Re: [APD] A lighting and nutrient question...

[Liz Wilhite <satirica at gmail_com>]

On 8/26/05, Jared Morris <jared_morris at sbcglobal_net> wrote: 
> 
> So the lady I am selling this awesome setup to decided to go with a 125
> gallon tank (72"L x 18"W x 22"H), and I'm thinking 3 175watt Metal Halides
> would do the system nicely. A little on the high side, I know, but the
> lights will be in a 15" tall fan ventilated canopy, and of course it will
> have injected CO2. Thoughts?

 Compact fluorescents are a better alternative than metal halides in my 
opinion, and tha tis what many or most of us use. The lighting your propose 
is not just a little high -- this is high light in a tank that size. Such a 
setup will require much more care and experience to maintain than a lower 
wattage setup. George Booth, Tom Barr, Scott Hieber, Karen Randall and a lot 
of other people can pull off setups like this -- they are very experienced. 
I think such a setup would be a challenge for a person who knows so little 
that she would let someone else design her system for her. 
 The relationship beween tank size and "ideal" lighting as expressed in 
watts per gallon is not linear. The watts per gallon rule doesn't work 
particularly well. See http://www.thekrib.com/Plants/Tech/Lighting/ and 
http://www.thekrib.com/Plants/Tech/Lighting/comments.html . With larger 
tanks a lower WPG works better.
 Liz
_______________________________________________
Aquatic-Plants mailing list
Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com
http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo/aquatic-plants