A cure for 'pea soup' (that we may never see).

Meyer Jordan

Tadpole
Joined
Oct 10, 2014
Messages
7,177
Reaction score
5,675
Location
Pensacola, Florida
Hardiness Zone
9a
Country
United States
Algae. Universally cussed and discussed on Forums, Chat Rooms, Blogs, articles and product advertisements. Pond owners universal distaste for even the slightest overgrowth of this quite beneficial organism has spawned a proliferation of various pond treatments, devices and DIY cures. These may offer temporary respites from the ‘green monster’ but none address the underlying cause…excess nutrients and may produce some unwanted side-effects.

These available temporary fixes can, over time, amount to a fairly high cumulative expense in not only money, but also effort.

What if you were told that there was a method that was proven to remove 99% of planktonic algae in only minutes and that the algae was collected by this process for permanent removal? What is you were told that this process has been around since at least 1975? Even though this process does not address the reduction of nutrient load, it does solve the problem of removing the algae from the water column.

Now, what if you were told that this process has been improved and modified to not only remove algae from the water column but also reduce the nutrient load by over 90%.

Sound too good to be true? Well, in this case it is true. The question that this immediately brings to mind is – Why is this process not available for garden ponds? It is not because the manufacturers of pond equipment are not aware of this process. I personally know that at least one manufacturer has known about this for about five (5) years. I personally brought this to the attention of the company president. Although some miniaturization would be needed, this would hardly be an obstacle for production given present day technology.

The introduction of such a process would, of course, decimate the current market for the various treatments and cure-alls. An entire product market would be destroyed. This alone would be reason enough to suppress the development of this process for use in garden ponds.

We may never see this process offered, but it is important to know just what could be.
 
Joined
Oct 27, 2011
Messages
1,993
Reaction score
1,786
Location
BC Canada
I would have "liked" your post, but didn't, because you neglected to tell what it is. (n)

I'm betting it's some kind of centrifuge filter.
 

Meyer Jordan

Tadpole
Joined
Oct 10, 2014
Messages
7,177
Reaction score
5,675
Location
Pensacola, Florida
Hardiness Zone
9a
Country
United States
I would have "liked" your post, but didn't, because you neglected to tell what it is. (n)

I'm betting it's some kind of centrifuge filter.

No actually it works with magnets.
The original method used as far back as 1975 involved adding Ferrous oxide to the algae laden water. Ionic charges causes the iron oxide to bind to the algae. This is passed through a chamber housing the magnets. The algae is pulled out of the water flow and held returning only clear water to the pond.

The improved method added a coagulation factor through the use of clay or fly ash. Here the algae and the fly ash which had bonded not only with the iron oxide but also with the Nitrate and Phosphorus in the water were removed by the magnets. This last method showed an reduction in Algae, Nitrate and Phosphorus all by more than 90%.
The beauty of this last method is it accomplishes the one thing that other algae treatments and devices can not do. It not only removes the algae but also the underlying excess nutrients that caused the excess algae to begin with. All that is left is water that is relatively free of planktonic algae and excess nutrients.

It seems to me with just a little engineering that such a system could be sized for use in garden ponds. But I seriously doubt that any manufacturer is going to intentionally reduce their bottom line by eliminating the need for a product line of pond treatments that is a virtual Cash Cow.
 
Joined
Oct 27, 2011
Messages
1,993
Reaction score
1,786
Location
BC Canada
It seems to me with just a little engineering that such a system could be sized for use in garden ponds. But I seriously doubt that any manufacturer is going to intentionally reduce their bottom line by eliminating the need for a product line of pond treatments that is a virtual Cash Cow.
I don't know about that. They is already a pretty big market out there for electronic devices that eliminate pea soup algae.
31o6BOI--DL._AC_UL160_SR160,160_.jpg
 

sissy

sissy
Joined
Jan 17, 2011
Messages
33,086
Reaction score
15,702
Location
Axton virginia
Showcase(s):
1
Hardiness Zone
7A
Country
United States
I know I have seen magnets at the pet store to clean glass on tanks .I guess that acts like a squeegee .Magnet on the inside and magnet on the outside of the glass .
 

Meyer Jordan

Tadpole
Joined
Oct 10, 2014
Messages
7,177
Reaction score
5,675
Location
Pensacola, Florida
Hardiness Zone
9a
Country
United States
I know I have seen magnets at the pet store to clean glass on tanks .I guess that acts like a squeegee .Magnet on the inside and magnet on the outside of the glass .
Different use, Sissy. The magnets in the system that was described removes the algae from the water not from surfaces.
 
Joined
Oct 27, 2011
Messages
1,993
Reaction score
1,786
Location
BC Canada
Yes, but these do not remove the algae not do they eliminate the cause.
True, but they are effective at eliminating the green water while they are running, and the fact that they are so popular shows people would be willing to pay for some electronic device to get rid of pea soup algae.
Do you have any schematics for one of these magnetic algae removing devices?
 

Meyer Jordan

Tadpole
Joined
Oct 10, 2014
Messages
7,177
Reaction score
5,675
Location
Pensacola, Florida
Hardiness Zone
9a
Country
United States
Do you have any schematics for one of these magnetic algae removing devices?

No, but still looking.

I have no doubt that people would purchase such a system given its potential for improving water quality. The fact that they would no longer need algaecides or Phosphorus binders would greatly impact the present market for these products...costing the manufacturers money from lost sales.
 
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
7,046
Reaction score
7,236
Location
Water Valley, Alberta
Showcase(s):
1
Hardiness Zone
2a
Country
Canada
edit - It looks like someone is trying to make the device:

http://www.google.com/patents/US20140242663

I saw a device on line years ago for reef tanks that didn't go anywhere, and came across this patent application while searching.

If you click on each of the inventor's names, you get a little more information as well.
.
 
Last edited:

Meyer Jordan

Tadpole
Joined
Oct 10, 2014
Messages
7,177
Reaction score
5,675
Location
Pensacola, Florida
Hardiness Zone
9a
Country
United States
edit - It looks like someone is trying to make the device:

http://www.google.com/patents/US20140242663

I saw a device on line years ago for reef tanks that didn't go anywhere, and came across this patent application while searching.

If you click on each of the inventor's names, you get a little more information as well.
.

Thanks, That be it.
I would imagine that this patent was applied for with commercial applications in mind, but it could be modified for use in Garden Ponds.
Would a manufacturer venture into making this process available to hobbyists and most certainly make an entire line of pond treatments obsolete? I would think that it would likely be a outsider and not a current known manufacturer.
The device for Reef tanks is still available and is called an "Algae Scrubber". Entirely different process.
 
Joined
Jun 11, 2012
Messages
7,046
Reaction score
7,236
Location
Water Valley, Alberta
Showcase(s):
1
Hardiness Zone
2a
Country
Canada
...
The device for Reef tanks is still available and is called an "Algae Scrubber". Entirely different process.

No, the device I'm thinking of was shaped like a UV sterilizer and had magnets wrapped around it.

It's interesting that Los Alamos National Security is named on the patent and one of the uses of the collected algae is for biofuel.

.
 

Meyer Jordan

Tadpole
Joined
Oct 10, 2014
Messages
7,177
Reaction score
5,675
Location
Pensacola, Florida
Hardiness Zone
9a
Country
United States
It's interesting that Los Alamos National Security is named on the patent and one of the uses of the collected algae is for biofuel.

Yes, this method is in wide use in the algae/biofuel industry for harvesting the algae. It is not like it is some new method. It has been around for many years, yet it is practically unheard-of in the Water Feature industry and hobbyist circles.
 
Joined
Jun 11, 2021
Messages
10
Reaction score
8
Country
United Kingdom
Algae. Universally cussed and discussed on Forums, Chat Rooms, Blogs, articles and product advertisements. Pond owners universal distaste for even the slightest overgrowth of this quite beneficial organism has spawned a proliferation of various pond treatments, devices and DIY cures. These may offer temporary respites from the ‘green monster’ but none address the underlying cause…excess nutrients and may produce some unwanted side-effects.

These available temporary fixes can, over time, amount to a fairly high cumulative expense in not only money, but also effort.

What if you were told that there was a method that was proven to remove 99% of planktonic algae in only minutes and that the algae was collected by this process for permanent removal? What is you were told that this process has been around since at least 1975? Even though this process does not address the reduction of nutrient load, it does solve the problem of removing the algae from the water column.

Now, what if you were told that this process has been improved and modified to not only remove algae from the water column but also reduce the nutrient load by over 90%.

Sound too good to be true? Well, in this case it is true. The question that this immediately brings to mind is – Why is this process not available for garden ponds? It is not because the manufacturers of pond equipment are not aware of this process. I personally know that at least one manufacturer has known about this for about five (5) years. I personally brought this to the attention of the company president. Although some miniaturization would be needed, this would hardly be an obstacle for production given present day technology.

The introduction of such a process would, of course, decimate the current market for the various treatments and cure-alls. An entire product market would be destroyed. This alone would be reason enough to suppress the development of this process for use in garden ponds.

We may never see this process offered, but it is important to know just what could be.
And that process is?
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
30,867
Messages
509,568
Members
13,096
Latest member
bikmann

Latest Threads

Top