Re: [APD] woes with walsted type tank

["S. Hieber" <shieber at yahoo_com>]

--- Bill D <billinet at comcast_net> wrote:

> "Good points, Bill. However, I would hem and haw a bit
> about
> the bio-wheels and surface turbulence. That is, I'm not
> sure that they'd present a problem -- if CO2 is not being
> injected, then the diff in CO2 levels if there is surface
> turbulence or not is pretty darn small since the CO2
> levels
> are pretty darn small."
> 
> Scott, thanks for your comments.
> 
> My understanding, and you can correct it if it's wrong
> and I hope that you
> do, is that atmospheric CO2 is absorbed into aquarium
> water at about 25% of
> the rate at which it is dispersed due to surface
> agitation.  I could be
> wrong.

I don't know about that. Anbd no one told me I might have
tto try to  think today.  Ah well. The CO2 absorbtion from
the atmosphere might be as you cite if there's virtually no
CO2 in the water but less if the there's some CO2 already
present from fish and bacterial processes.

I think still water will be around a few ppm, iirc, and a
fish tank might be around 5 or 6. And taht's my reason for
saying  surface agaitation won't make a big dif to plants
because you're talking about changes in what are very small
amounts to begin with. It's not half a loaf or whole; it's
more like half a crumb or two. ;-)(

sh



_______________________________________________
Aquatic-Plants mailing list
Aquatic-Plants at actwin_com
http://www.actwin.com/mailman/listinfo/aquatic-plants