Skimmer article/study

[Money pit]

I ran a skimmer less tank for many years, now days I'm running a euro reef. Some of the benefits I've seen , are cheaper on salt.. I was doing 50% water changes. Using these numbers from the article 100% organics minus 35% assuming optimal skinner efficiency = 65% minus 15% of that for weekly water change = 55% organics left in the tank. Compared to 50% , doing water changes alone,assuming organics are evenly distributed. Not much difference, but the salt saving will add up over time. As an indirect benefit,I was sump less on the old tank and had a problem with scum build up on the top of the water, so to add the skimmer I had to put in a sump. The overflow took care of the scum problem. If you look at the water clarity issue, doing only water changes once a week. There's a weeks worth of organic build up yellowing the water, with a skimmer you're removing 35% of that on a steady day to day basis , giving you clearer water and better light penetration. As for the price, I always argued with those who swore by Bubble King as the best skimmer. My point was 2 of my Euro Reefs would out skim your Bubble King and still cost less.

[Palmer]

I see your point money pit but as I read the article it differentiates between what a skimmer can remove and the organics that are not possible for a skimmer to remove. I may be wrong in this but I believe the 35 % refers to the part of the whole that it can remove. When talking water changes I assume all organics in the water can be removed. So the percentages would be apples to oranges... I think

[Money pit]

There isn't anyway to know the amount of organics the skimmer can''t remove so I didn't add it to the equation. But you're right it would make a difference. Think of the build up if you never did water changes, seems kind of nasty.