3-4 bubs per sec Still Have 9+ PH ?????????

[BIGFOOTRoger]

90 Gallon
Heavily Planted
4 X 54WATT CATALINA T5 HO
Rena XP3 Canister
NO Airstones
CO2 Tank 3-4 Bubbles Per Second 24/7
8 Large Clown Loaches
30 Guppys
20 Platys
3 Geo. Brasiliensis
2 Skunk Loaches
Rainbow or 2
5 Scissor Tail Rasboras
3 corys
8 other little guys
Fluorite substrate
No Algae

Why is my PH so High ?
Tetra Master Kit Bright Blue at least 9 PH I Figure

Pumping into a power head reactor.........no balls in reactor tube

Any clues !

Thank You

And Please

Roger

[BigFlusher]

Biogenic decalcification?

[DaBub]

As my inarticulate friend, Big Flusher suggests it does appear to be biogenic decalcification where the pH jumps to 9.0 or even higher. You may notice carbonates precipitating out of solution.

Those T-5 lights provide a lot of energy and the plants may simply be consuming all the available CO2.

Due to the high light and number of plants, I would guess you are simply not meeting their carbon needs.

I don’t know if Biollante is still Barr’ed or not, Biollante knows about this, I’ll try e-mailing.

[BIGFOOTRoger]

I know of B D C...from reading Kasper Horst and Horst Kipper "The Optimum Aquarium"

I have no signs other than the PH rise.

None of that nasty build-up.

Oh , AND the WAY TOO MANY PLANTS HA! HA! HA!

So it's those plants sucking my CO2 Tank Dry

So Now What............remove some plants? Or Increase the CO2.........OR reduce Photo Period ?

Thanks for the reply !

[DaBub]

off hand i would say reduce the number of bulbs. toal wattage.

[Left C]

You may also want to add a drop checker with a 4 dKH solution and Bromothymol Blue low range freshwater pH indicator solution to dial in your CO2 level a bit more. GLA has a good selection of them. Also, you can get them and the solutions on ebay.

http://www.greenleafaquariums.com/co...-checkers.html

SuMo has the 4 dKH solution. It's their 30 ppm solution.
http://www.sumoregulator.com/DropCheckerSolutions.html

[Philosophos]

The plants aren't sucking the CO2 dry; you'd have to be yielding something like 1-2lbs of wet growth per week, without even accounting for atmospheric CO2 at 2.5ppm. Ponder this for a moment:

On average, people tend to go through 1lb of CO2/month on mid-sized aquariums. Plants are about 90% H2O, and we'll say 40% carbon. CO2 is 12/44 g/mol carbon.

=1/4*100/90*100/40*12/44
=0.25*10*2.5*0.2727
=1.704375

BPS is definitely not an accurate measure of how much CO2 is dwelling in the column. As LeftC is saying, try a drop checker out; it's helpful to know if you're even maintaining it in the column. Also, how are you diffusing the CO2 into your column? How much surface agitation do you have? An XP3 is also a very small filter for a densely planted tank.

Another question would be test kit accuracy. I'm guessing that just by pouring the water into the test tube, you're probably gassing off a ton of CO2. Try borrowing a pH meter; most LFS's have one. Measure pH in the column directly.

If we're going to consider biogenic decalcification, then the pH has to rise between water changes; not hold at 9pH. Test the water the day before and the day after a 50% water change. If there's no significant increase in pH, then there's no buildup of calcification from a steady metabolism. A list of stocked plants would also be helpful; if there are no plants present known to go through this process, then there's no reason to suspect it either.

[BigFlusher]

been trying to answer for a couple o' days

biogenic decalcification was admittedly a guess not being able to see the other factors.

i still do not buy into 100% efficiency of co2 as Dan suggests also do not buy into 130% of plant h2o and co2, certainly at least a % or 2 of other stuff. on my planet we are generally limited to 100% of anything.

if you are 'out gassing' a significant amount of co2 in transfer to test tube, i seriously doubt that the co2 was actually in solution as opposed to just bubbles in the water.

i do agree bps is meaningless, it is the amount of co2 into solution in the water column then the circulation getting the co2 and nutrients to the plants.

[Philosophos]

90% wet weight, 10% dry, of that 10%, 40% is carbon at most. The math spells it out for you.

CO2 does not remain in solution easily; it gases off within 48 hours just at rest, and we push very far beyond 100% saturation. Agitation or aeration will gas it off even faster, in a matter of seconds if you pour the whole solution splashing into a test tube. This is basic knowledge to CO2 dinamics within a planted tank. It's the same reason sticking DIY CO2 into the intake of a HOB is a miserable idea.

[BigFlusher]

no problem with the arithmetic, just the assumption behind it.

still doubt 100% of co2 in solution.

it was you who posited 90% h2o and 40% carbon. your revision is accepted.

i have no argument with co2 gassing off in 48 hours or so my clearly stated objection was to losing statistically significant amounts in transfer to test tube. if the co2 is in solution that should not happen without vigorous shaking.

i still think one way or another it is a lack of carbon.

i also heartily agree with DaBub that reduction in light would be a good 1st step.

nice try at changing the terms to 'win' your argument! my point was simply a possibility based on incomplete facts, if there is no calcium deposit then biogenic decalcification is unlikely.

that does not make the silly bps or bubbles floating around the tank anymore effective or less wasteful in getting co2 in solution and into a plant useful form.

other possibility exist, the pH reading may indeed be incorrect or inaccurate. i am not familiar with tetra pH kits but if it is the 'blue' as in Bromthymol Blue the range 6.0 (yellow) to 7.6 (blue) is about it.