[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
CO2 and Lights
- To: aquatic-plants at actwin_com
- Subject: CO2 and Lights
- From: STDIXON <stdixon at bechtel_com>
- Date: Mon, 28 Apr 1997 08:42:47 -0400 (EDT)
- Autoforwarded: false
- Cc: Steven Dixon <stdixon at bechtel_com>
- Disclose-Recipients: prohibited
- Hop-Count: 1
- Importance: normal
- Mr-Received: by mta SFMW.MUAS; Relayed; Mon, 28 Apr 1997 08:42:47 -0400
- Mr-Received: by mta SFNSP; Relayed; Mon, 28 Apr 1997 08:48:03 -0400
- Sensitivity: Company-Confidential
- Ua-Content-Id: 11B4E22A2E00
- X400-Mts-Identifier: [;7247420828041997/A11181/SFNSP]
> The question I have is whether the
> trickly filter and significant surface disturbance is completely ruining
> the effects of the CO2 generator. Am I waisting my time with this?
There is some difference of opinion among APDers on this point. Booth and
some others think the trickle filter doesn't affect CO2 levels too much.
Others disagree. If you can measure KH and pH and don't use phophate or
humic acid buffers (blackwater extracts or peat) you could probably figure
out what's going on.
I measure pH (Pinpoint pH Monitor) in my trickle filter sump box (in the
cabinet below my aquarium). Out of curiosity, recently I recalibrated the
pH monitor and took measurements around the aquarium (where the CO2 reactor
emits CO2 enriched water and other places) and also in the trickle filter
sump. I was surprised to find up to a 0.2 difference in pH between the
aquarium and the sump (the sump has a higher pH than the aquarium, as one
might expect). Using the famous "CHART" I can "calculate" the difference
in CO2 levels (I'm too senile to do log functions any more :-). The only
reason I can think of is outgassing of CO2.
I wasn't disturbed by this; I just figure I have a little more CO2 in the
aquarium than I previously thought. I'm playing around with reducing the
flow rate of the trickle filter pump just to see if there is a difference
in CO2 levels. (I don't think intense filtration is necessary in a heavily
planted tank with a reasonable fish load.)
> Also, would compact florescents be a good addition to the tank?
> Currently, I have 2 rows of strip florescent lights over the tank. If I
> do upgrade to the 96 compact florescents, should I get one
> with 2 or 4 bulbs. Again, my tank is a 75 gallon.
Maybe just 2 bulbs for around 3 watts per gallon (and especially if your
CO2 output may not be optimum). Karen Randall says that CFs emit about the
same level of light (lumens) per watt as regular fluorescents, so two bulbs
might do just fine. I'm using 170 watts of CFs and 160 watts of regular
fluorescents on a 125 gal. 24" high tank (I bought the wrong lights
initially and rather than start over, I just tucked in a few CFs under the
hood where there was room) and I have the feeling that the high light
levels might be driving some algae my way. Once I settle on long term PMDD
supplement levels, I intend to experiment a bit with this lighting
question.
Regards, Steve Dixon