how necessary is co2

[plantbrain]

I guess my question to folks who ask and seem to want to avoid CO2 is do you understand what CO2 enrichment does?

It maximizes the use, the plant's ability to use every available watt of light energy. So you get far better growth and you can grow any species easily.

You can use less light than you can without CO2.

Adding CO2 is not hard, but merely because someone tells you can grow plants without adding CO2 gas etc, or it's not 100% required is hardly a fair way to look at it.

Folks hear that and they often add lots of light(you have too much, even for a CO2 enriched tank by most standards) without the same predjudice or cost concerns.

Light seems obvious, more is better............or is it?

Underwater, plants are very different than terrestrial plants, where you add more light and get more/better growth for many species. Not so with aquatic plants.

They are 10,000X more limited due to diffusion in water of CO2 than they might be in air.

Adding more light drives up more CO2 demand.
So this is a 2 fold problem now for aquarist.

Better to stick with low light, good CO2(or not, or Excel etc).

If you want more plant options, more thicker growth etc, then add CO2.
More light is the last thing to add if you want more growth.

I used emergent growth and no CO2, since that gets around the CO2 issue but still provides the benefits of plants.

Up to you, but I would suggest looking into the final product of what you want, then see what it takes to best get you to that goal.

Start there, then see which things will help in the entire context(fish/plant selections, nutrients, CO2, light etc), not piece meal.

Regards,
Tom Barr

 

[67chevelle]

With root tabs, liquid fert, and 2.5 - 3 wpg how necessary is having co2, I've heard florishs excel can be helpful as a replacement for co2 , what do you think?

If you decide not to use CO2,I would use the root tabs and ferts sparingly.If your plants are not growing fast enough to use up all the ferts,algae will start to grow.I would also keep you lighting to 2 wpg or less if no CO2 is used. Using CO2 is easy. There are plenty of people here who will help you get it set up if you decide to buy a regulator and tank.
Excel is always an option too,but in the long run,CO2 is cheaper and easier,IMO.

 

[GreenTerr0]

I appreciate all the advice but its a little overwhelming I'm not clear on what to do, currently I'm using a 40 watt aqua glo bulb and a 20 watt floro on a 30 " strip, my plants are growing, and look pretty good, I purchase all the hardware to change over my 48" florescent strip into a cfl hood using some supplies from work, I can achieve up to 8 - 10 cfl bulbs at 23 watts each ( not output but actual rating) I thought the more light the better, at the big als they're telling me I need 3 wpg , one guy even told me 5 wpg, co2 is out of the question, ferts and lights is all I can do for the next while, what is my best route?

 

[Trigger1985]

Well since you're planning on switching to CFL, you have a bit a flexibility, if you start getting algea outbreaks, just switch to a lower wattage bulb. If you can't afford CO2 now, then stick with excel, maybe save up for a CO2 system. My tank is a 25 gallon, so I went the DIY route, though I'd love a nice system, and plan on getting one some day. It's all about making your life easier while still providing for your plants. Excel works, but DIY is easier, no daily dosing, etc and it won't melt some plants (excel melts vals, and many others). And a CO2 system is even easier than that, no shaking bottles and adjusting gang valves every few days like on my DIY. And no worrys if you go on vacation for a few days that you're going to come home to an outbreak, or no worrys that the person watching your tank overdosed the tank, etc.