Jestersix

Should we make shirts?

Srt4eric said:
Yep
Click to expand...
My main cube32 with the sps and nicer hammers responded well when I reverted back to using only natural in it.

I'm kinda curious if beyond just the environmental effects between the two do corals have a preference between the two or are there no noticeable differences to the coral.

Have any long time reefers here made any observations in corals between the two?

Not asking for anything scientific here, just your general impressions of how your corals may have responded differently between using natural seawater and mixed saltwater.
 
Alexander1312 said:
Thank you for this education @BAYMAC. So based on this, this sounds like something we should NOT use under ANY circumstances.

So why do we?

The drawbacks with what is in it, or rather what is not, bothers me only in regards to the lower salinity, which would require a bit of overfilling after water change to offset this with evaporation.

I believe we said previously that a minimum order is somewhere between 100 gallons and 300 gallons? I could do 100 gallons but 300 would be out of reach for me.
Click to expand...

Reefers like to control what goes into their aquaria. NSW can vary at times. I was only commenting on the environmental foot print of both. The sad part is, the environmental foot print for the hobby is pretty large in itself.
 
BAYMAC said:
Reefers like to control what goes into their aquaria. NSW can vary at times. I was only commenting on the environmental foot print of both. The sad part is, the environmental foot print for the hobby is pretty large in itself.
Click to expand...
Understood that this was feedback specific to the enviromental footprint. I did also feel that our hobby causes several asdverse effects on the enviroment (electricity, equipment which is not intended to last long term, various disposable items we are using etc). I guess i still somewhat underestimated the salt production process which why I found this eye opening in a way. Thanks again.
 
H2OPlayar said:
Relative to racecars, this is as environmentally friendly as it gets!
Click to expand...

And relative to an ant, I'm a god. Both statements are bogus and irrelevant.

The hobby uses a TON of jet fuel, plastic, card board, Styrofoam, electricity, etc.

In no real metrics would it be considered a low environmental foot print.
 
BAYMAC said:
And relative to an ant, I'm a god. Both statements are bogus and irrelevant.

The hobby uses a TON of jet fuel, plastic, card board, Styrofoam, electricity, etc.

In no real metrics would it be considered a low environmental foot print.
Click to expand...
But I (used to) do both hobbies, that is why it is relevant.

In any metric that compares this hobby to corporate waste production makes what this hobby produces insignificant.
 
The environmental footprint of our hobby is no joke. It also is quite ironic (to me) that a hobby based on a love for the oceans and their inhabitants, and so focused on their care and health, directly and indirectly harms them. The more you do to help your little box of ocean, the more you increase the real negative environmental pressures on the rest of the oceans and their inhabitants. I’m not as much worried about the direct effects most people focus on, like fish dying in the chain of custody, but rather the effects on the environment like carbon emissions, warming oceans, acidifying oceans, microplastics, etc. It’s a source of cognitive dissonance for me.
 
The conservationists aren’t entirely wrong when they say we are a detriment to the environment. This hobby produces a lot of waste, both in emissions and of life.
 
BAYMAC said:
I'll bite.

How can transporting water 50-100 miles in a truck be worse then everything that goes into the production and transportation of salt mix and MUNI water?

There is NO comparison. Hands down the most environmentally sound of the two is NSW.
Click to expand...
2nd bite- while there are transport costs indeed -in my view -how many people are running RODI units that are wasting at least 1:1 RODI to waste water if not more. Some people can use the grey water -but how many can’t.
At least in CA-freshwater is an issue. SW not so much!
 
JVU said:
The environmental footprint of our hobby is no joke. It also is quite ironic (to me) that a hobby based on a love for the oceans and their inhabitants, and so focused on their care and health, directly and indirectly harms them. The more you do to help your little box of ocean, the more you increase the real negative environmental pressures on the rest of the oceans and their inhabitants. I’m not as much worried about the direct effects most people focus on, like fish dying in the chain of custody, but rather the effects on the environment like carbon emissions, warming oceans, acidifying oceans, microplastics, etc. It’s a source of cognitive dissonance for me.
Click to expand...

@JVU I think if we start looking at any hobby -we can start to see serious environmental/ecological harms for sure-

You def bring up valid points. Curious though what the percentage of FedEx/UPS consists of live animals in general.. would def be eye opening for sure.
 
L/B Block said:
@JVU I think if we start looking at any hobby -we can start to see serious environmental/ecological harms for sure-

You def bring up valid points. Curious though what the percentage of FedEx/UPS consists of live animals in general.. would def be eye opening for sure.
Click to expand...

Wholesale and export fly cargo, not FedEx/UPS. The bulk of livestock ships that way. The stats are there for imports.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top