Calling Chemists
- Thread starter danmhippo
- Start date
The reason I am asking is remember few years ago, there was the concept of sulfer denitrator, where you run water through chambers filled with sulfer chuncks. Bacteria using sulfer and the O2 in NO3 as food to reproduce. The end result is a denitrator. As water leaving the chamber, the PH is quite acidic, the effluent run through the other chamber to dissolve aragnite, much like a denitrator/CA-reactor combo.
Now, first, I don't know where to buy sulfer chunks, that's why I am thinking about H2S, a by product of denitration. I remembered when I used a coil denitrator, when the effluent flow out rate is too slow, H2S developes. To produce the H2S, I virtually do not need any special equipment other than a large bio-ball filled chamber, to colonize bacteria, and a very slow water turnover rate. If I run the effluent to an aragnite chamber, would the effluent be acidic enough to dissolve the aragnite?
Now, first, I don't know where to buy sulfer chunks, that's why I am thinking about H2S, a by product of denitration. I remembered when I used a coil denitrator, when the effluent flow out rate is too slow, H2S developes. To produce the H2S, I virtually do not need any special equipment other than a large bio-ball filled chamber, to colonize bacteria, and a very slow water turnover rate. If I run the effluent to an aragnite chamber, would the effluent be acidic enough to dissolve the aragnite?
Also, if the sulfer denitrator works, as claimed years ago, sulfer water also stinks like hell too. Anyone knows how this is worked out?
Here is a link to such device:
Sulphur denitrator
Also in more detail explanation:
Autotrophic denitrator in detail
[ September 08, 2001: Message edited by: danmhippo ]
Here is a link to such device:
Sulphur denitrator
Also in more detail explanation:
Autotrophic denitrator in detail
[ September 08, 2001: Message edited by: danmhippo ]
I gave the links a quick going over and will go through them again when I have a bit more time. I think the idea is interesting and may be workable. I think several of the drawbacks, smell and ph of the effluent can probably be dealt with. I think the sulfate question needs to be addressed more and possibly dealt with. Sounds like an experiment I wouldn't mind tackling myself.
randy holmes-farley
Advanced Reefer
- Location
- Arlington, MA
I went through the calculations a few years ago when someone asked a similar question. In the end, there isn't enough acid produced by the reduction of nitrate in this fashion to usefully impact the calcium levels in a normal reef tank. It might be fine for nitrate elimination, but not for calcium addition.
Also, the acid produced will keep the alkalinity from being delivered to the tank. IOW, it's just like dissolving CaCO3 with HCl: you get calcium, but no alkalinity for the tank.
As to the sulfate, that's no problem as the tank already has a huge amount of sulfate (almost 3,000 ppm), so your unlikely to impact it much.
Also, the acid produced will keep the alkalinity from being delivered to the tank. IOW, it's just like dissolving CaCO3 with HCl: you get calcium, but no alkalinity for the tank.
As to the sulfate, that's no problem as the tank already has a huge amount of sulfate (almost 3,000 ppm), so your unlikely to impact it much.
The theory looks good. Unfortunately, my inorganic chemistry is VERY rusty and I can't be sure of my following thought process (it's a theory without any backing):
The sulfur reacts with the O2 part of the nitrate, making SO2 and N. The nitrogen is a gas and escapes. The SO2 reacts with H2O to make H2SO4, or sulfuric acid. This would DEFINITELY be acidic enough to dissolve the CaCO3 but my chemical "expertise" ends there. What happens to the SO2 after the H2SO4 has reacted with the CaCO3 (H2SO4 + 2CaCO3->H2CO3 + 2Ca + SO2(CO3)???) That's doubtful as both SO2 and CO3 are anionic and shouldn't bond, but stranger things have happened...
The sulfur reacts with the O2 part of the nitrate, making SO2 and N. The nitrogen is a gas and escapes. The SO2 reacts with H2O to make H2SO4, or sulfuric acid. This would DEFINITELY be acidic enough to dissolve the CaCO3 but my chemical "expertise" ends there. What happens to the SO2 after the H2SO4 has reacted with the CaCO3 (H2SO4 + 2CaCO3->H2CO3 + 2Ca + SO2(CO3)???) That's doubtful as both SO2 and CO3 are anionic and shouldn't bond, but stranger things have happened...
For me, basicaly if what the link says is true that sulfer beads does not need replenishment for years, messing around with CO2 bottles, CO2 bubble counter, solenoids, measuring affluent, replace bottles, if connections leaks, replace more bottles....etc. is things I would like to do without, not to mention the added spaces and additional costs of the Ca-reactors.
This is the reason I want to investigate into this method. If sulfer works as stated, how about the H2S, which comes by rather easily with bacterial denitrators? Even if sulfer is the only way to go (not H2S), simple setup and maintenance is what drives me to look-into this concept. All that is necessary to adjust is the water input rate.
As a proponent of lazy-man's reef keeping, I feel there is a need to research on simple yet effective techniques to improve the survival rate of corals being kept. If this concepts works, it tackles 2 main obstacles of reef keeping, denitration and Ca/dKH supplements.
BTW, who knew 20 years ago that a simple concept of mixing air and water, later known as protein skimmer, would increase the survival rate and bioload capacities of modern reef keeping?
[ September 10, 2001: Message edited by: danmhippo ]
This is the reason I want to investigate into this method. If sulfer works as stated, how about the H2S, which comes by rather easily with bacterial denitrators? Even if sulfer is the only way to go (not H2S), simple setup and maintenance is what drives me to look-into this concept. All that is necessary to adjust is the water input rate.
As a proponent of lazy-man's reef keeping, I feel there is a need to research on simple yet effective techniques to improve the survival rate of corals being kept. If this concepts works, it tackles 2 main obstacles of reef keeping, denitration and Ca/dKH supplements.
BTW, who knew 20 years ago that a simple concept of mixing air and water, later known as protein skimmer, would increase the survival rate and bioload capacities of modern reef keeping?
[ September 10, 2001: Message edited by: danmhippo ]
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by danmhippo:
<STRONG>For me, basicaly if what the link says is true that sulfer beads does not need replenishment for years, messing around with CO2 bottles, CO2 bubble counter, solenoids, measuring affluent, replace bottles, if connections leaks, replace more bottles....etc. is things I would like to do without, not to mention the added spaces and additional costs of the Ca-reactors.
This is the reason I want to investigate into this method. If sulfer works as stated, how about the H2S, which comes by rather easily with bacterial denitrators? Even if sulfer is the only way to go (not H2S), simple setup and maintenance is what drives me to look-into this concept. All that is necessary to adjust is the water input rate.
As a proponent of lazy-man's reef keeping, I feel there is a need to research on simple yet effective techniques to improve the survival rate of corals being kept. If this concepts works, it tackles 2 main obstacles of reef keeping, denitration and Ca/dKH supplements.
BTW, who knew 20 years ago that a simple concept of mixing air and water, later known as protein skimmer, would increase the survival rate and bioload capacities of modern reef keeping?
[ September 10, 2001: Message edited by: danmhippo ]</STRONG><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well put
<STRONG>For me, basicaly if what the link says is true that sulfer beads does not need replenishment for years, messing around with CO2 bottles, CO2 bubble counter, solenoids, measuring affluent, replace bottles, if connections leaks, replace more bottles....etc. is things I would like to do without, not to mention the added spaces and additional costs of the Ca-reactors.
This is the reason I want to investigate into this method. If sulfer works as stated, how about the H2S, which comes by rather easily with bacterial denitrators? Even if sulfer is the only way to go (not H2S), simple setup and maintenance is what drives me to look-into this concept. All that is necessary to adjust is the water input rate.
As a proponent of lazy-man's reef keeping, I feel there is a need to research on simple yet effective techniques to improve the survival rate of corals being kept. If this concepts works, it tackles 2 main obstacles of reef keeping, denitration and Ca/dKH supplements.
BTW, who knew 20 years ago that a simple concept of mixing air and water, later known as protein skimmer, would increase the survival rate and bioload capacities of modern reef keeping?
[ September 10, 2001: Message edited by: danmhippo ]</STRONG><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Well put
damnhippo:
Sorry to be a VERY wet blanket, but I don't see this idea as practical at all.
Yes, theoretically -- eventually -- very small amounts of very dilute Sulpheric Acid could result from Hydrogen Sulphide production in water, but think about it -- what super-strain of Hydrogen Sulphide generating bacteria could possibly live in water acid enough to rapidly dissolve a useful amount of Limestone?
There's also a second drawback to the plan. If your goal is to produce useful amounts of Calcium for your tank, the amount of H2S production required would be so great that the volume of your "Anaerobic Bacterial Calcium Reactor" would have to be MANY, MANY TIMES the total volume of the reeftank it was servicing -- particularly since the flowrate through it would be so slow.
And, you would have to feed it MASSIVE amounts of food in order to have enough Sulpher production result. Think of the leftover pollution.
That's why the device you reference uses big, solid chunks of chemical sulpher, vice organically produced H2S.
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.
Sorry to be a VERY wet blanket, but I don't see this idea as practical at all.
Yes, theoretically -- eventually -- very small amounts of very dilute Sulpheric Acid could result from Hydrogen Sulphide production in water, but think about it -- what super-strain of Hydrogen Sulphide generating bacteria could possibly live in water acid enough to rapidly dissolve a useful amount of Limestone?
There's also a second drawback to the plan. If your goal is to produce useful amounts of Calcium for your tank, the amount of H2S production required would be so great that the volume of your "Anaerobic Bacterial Calcium Reactor" would have to be MANY, MANY TIMES the total volume of the reeftank it was servicing -- particularly since the flowrate through it would be so slow.
And, you would have to feed it MASSIVE amounts of food in order to have enough Sulpher production result. Think of the leftover pollution.
That's why the device you reference uses big, solid chunks of chemical sulpher, vice organically produced H2S.
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.
For Randy Holmes-Farley.
Randy can you take another look at the kalkwasser thread on page 5 please. I asked you a question on it and I expect that you think it has been closed off. Sorry that I am breaking into this thread but I didn't know how to reach you any other way.
Bob
PS, I dont have an e-mail for you since you left Compuserve.
Randy can you take another look at the kalkwasser thread on page 5 please. I asked you a question on it and I expect that you think it has been closed off. Sorry that I am breaking into this thread but I didn't know how to reach you any other way.
Bob
PS, I dont have an e-mail for you since you left Compuserve.
Bob G -- I think RHF's point about not needing to bother with Vinegar is that, if plain ordinary Kalk dripping provides all the Calcium input you need in your tank, then you don't need to use and won't benefit from Vinegar.
Remember, the whole endless Vinegar-in-Kalk discussion was kicked off by a simple question from llowwwell about how to make more Kalk powder dissolve in makeup water with less Calcium wasted as precipitate.
Vinegar in Kalk helps in three situations:
1) your tank has too little evaporation to allow you to replace Calcium used by livestock with just Kalk in make-up water
2) you find it hard to dissolve enough Kalk in your makeup water
3) you need the extra denitrification boost that the Acetate leftover from the Vinegar/Kalk reaction provides to bacteria in your denitrification bed.
If you are using just plain good old Kalk and are fully satisfied with the results, don't bother with Vinegar -- as the saying goes,
"If it ain't broke, don't 'fix' it."
Remember, the whole endless Vinegar-in-Kalk discussion was kicked off by a simple question from llowwwell about how to make more Kalk powder dissolve in makeup water with less Calcium wasted as precipitate.
Vinegar in Kalk helps in three situations:
1) your tank has too little evaporation to allow you to replace Calcium used by livestock with just Kalk in make-up water
2) you find it hard to dissolve enough Kalk in your makeup water
3) you need the extra denitrification boost that the Acetate leftover from the Vinegar/Kalk reaction provides to bacteria in your denitrification bed.
If you are using just plain good old Kalk and are fully satisfied with the results, don't bother with Vinegar -- as the saying goes,
"If it ain't broke, don't 'fix' it."
Sponsor Reefs
We're a FREE website, and we exist because of hobbyists like YOU who help us run this community.
Click here to sponsor $10:
