[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: O2 at night
- To: <Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com>
- Subject: Re: O2 at night
- From: Thomas Barr <tcbiii at earthlink_net>
- Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 09:31:48 -0500
- In-reply-to: <200301271114.h0RBE1nT003429 at otter_actwin.com>
- User-agent: Microsoft-Outlook-Express-Macintosh-Edition/5.02.2022
> Tom Barr wrote:
> "So you think a rise of .5 to 1.0pH unit over several hours is going to make
> a difference in the fish?
> I don't think it is going to make a difference with the pH alone."
> I don't know, but thought it should be avoided. The pH swing is from 7.2 to
> 7.6 over the week, before I change out one bottle. I can't go for more than
> a week, with the heated bottles. I suppose they'd last long if they weren't
> heated - or not? (I know squat about yeast biology).
Sounds like the bottles are not making enough CO2 towards the end of the
week or making enough only in the beginning, not enough later.
You can try some ideas using a reactor that waste CO2 up to a point, then
conserves CO2 when low. The gravel vac style reactors using a power head are
very good for this since you can drill a pre determined 3/16" hole to burp
out the excess CO2 and the reactor is extremely efficient up till that
The net effect is a better more even CO2 levels using DIY, since you cannot
control the source very well, you can control how it is dissolved into the
>> "But an idea you can consider is placing the DIY brew bottles on the
>> ballast, they warm up during the day and increase production and then turn
>> off at night lowering production".
> I could certainly put the bottle heaters on the same timer as the light,
> fairly easily. I can check that out with the fishless hi-light nursery tank.
> Bottles on the light ballasts wouldn't work with my canopy designs. Ballasts
> are adjacent to the lights. Also, I'm having to heat these bottles to 85 - 90
Oh well, just a thought. Leave the heaters on.
>> "Your trying to hit a moving target. But most bottles do well for about 10
> My individual bottles are lasting 14 days, heated; I change one a week.
That should be enough. But maybe the reactor method might be a better way to
even things out with less $.
>> "Gas tanks are worth the expense and are extremely stable/easy and cheap if
>> you have more than a couple of plant tanks. Sure save a good deal of
>> headache and time."
> I have 6 planted tanks, none of which could share a gas tank and I can't
> afford 6 systems. House design precludes any two tanks being adjacent or
> even on the same section of wall.
Well that's no good then.
>> " I learned that the hardness did not make a hill of beans difference,
>> neither does turning the /cO2 off at night. You gain nothing for the fish
>> either way."
> I would assume that the types of plants which I can't grow worth a darn
> failed due to excessive "liquid cement" in the tank.
No, it's the CO2 nutrients. The nicest natural planted submerged planted
area I've seen is hardwater.
In all this discussion
> I find I've lost track of why I would want to turn off the CO2 at night,
> anyway? I don't think the logic of that ever got discussed. The idea of O2
> at night was in a new aquarium plant book I ordered.
I turn it off simply because the plants do not need it at night.
Also, since I use reactors with powerheads to drive the systems connected to
timers, there's no need to run them 24/7, they will last longer, use less
electric, give a chance to have all the leaves and other junk that gets
attached to the prefilter screen to float off preventing clogging etc.
You can also add more CO2 during the day when you need it, without nearly as
much concern at night since the system is off, thereby avoiding excessive
CO2 build up over the night. You can add another bottle to the system and
have high CO2 during the day when it's being used. You don't need high CO2
>> "I do 50% weekly water change every week. I don't adjust the pH of the tap
>> water, it comes in at 7.7 or higher. The tank's sit at 6.2-6.3 here.
>> No fish issues. They seem to enjoy it."
> OK, I do 50% water changes every week. Fortunately, my well water is coming
> in at 7.4 - CO2 saturated, hence no shock to the system. But you're saying
> there wouldn't be anyhow.
Well, I think if you watch closely after each water change how the plants
respond, you'll see how well they do.
But you'll need to perhaps try something with the CO2 and add fresh
nutrients back afterwards, but the nutrients are fairly cheap, KNO3,
K2SO4,KH2PO4, traces etc. CO2 is often the biggest challenge for DIY folks.
> Thanks, I may be over fine tuning my systems. Sharon