might be worth reaching out and digging around for some of his more recent articles about it, if any.
https://www.instantocean.com/Ocean-of-Knowledge/SeaScope/SeaScope-Index-by-Subject.aspx
I know this is a lot of information, but I want you to have something you can refer back to in a meaningful way. Ozone does have an impact on smaller systems and can improve virtually any system, but the poison is in the dose and ultimately the smaller tanks that balance is harder to strike, whatever it may be.
The oxidizing power of ozone is about twice that of chlorine. It strips cilia from small organisms and eventually kills them, and once it enters can do lethal damage. It works by oxidizing those dissolved organics, as I explained in more layman's terms above, along with managing bacteria populations and breaking up small particles like detritus... When it does this, it's taking those complex mineralized organics and making them into more active compounds in the water column that are removable via skimming. This is sort of a compounding effect because whenever you introduce ozone to a system with a skimmer, and you add the air from the skimmer with ozone, the result is also a more stable foam.
Downsides include reacting with bromide, chloride, forming hypo-bromite, hypo-chlorite. These are also oxidants and extends the power of the ozone into potentially hurting fish and gill tissue, larvae, and other micro organisms that would otherwise be a little more protected against just ozone.
Ozone will also react with calcium in your water, can kill macro algae at high levels, and can oxidize medications or chemical additives, meaning their effects may (and will) potentially change as well. So if you have ozone, you have to turn it off if you ever intend to treat the system with medications.
On top of all this, it's not good for us (humans) when it's smellable in the room itself, and it destroys things like rubber and certain plastics in a hurry. This shortens the use life of your skimmers, for example, depending on the plastic they are made from, and is something to be aware of. Some people pass the ozone through a carbon filter, or running the ozone air from the skimmer back through wet carbon, to prevent some of these drawbacks, but I've never ran ozone myself to speak to this. You however can't run dry ozonated air through a dry activated carbon bag like the people who put them on top of their skimmers however because it can spark a fire. In the beginning of reefing, ozone was a big deal.
This all said, generally speaking the less nuclear option with some of the same benefits rests within UV sterilizers as they naturally generate some amount of ozone. Adding a UV sterilizer will marginally improve how much you can remove with protein skimming.
UV is a different subject entirely but I suspect the vast majority of people running UV are not replacing their bulbs often enough for the argument against UV to have any meaningful difference on their tanks. UV bulbs typically have a 5000 hour lifespan and after that, the bulb is useless. Some bulbs made today might be more effective, but be aware that regardless of manufacturer direction, this is the reality of using UV is every 6 months you'll need a new bulb even if it's a low pressure high intensity bulb.
Then there's the issue of energy production. Bigger ones work better because there's more time to bombard your water. Some things are destroyed around 35k uw sec cm² and some like cryptocaryon aren't destroyed until over 100k uw sec cm², and lower low= better kill rate, especially if the bulb is older. This is because UV bulbs have higher efficiency at higher operating temperatures and the difference is as much as 50% loss in efficiency operating at 72° as opposed to say 106° of the bulb itself. You can always measure your flow rate by testing the sterilizer in a bucket at similar head pressure to your tank, and then measuring the amount of water and doing the conversion from liters or gallons to gallons per hour, or if you're lazy, allow it to fill between two 5g buckets, time it, and then calculate:
(60 minutes/minutes to fill) X 5gph =flow gph
To walk back to part of your original question, oxy redox potential is always going to help a tank at higher levels, -- to a certaine extent. You don't want over 400 millivolts. 200-360 is probably fine. That said, generally redox potential goes down as pH and temperature rise, but most people run skimmers or other ways to incorporate oxygen into their tanks to raise it. Mike Paletta wrote an article for Seascope in 1988 about his experiences, which I'll attach, though due to its age if you have any further questions it might be worth reaching out and digging around for some of his more recent articles about it, if any.
https://www.instantocean.com/Ocean-of-Knowledge/SeaScope/SeaScope-Index-by-Subject.aspx
I know this is a lot of information, but I want you to have something you can refer back to in a meaningful way. Ozone does have an impact on smaller systems and can improve virtually any system, but the poison is in the dose and ultimately the smaller tanks that balance is harder to strike, whatever it may be.
Kudos to Visualsnow for such a great writeup! I can speak to using ozone many years ago. Front ending your ozone generator with a desiccant to remove excess moisture improved the output significantly. Using an ORP Controller ensures that you didn't fry the inhabitants by keeping your ORP below 450 (Many recommend 400 max due to the potential negative effects by exceeding 450). And of course using an ozone generator with variable output also allowed some level of input control. Early models leveraged UV to produce ozone, more current products do so electronically. I've found when using low levels of ozone, below 100mg/hr, controllers weren't required as that level didn't cause large increases in ORP. Above 100 mg/hr, particularly using one that produce 300+ mg/hr, controllers are warranted. Of course, ozone output is just an estimate as there isn't an easy way for the hobbyists to actually measure ozone output or in the effluent, particularly given the 30 minute half life of residual ozone. Note that most of the testing equipment and many of the ozone generators are repurposed from the outdoor pool industry.
Is there a benefit? Sparkling clear water, improved skimmer efficiency (recall that we didn't have needle wheel skimmers back in the day), reduction in skimmate stench, some biological control particularly with slime algae and diatoms and potentially (though still debatable) some impact on protozoans.
The downside? Additional equipment maintenance, replacing your tubing with a silicone based product, potential wear and tear on the skimmer, filtering the excess air through carbon and potentially the effluent as well. Regardless of how well you filtered, ozone can almost always be detected at low levels through smell, which could be problematic for children and anyone with respiratory issues.
It was a tool at one time to address many issues that were otherwise difficult to solve. Would I setup ozone again today? Probably not. Would I dissuade you from trying? No. There could certainly be benefits given proper controls for your system. I simply found it to not demonstrate quantifiable benefits for the effort required. That doesn't mean that it wasn't doing something positive, it was simply anecdotal. In my case, I can never recall having issues with dinoflagellates or cyanobacteria when running ozone. It didn't do a damn thing for ich or oodinium at the levels we use in aquariums though.
Is there a benefit? Sparkling clear water, improved skimmer efficiency (recall that we didn't have needle wheel skimmers back in the day), reduction in skimmate stench, some biological control particularly with slime algae and diatoms and potentially (though still debatable) some impact on protozoans.
The downside? Additional equipment maintenance, replacing your tubing with a silicone based product, potential wear and tear on the skimmer, filtering the excess air through carbon and potentially the effluent as well. Regardless of how well you filtered, ozone can almost always be detected at low levels through smell, which could be problematic for children and anyone with respiratory issues.
It was a tool at one time to address many issues that were otherwise difficult to solve. Would I setup ozone again today? Probably not. Would I dissuade you from trying? No. There could certainly be benefits given proper controls for your system. I simply found it to not demonstrate quantifiable benefits for the effort required. That doesn't mean that it wasn't doing something positive, it was simply anecdotal. In my case, I can never recall having issues with dinoflagellates or cyanobacteria when running ozone. It didn't do a damn thing for ich or oodinium at the levels we use in aquariums though.
Dr. Randy Holmes-Farley wrote 2 articles on ORP. I recommend that you read and understand both of them and then decide if you want to go down this route. For me, juice is not worth the squeeze. If I just want more clear water, a bit of vinegar or some granular activated carbon can do this with less effort.
I would avoid the hobbyists who tell you that XYZ was solved when using ozone since many of them stopped and still did OK. Most of the back-in-the day stores likely had ozone running when things just hit a maturity level or critical mass of things going right and the ozone was along for the ride.
It can be good if you need what it provides, but I highly suggest that you understand what is happening a the root of the good vs. evil battle and not just look for a ORP number of XXX.
I would avoid the hobbyists who tell you that XYZ was solved when using ozone since many of them stopped and still did OK. Most of the back-in-the day stores likely had ozone running when things just hit a maturity level or critical mass of things going right and the ozone was along for the ride.
It can be good if you need what it provides, but I highly suggest that you understand what is happening a the root of the good vs. evil battle and not just look for a ORP number of XXX.
I agree to both of these replies. There's benefit, but I have never had an issue that could only be solved with one. I'm not sure if the technology has changed much but ORP measurements in and of themselves aren't a great way to measure the ozone that is actually in the tank because ORP is a function of the logarithm of the concentration ratio. I'll give you an example of why ORP matters and why it shouldn't be used. First why it shouldn't be used.
The Nernst equation to balance chloride ions in water (hypochlorous acid) and calculate ORP looks like to this:
HALF REACTION:
HOCl + H+ + 2e-=> Cl- + H2O
E° = 1,490 mV
NERNST EQUATION (25°C)
E = 1,490 - (29.58) log ([Cl-]/ [HOCl] [H+])
So from this, five problems.
1. There is no temperature dependance shown ( Except what I provided outside of the equation itself as an example). ORP measurements are almost never temperature compensated.
2. ORP depends on chloride ions, pH[H+], and hypochlorous acid [HOCl]
3. ORP is a logarithm of the concentration ratio as previously stated.
4. The coefficient prior to the log which holds a value of -29.58 is (59.16/n), where "n" is the number of of electrons in the half reaction, in this case, two. This negative coefficient symbolizes for the logarithm that a 10x change in the concentration of Cl-, HOCl, or H+ will only change the ORP ±29.58 mV
5. Typical accuracy of ORP measurements are ±5mV because they are given as an exponent of 10. This means based on our above formula that the calculation can be as much as ± 30% off in terms of calculating accurate concentration. Drift in the reader or the probe will make this error bigger.
Now for why it's good:
It measures titration curves really well so any oxy redox reaction that goes to completion shows a measurable change in ORP at the equivalence point. The most basic example of this is pH balancing test kits with a color change. When the color changes, the ORP changes with it and this can be measured to prevent going past the equivalence point.
Overall I just recommend not worrying about ozone or UV. Tanks do fine without them. If you were dealing with a public aquarium and had to keep the building smelling clean because your skimmer can stink up a building, or you are taking in coral from all over the place and want to limit what you deal with, then ozone/UV makes more sense. As far as dinoflagellates go, I recommend supplementing with Iron and Silicate solution and having a big enough clean up crew to work on the diatoms afterwards. Lots of people don't have big enough clean up crews for the size of their tank. I have a 40b with 3, maybe even 4 Purple urchins, 3 emerald crabs, a 2 big Mexican turbo snails, 10 blue leg hermits, and probably close to 50+ astrea/trochus/nerite snails.
I still have algae build up but I never have problems like I see in some tanks and my first recommendation is get a bigger clean up crew from somewhere like Reeftopia and quarantine them for 4 weeks before adding them if you are concerned about diseases, or you can use inverted reef which is pre quarantined invertebrates.
I know some people here do hate longspined urchins but I find they are excellent and if you're careful then your odds of getting poked go way down. It usually when you don't know where they are that you get poked.
Just my two cents. It's not worth the hassle and even though I can defend it, the idea of using ORP as the measurement is flawed and it will kill your fish before it kills your, "pests".
Best practice is to quarantine and treat in a separate tank system. It's not high tech, but it works.
For getting rid of smells, just put a bag of activated carbon over the top of your skimmer collection cup.
For getting clear water, use calcium carbonate powder in solution. I can provide the solution later but right now I have to finish making pot roast lol it's at the halfway point where I add carrots and such.
The Nernst equation to balance chloride ions in water (hypochlorous acid) and calculate ORP looks like to this:
HALF REACTION:
HOCl + H+ + 2e-=> Cl- + H2O
E° = 1,490 mV
NERNST EQUATION (25°C)
E = 1,490 - (29.58) log ([Cl-]/ [HOCl] [H+])
So from this, five problems.
1. There is no temperature dependance shown ( Except what I provided outside of the equation itself as an example). ORP measurements are almost never temperature compensated.
2. ORP depends on chloride ions, pH[H+], and hypochlorous acid [HOCl]
3. ORP is a logarithm of the concentration ratio as previously stated.
4. The coefficient prior to the log which holds a value of -29.58 is (59.16/n), where "n" is the number of of electrons in the half reaction, in this case, two. This negative coefficient symbolizes for the logarithm that a 10x change in the concentration of Cl-, HOCl, or H+ will only change the ORP ±29.58 mV
5. Typical accuracy of ORP measurements are ±5mV because they are given as an exponent of 10. This means based on our above formula that the calculation can be as much as ± 30% off in terms of calculating accurate concentration. Drift in the reader or the probe will make this error bigger.
Now for why it's good:
It measures titration curves really well so any oxy redox reaction that goes to completion shows a measurable change in ORP at the equivalence point. The most basic example of this is pH balancing test kits with a color change. When the color changes, the ORP changes with it and this can be measured to prevent going past the equivalence point.
Overall I just recommend not worrying about ozone or UV. Tanks do fine without them. If you were dealing with a public aquarium and had to keep the building smelling clean because your skimmer can stink up a building, or you are taking in coral from all over the place and want to limit what you deal with, then ozone/UV makes more sense. As far as dinoflagellates go, I recommend supplementing with Iron and Silicate solution and having a big enough clean up crew to work on the diatoms afterwards. Lots of people don't have big enough clean up crews for the size of their tank. I have a 40b with 3, maybe even 4 Purple urchins, 3 emerald crabs, a 2 big Mexican turbo snails, 10 blue leg hermits, and probably close to 50+ astrea/trochus/nerite snails.
I still have algae build up but I never have problems like I see in some tanks and my first recommendation is get a bigger clean up crew from somewhere like Reeftopia and quarantine them for 4 weeks before adding them if you are concerned about diseases, or you can use inverted reef which is pre quarantined invertebrates.
I know some people here do hate longspined urchins but I find they are excellent and if you're careful then your odds of getting poked go way down. It usually when you don't know where they are that you get poked.
Just my two cents. It's not worth the hassle and even though I can defend it, the idea of using ORP as the measurement is flawed and it will kill your fish before it kills your, "pests".
Best practice is to quarantine and treat in a separate tank system. It's not high tech, but it works.
For getting rid of smells, just put a bag of activated carbon over the top of your skimmer collection cup.
For getting clear water, use calcium carbonate powder in solution. I can provide the solution later but right now I have to finish making pot roast lol it's at the halfway point where I add carrots and such.
DIY "coral snow"
This is the CaCO3 I use. It's about $8 for a pound on Amazon. I then take a ≈ 1 liter sparkling water bottle that has been emptied and to that I add about 20 tablespoons of the powder (about 204 grams) and then I fill the bottle to the top with RODI. To dose, I do no more than (tank volume /10) ml/day. So a 40 breeder gets 4ml per day maximum, and so on. I shake the bottle and then load it into a dental syringe and I spray this into the gyre.This doesn't seem like much but you don't want to over do it. I've experimented with doubling and tripling the dose and you risk ending up with other problems if you don't end up needing that much flocculant. I dose it whenever I remember to, certainly not everyday, maybe three times a week top in a good week where I'm on top of the concept. Too much of anything is bad and generally I reserve it for the night or two before people come over. Or on a day prior to the day I intend to really spend some time looking at the tanks.
This is the CaCO3 I use. It's about $8 for a pound on Amazon. I then take a ≈ 1 liter sparkling water bottle that has been emptied and to that I add about 20 tablespoons of the powder (about 204 grams) and then I fill the bottle to the top with RODI. To dose, I do no more than (tank volume /10) ml/day. So a 40 breeder gets 4ml per day maximum, and so on. I shake the bottle and then load it into a dental syringe and I spray this into the gyre.This doesn't seem like much but you don't want to over do it. I've experimented with doubling and tripling the dose and you risk ending up with other problems if you don't end up needing that much flocculant. I dose it whenever I remember to, certainly not everyday, maybe three times a week top in a good week where I'm on top of the concept. Too much of anything is bad and generally I reserve it for the night or two before people come over. Or on a day prior to the day I intend to really spend some time looking at the tanks.
Thanks for all of the great replies! I appreciate the time you all spent writing this stuff up. Lots to digest, then I'm sure I'll have more questions. I'd like to add UV too, but I think I'll start another thread to talk about sizing and the like, so it's easy to find if someone else needs that info too.
Thanks!!
Brett
Thanks!!
Brett
I will also mention that OPR are one of the weakest links in any reef system that uses them. Only perhaps pH probes are worse. Just like I almost NEVER recommend that a calcium reactor be tuned and set to run off of a pH probe, I would not trust a ORP probe wholesale since they do fail, drift and otherwise give false readings. Build in some other check and balance into the system and something preferably mechanical that cannot really fail.
A teaspoon of kalk in your skimmer cup will kill bacteria and it will not smell. Mine really don't smell anyway, but to each their own.
A teaspoon of kalk in your skimmer cup will kill bacteria and it will not smell. Mine really don't smell anyway, but to each their own.