[throw9394999]

> in our one-bedroom NYC apartment ... Bigger tank = better

If tank fails, you are liable for water damages and home insurance DOES NOT cover that. We were flodded by neighbours, the damage was $20.000 in cheap east europe commie block.

Plus bigger tanks need structural support in floor (steel beams).

[pipe2devnull]

Structural support in the floor? There are people that weigh more than this. It’s only 20 gallons

[malfist]

As someone who has over 800 gallons in aquariums between three tanks in his house, I'll say structural support is not as important as people make it out to be (ask an actual structural enginer). Anything up to 120 or so is just fine hanging out on a floor without extra support.

Also steel is completely unnecessary unless you're doing something wild like that guy in NYC with a 17,000 gallon home aquarium. If you're just throwing a 200 gallon or so on a second floor, an enginer might not care at all if its across the joists or has a wall below it, but even if its completely open below, the "support" might just be a joist of a different design, or an inch thicker or one extra joist. Steel is really not nessecary

[inigyou]

But big tanks do need extra support. This is a relevant thing to post in case someone is thinking about scaling it up.

The Pfizer building in NYC almost collapsed after they tried to build a swimming pool on the roof. This happens semi-regularly when building owners ignore, or don't consult, engineers about rooftop swimming pools. Every owner wants one and doesn't want to be told no.

[throwaway2037]

"almost collapsed"? Probably an overstatement.

If anyone wants to read more about this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pfizer_Building#Structural_det...

    > This happens semi-regularly when building owners ignore, or don't consult, engineers about rooftop swimming pools.

Another wild overstatement. Yeah, I'm sure the city approved this office to residential converstion with a rooftop swimming pool that has no engineering analysis. "This happens semi-regularly": Can you provide other examples? I couldn't find any with a cusory Google search.

[knollimar]

Pretty sure the pfizer building was vertical expansion without reinforcement.

I dont think they got to the pools. I worked for a company that did a bid for the electrical work. Edit: there was a pool. Didnt have on plans at time

Second edit: looking at wrong plan. There was a pool but it was basically a blank plan with annunderdesigned roof.

[sokka_h2otribe]

Ok, they also added an entire building on top, not just a pool

[cogman10]

I looked it up, you are looking at 160lbs (75kg).

[bitcurious]

> If tank fails, you are liable for water damages and home insurance DOES NOT cover that.

Whether an aquarium is covered by home/renters insurance is specific to the policy and aquarium size, not consistent enough to make statements like this. This aquaponics system is essentially a planter on top of a low stock aquarium.

I will say that the shelf supporting the aquarium seems inadequate to the job, increasing the risk.

[wk_end]

Having a fish tank for fish is a normal enough thing and carries similar risks of water damage, doesn't it? Does this strike you as significantly higher-risk, less insurable, or more irresponsible than that?

[laweijfmvo]

a lot of landlords ban fish tanks. they can do far more damage than a dog or cat ever will..

[martey]

This is covered in the post (emphasis mine):

> With similar concerns in mind, we also decided to limit the tank size to 20 gallons, as the grow-bed above also contains an additional ~10 gallons of water. Since a gallon of fresh water weighs roughly 8.34lbs, we estimate this puts the entire weight of the system’s water somewhere between 170 and 250lbs. Considering the weight threshold of the industrial shelving, and given that we live on a high floor in our building, we decided to constrain the system to this size to minimize the flooding risk.

[rrr_oh_man]

> home insurance DOES NOT cover that

Citation needed. Very bold sweeping claim

[projektfu]

It is most likely covered (in the US?) unless it was leaking from negligence or was specifically prohibited in the lease. Obviously, read your policy and your lease for details.

Source: https://www.thezebra.com/ask/renters-insurance-coverage-aqua...

[firloop]

Every apartment lease I’ve signed specifically prohibits aquariums.

[throw9394999]

Home insurance covers usual cases like ruptured pipes. It does cover running farm in your appartment!

[woodpanel]

And people are wondering why being landlords is often such a bad investment.

Imagine the lawsuit if you rent out an apartment that you own, and your „very intelligent“ tenant produces water leak damages, in a nyc high rise with potentially ALL owners underneath you affected.

[throw9394999]

I think landlords are not liable in this case. It is like if tennant sets building on fire. It just violates all sorts of codes.

For landlords worst are dogs. With wooden floors soaked with acidic urine, all surfaces scratched and chowed. Thanks to ESA bs, you can not even charge extra security deposit or extra rent! And normal tenants avoid your building, nobody wants to live in laud smelly zoo!