Home | About Us | Contact Us


Koi Forum - Koi-Bito Magazine straight from Japan
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 29 of 29

Thread: Ozone

  1. #21
    Oyagoi gspotmc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Walnut, Ca
    Posts
    1,405
    When Jr Posts It's Always Supported By Hard Cold Facts. Ain't That Fascinating.

  2. #22
    Nisai
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    58
    I agree that ozone in a pond is dangereous but lets look under the kimono a bit at what Ernst is referring to. (and no I do not sell these things).

    To date ozone has been prohibitively expensive and its use has not been 100% safe. Conventional ozone generators produce ozone from the oxygen in the air. In order to do its job, the ozone then needs to be mixed with water, in a process that requires a huge amount of energy i.e through a foam fractioner.

    Because some of the ozone goes to waste, the generator produces more ozone than is strictly required, to make sure that enough of it reacts with the water. As a result, too much ozone may end up in the pond water – a dangerous overdose for the fish living in the pond. In steps the redox meter which you then need to add to the pond to constantly measure the ozone produced and adjust the settings.

    These Redox probes which sit ideally in the pond water measure the mv readings (contaminants) which in term control the amount of Ozone produced. These redox probes depending on water hardness and other and need cleaning regularly and cross referencing with other Orp meters to make sure the safe Ozone levels are not exceeded.

    The Koizo3 unit that Ernst is referring to work very differently to the typical Ozone Generators (Estrad) that produce high levels of Ozone that have to be mixed through expensive reactors (Freshskim 200/300 units).

    The Koizo3 ozone unit produces ozone from water. A process of electrolysis is used to break down water into its two component parts: oxygen and hydrogen. The Koizo3 ozone unit also releases single oxygen atoms (i.e. O rather than O2 atoms) that combine with oxygen molecules (O2) to form ozone (i.e. O3). This unit can not generate more ozone that what oxegen is already in the water. It does not take ozone generated from air and "inject" it in the water. It uses the water itself to generate O atoms that then combines with the O2 atoms already in the water to form ozone.

    Ozone is a highly reactive substance and tries to revert straightaway to its original form, thus causing the extra oxygen atom to react with an organic substance which are then ‘incinerated’ by oxidation. The substance that remains after this oxidation process is pure oxygen.

    To me it looks like the Koizo3 ozone is a lot safer and produce ozone in a new manner. It's safety comes in with the fact that ozone is produced from water rather than from air. It can not add any more "O" that what is already present. It’s also many times cheaper than the conventional method.

    The Koizo3 ozone unit also consumes very little power – just 2 or 4 Watts per unit, which means that the running costs are negligible.

    On a 30 ton pond like mine I can put 4 of these cells with a combined power consumption of 16watt. In return I can remove my three 55watt (165watt total) UV lights and save a huge amount of energy. The cost of the probe replacements are the same as the UV lights replacements which I would have incurred in any case.

    So rather than look at the big bad ozone thing, look at the energy saving at a fraction of the footprint for the same result just as the Nexus has delivered a much more efficient filtration in a smaller footprint.

  3. #23
    Jumbo farne230's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas
    Posts
    605
    I would like to hear from people who have installed this unit and have run this unit for over one year. If so please post costs, orp reading start to finish observations on water quality, laten residue left over and monitored in pond, reduction of algae if any, a hobbiest view please.
    Bob

  4. #24
    Daihonmei
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    7,642
    Nope, you can't have it both ways Booi. Either a violent chemical reaction takes place or it doesn't - regardless of how the unstable 03 was formed initially. The point of ozone is to create an unstable oxygen form so that when it rips itself apart it takes out the organic molecule it was attracted to. This is not unlike a mine hitting a passing submarine. This is exactly the same way chlorine or any other powerful oxidation chemical works.

    The story/debate of ozone really revolves around three separate areas of consideration;

    1) the residual ozone generated and the efforts made to keep it away from the koi themselves.
    2) the various alarms, redundencies, fail safes etc for the control of the just how much ozone is produced as an ambient presence. There is a cross over here as ORP is a control feature in regulating the level of ozone BOTH produced and allowed to exist in the system ( in cheaper generators)
    3) And this one is MY personal rejection standard for ozone. The unenlghtened use of ozone as a technology to compensate for an otherwise poor pond design or husbandry technique. Those things are what leads to a system that will become PP dependent, baking soda dependent and ozone dependent. People will also, once they realize it, say that ozone is nothing more than the 'big brother' to a UV system, so what's the difference? UV is localized and weak. Ozone has the potential to 'leave' the confines of it's home and travel. And it also can be quite powerful. In this regard, I am not taking about it's ability to outright kill fish. I'm talking about it's ability, thru competitive exclusion, to eliminate or dominate ALL microbial life in a four season pond. A very very bad thing.
    Koi are 'initimate' with the microbial community in natural settings. They dig, bury there bodies and ingest millions of microbes daily. This is what nurtures the color cells and skin luster. Shifting this relationship of natural balance within a closed system for the sake of clearer water ( again a failure in the ozone pond without ozone) or the dopey idea that ozone is going to eliminate all pathogens but preserve other heterotrophic forms is --well---dopey.

    So I don't question for a minute that systems can make safer levels of ozone and protect the pond occupants from high levels of ozone or warn the owner when there is a problem ( although I have given you just three examples where well funded public aquariums run by professionals eventually were undone by such reliance on technology). But I will say that folks who thing ORP is a 'NUMBER" that can be had thru artifical means or folks who think gin clear water is good koi water just because it's clear, or folks who think disease can be eliminated by adding ozone are all in the beginning stages of koi keeping and not at some advanced stage ( as technology sometimes suggests). The forest is lost thru the trees in this case. JR

  5. #25
    Sansai monscine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Jakarta, Indonesia
    Posts
    172
    Hi Erns,

    So I bet you must have the ozone stuff on your pond right now. I'm really curious how your pond, and your kois after you implemented that device? Cause I have a plan to also use it on my pond.

    Thanks,

  6. #26
    Jumbo farne230's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas
    Posts
    605
    Please let us know how it is working.
    Bob

  7. #27
    Tategoi Erns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Paarl, South Africa
    Posts
    496
    I'm not imressed at all with the unit I got. It worked very well for the first 3 months. My koi were happy and my water was incredible. Once the cells ran out I notced that another part in the core of the unit had oxidized and causing the unit to stop working plus it sprung a leak. Seems there is a design error and we are now waiting for replacement core sets.

  8. #28
    Sansai monscine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Jakarta, Indonesia
    Posts
    172
    Quote Originally Posted by Erns View Post
    I'm not imressed at all with the unit I got. It worked very well for the first 3 months. My koi were happy and my water was incredible. Once the cells ran out I notced that another part in the core of the unit had oxidized and causing the unit to stop working plus it sprung a leak. Seems there is a design error and we are now waiting for replacement core sets.
    Erns, don't they have already say that it needs about 3-4 times replacement a year, depend on water condition, so if it works well for the first 3 months, then it just the time to replace the core. May I know which type you bought?? Any particular effect to your kois for this last 3 months despite of your water changing well?

  9. #29
    Daihonmei MikeM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Orlando, Florida
    Posts
    11,128
    Bumping up for Alexandre.

    An old thread, and better systems are available today. The fundamentals, however, remain the same.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Similar Threads

  1. Using Ozone
    By MikeM in forum Main Forum
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 04-19-2016, 08:40 AM
  2. Ozone?
    By j_iwanto in forum Main Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-07-2008, 09:46 PM
  3. Ozone Treatment
    By IQzero in forum Main Forum
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 03-09-2007, 10:54 AM
  4. Ozone
    By woodyaht in forum Main Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 06-29-2005, 08:30 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Articles - Sitemap - FAQs and Rules

KB Footer Graphic
Straight from Japan... For the serious hobbyist!
All content and images copyright of: Koi-bito.com