idea to complelty eliminate water changes

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
E

Eric L

Feeder Fish
MFK Member
Feb 12, 2006
195
0
0
washington
A very expensive part of keeping a fish tank is the water for water changes (assuming its a big tank and u do weekly changes. Well what if you set up a rig underneath the tank in the sump area that distilled portions of the water continously and leave all the nitrate, and other things that build up in tank in the distilling unit so that you only had to dump what ever builds up.

I figure that since I am running a 400 watt heater in my 180 gallons anyways, why not continously run a 400 watt disitilling unit that would leave the water that goes back into the tank heated. All you would have to do is make an almost sealed unit that has water steadily pumped into it at a slow rate and then allow the steam to go somewhere thats cool (like a pipe that could run through the sump filter) were it can condensate and be reintroduced into the tank) The pipe running through the sump tank and the water from the distiller being put in the tank would be warmer and eliminate the need for a heater.

Over all I think this could eliminate water changes altogether and eliminate the need for a heater and saving the owner cost on water bills while adding no new electiricty bill other than a weak pump to get water into the distiller. Also if I am right the water quality if the entire amount of water in the tank was cycled through the disitiller every week would be just as good or better than with water changes. Of course this wouldnt work with tanks that need minerals but the fish I keep some from the Amazon where the mineral content is low.


Why not?

THanks,

Eric
 
Well, I have checked on some stuff and it turns out that a distiller would use about 4 times the electricity than a normal heater would if I were to try to distill 100% of the volume of water in the tank every week.

So now I have to calculate wether or not the savings on water changes would make it cost effective to use this.


If I only were to puriify 50% of the water a week the cost would go down but that would sacrifice water quality and make this operation at least on par with doing normal water changes when it comes to quality

Benefits:

Less water usage
Less tank maintence
Better or same water quality
Possible the ability to stock tanks more heavily

Downsides:

More electricity usage
More complicated
Harder to control heating of tank
Possible lack of enough energy to properly heat tank.
 
The military uses distillation for all of its at-sea water. When you distill water you also boil out all of the trace minerals and elements. Removing that debris requires a cyclonic separator and access to a waste drain. Then the now sterile tank water will need replacement of those trace minerals/elements in equal amounts to those removed to keep the system in balance. Now, you're looking at an indoor (hot and smelly) distillery, a computerized water testing array, and multiple dosers to keep the tank's chemistry from wavering. I'm sure there is someone out there using a setup like this. But, I don't see it as being economically feasable on the hobbyist level. Nice idea though.
 
You're also correct about too much heat being left over from the process. A condensate tank/reservoir would be needed, with a chiller, to even out the temp. This reservoir can also be used to redose stripped minerals/salts back into the system. The downside is that a chiller has now been added (requiring additional power) and the reservoir itself will require space and level regulation.
 
So the best I could hope for is reduced water changes?

So the heating effects would be to powerful and would send the tank far over 80?
 
Someone would have already done it if it was feasible, but it's a good thought...keep thinking.
 
check out stuff they call Chemi-Pure it says it can make water changes disapear for 5 years. I don't believe it but i'll be doing a weird experiment when my 30 gal gets vacant, i'll get some neon tetra and some other nice fish but less on the $$$ amount. Put them in a 30 gal. with the chemi-pure. no heater and no water change. filter change is a must. but my experiment will only begin in a month from now. :) i'm not being cruel here... i'll still keep an eye on the water parameters.

based on water bills and electric bill... i would say electric is more expensive than water. A distiller would be a lot of $$$ maybe not even enough to cover your water change in 10 yrs. My water bill ranges in 25-30 a month. having water change to a 60, 30, 10, 5 gal tanks. take into consideration the amount we use. to sum it all... in 10 years we spend $3,600 of water based on 30 a month. :)

In my opinion to make water change easy you need a blue print of a plan you want to use to save time and effort. I currently have 2 45 gal drums filled with aged water for changing. using a powerful pump that brings it in. you can do a custom phyton to help out in draining and filling.:)
 
You can save on the water bill by collecting rainwater. I know a few people that capture rainwater in 55 gal drums that drain to a basement 'rigged' purification storage tank. Purification comes from pumping the collected rainwater through a 3-stage filter (carbon, metal removing resin, and toxin removing resin).
The catch is to have a non-tar material roof. These people have either metal or terrecotta material on their rooves.
Granted, you'd be doing manual water changes with this system. You'd just be saving on water usage and sewer charges.
 
Thats actualy not a bad idea with the rain drum, I live in the city though so I would be worried about contaminations but instead of doing manual water changes I could just get another 1200 gph pump from Danner (I think) that cost $100.


Keep me updated on that neon tetra 30 gallon experiment though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
MonsterFishKeepers.com
Top Bottom