[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [APD] CO2 measurement

Standing up and cheering!!! Rah! Rah!

Vaughn H.

On Dec 7, 2006, at 6:43 PM, Thomas Barr wrote:

> Bill wrote about testing CO2
> "But for just growing plants, I don't think one needs that
> degree of
> accuracy."
> Okay, let's accept that to be true.
> Here's the problem, it might not be an issue personally for you,
> but it is very much so for many folks less lucky than yourself.
> I do not like luck personally, but will take it if it comes
> along. Others are much less fortunate.
> I want to know what makes my tank succcessful so I can help
> others.
> If I base my advice on correlation and belief advice alone, I'd
> never get too far. Folks all the time add too little CO2 based
> on test and assumptions.
>  Accuracy and improving a reduction in error from the test and
> they are huge in many cases.............can reduce the amount of
> headaches many folks have determining CO2.
> I'm not sure how one can argue against this given the cost is
> minor and the adaptation is simple/easy/cheap.
> Can you do the cheap version of the drop checker to resolve such
> issues? You bet.
> So why ever bother with a pH probe at all then?
> It's not so much the adaptation I've suggested, but going back
> to why even bother with a pH probe at all ever?
> You are taking the approach that it's no longeer really an issue
> about adding a KH ref toa  pH probe, but you have issues with
> the use of a pH meter/probe system to begin with.
> "Need" is a very strong word also.....
> That has nothing to do with the adaptation for a KH ref I've
> suggested here for the pH probe.
> The adaptation is a 10$ add on.
> It requires little skill and addresses a major problems for many
> folks with funky KH issues and those that use ADA AS etc and
> want to know their CO2 levels and how those correlate with BBA,
> good plant growth etc.
> Many folks, maybe not you personally, have reported 210ppm of
> CO2 based of the pH/KH charts and that was with accurate pH
> probes.
> If they followed the chart, they would only be adding really
> 3ppm of CO2, not the real values of about 30-35ppm.
> Resolving such issues in a practical way is a creative art.
> So the chart's assumptions and our own have led many to add
> ittle CO2 and thus "caused" many infested BBA planted tanks and
> pissed off aquarist.
> This is a very weak argument against accuracy for the hobby, we
> can say that no CO2 measurement nor nutrient measurement is
> required nor temp etc.
> I can do it by watching the plants.
> But.......this does not mean __others__ can.
> We need some base line other than "good plant growth".
> Knowing why they grow allows you to figure out how to grow them
> much better and with less work and assumptions.
> It also allows me to help others and rule problems out. It also
> helps the aquarist with the problems to rule them out as well.
> Then they do not "need" to ask Tom Barr.
> You may be able to, but for everyone to have a good degree of
> confidence we are on the same page and able to reproduce things
> and verify them, testing accuracy certainly helps a great deal.
> I know what I know through accurate testing,
> falsification/verification and isolating issues, not because I
> am smart, have a green thumb or the plant fairy.
> That testing allows me to see what is enough and what is
> practical for folks, not everyone can and should eye ball CO2,
> but most can eyeball dosing using EI.
> If you use a drop checker, you will hit a ball park figure might
> close, a pH KH ref probe, right on the money.
> What that(EI) showed me is that folks have more issues with CO2,
> than previously thought and much less with nutrients such as
> excess Fe. Some using cheapo test kits also made assumptions
> that caused issues, I knew this due to EI as well. Some micro
> managing their nutrient levels and avoidign water changes also
> had a lot of issues with CO2, that I knew from the past test
> with managing nutrients levels. It's a lot of work and after all
> that effort, folks still had BBA.
> We bumped the CO2 up, and voila, the BBA stops growing.
> Adding some KH ref and taking that out of the assumption is a
> very useful approach at dealing with CO2 related issues for
> newbies, seasoned vets, and researchers.
> Do you even need to measure CO2 to use it and have a successful
> tank? No, but I never said nor suggested that either.
> This makes things easier and removes more assumptions in a
> practical easy to use manner.
> Sure, some can and do dose CO2 without ever using any test kit,
> but it's not to be advised unless you are very careful, many
> aquarist do not fall into that group. You might, but most do not
> and have a lot of trouble understanding CO2 and how is figures
> into the aquatic plant world.
> Regards,
> Tom Barr
> www.BarrReport.com

Aquatic-Plants mailing list
Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com