[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Re: Equilibrium, Ca and Mg levels
- To: Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com
- Subject: Re: Re: Equilibrium, Ca and Mg levels
- From: Greg Morin <greg at seachem_com>
- Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 09:46:43 -0500
- In-Reply-To: <200102010848.DAA23283 at actwin_com>
- References: <200102010848.DAA23283 at actwin_com>
> > Check that label again ;-) It says to raise GH by 1 _meq/L_ add
>> 15g/10 gallons. 1 meq/L is about 3 dH, so you aimed for 3 meq/L which
>> is 9 dH (which is what your test showed).
>
>Since you're printing new labels for Equilibrium anyway, you could take
>this opportunity to rewrite the instructions with units that are a
>little less arcane than meq/l. It might prevent some confusion.
We do actually give the dH equivalence to meq/L right after it and
anyway, "arcaneness" is in the eye of the beholder ;-)
meq/L is the simplest most chemically sound way of expressing the
amount of a particular material in the water. Converting these values
into grains per gallons, parts or equivalents per million as calcium
carbonate just seems totally baffling and confusing to me. Why state
you have so much of some material in terms of equivalence to some
other material that is in fact not even in the water? ;-)
I don't' want to start some holy war on preferred units here since in
the end I'm sure we'd all just agree to disagree, but with respect to
our labelling, we will always use the most chemically sound units
first, followed by a commonly used unit to help with the transition
to the world of simple and easy to remember units ;-)
-Greg Morin
--
Gregory Morin, Ph.D. ~~~~~~~Research Director~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Seachem Laboratories, Inc. www.seachem.com 888-SEACHEM
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~