Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Surface agitation ; O2 & CO2

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Surface agitation ; O2 & CO2

    I've noticed that when i increase surface agitation and break a surface a lot , i can turn up the co2 a lot more than when i only wrinkle it a little..
    Ok , that's nothing new but , would it be fair to say that plants get more co2 this way , more bubbles , even though it goes out fast when it reaches the (broken) surface?
    And fish get more o2 this way right?
    So is a lot of co2 with a lot of surface agitation better than a little less co2 and less agitatioin?
    Downside would be often refilling of the co2 bottle which i don't mind as i have a 20kg bottle.

    Am i missing something here?
    Last edited by ibanezfrelon; 08-14-2010, 02:23 PM.

  • #2
    It's been said that 90 % of the CO2 we inject is not used by the plants. I personally like a little surface agitation. It adds O2, it breaks up surface scum and I like the look of a rippling surface. Since I use a split impeller mod for diffusion, it is obvious when I increase the bubble rate that the dispersion is more consistent throughout the tank.

    I used to run CO2 24/7, now for the last 6 months I've used a solenoid to switch CO2 on with the lights. I've minimized surface agitation and suffered more surface scum, and increased surface agitation for O2 and scum reduction. I've used inline PVC reactors, inline diffusers, ceramic diffusers and split impeller mods. I can't say that any of these methods were dramatically better or worse for saving money on CO2 usage. Since I use paintball bottles, not the cheapest way to use CO2, it would be obvious if any of these methods saved money. Differences could be expressed in $1.50 per month savings for the more efficient set ups. I still write down the date when I swap bottles just so I would be aware If I developed a leak somewhere.

    Anyway, what I'm driving at is adjust the surface agitation for the benefit of fish and appearance and adjust CO2 to the previously advised levels. The cost difference is really insignificant.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by hbosman View Post
      ... Anyway, what I'm driving at is adjust the surface agitation for the benefit of fish and appearance and adjust CO2 to the previously advised levels. The cost difference is really insignificant.
      Very good point!

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by hbosman View Post
        Anyway, what I'm driving at is adjust the surface agitation for the benefit of fish and appearance and adjust CO2 to the previously advised levels. The cost difference is really insignificant.
        +1, this is what I do and have ALWAYS done.

        Fish come first.

        Regards,
        Tom Barr
        www.BarrReport.com

        Comment

        Working...
        X