# Calibrate your drop checker, CO2 is bad for fish!



## ray-the-pilot (May 14, 2008)

This is my experience. I have a pH controller and I can accurately regulate the CO2 levels in my tank. I can say that in my aquarium, levels of CO2 above 15 ppm have negative effects on some of my aquarium fish. 

15 ppm is dark green to blue green on a drop checker so this is lower than many people keep their tanks. 

OK probably no one here knows the CO2 level of their tanks but what color do you think your drop checker should be at? I know that a number of people think that when their drop checker goes yellow their fish are at risk. I think that when your drop checker goes green, your fish are not happy. 

Where is your drop checker?


----------



## freydo (Jan 7, 2006)

in my experience i go with how many CO2 bps i'm injecting into my tank, and with what my pH meter tells me. my plants grow nicely and my fish are healthy. i don't need a drop checker or pH controller to tell me this.

so i'm not going to worry about the doom and gloom that i'm getting from your post. but i'm sure some people will consider your "...CO2 is bad for fish!" suggestions.


----------



## Seattle_Aquarist (Mar 7, 2008)

Hi Ray,

I use a drop checker with 4.0 kh/dh water and 4 drops of indicator solution. I shoot for blue green / dark green which should be 30 PPM. As the plants grow I have to increase the flow, conversely if I do a large trim or restart a tank have to remember to decrease the flow. My plants are growing well with minimal algae.


----------



## StevieD (Sep 23, 2008)

I don't know about that. On my 26 gallon bowfront, it is a bit overcrowded and i know i have at least 25ppm of co2 and had upwards of i would say 40 or more.. Not until then did i remotely begin to see signs of stress. I think i have a problem of not enough oxygen than too much co2. There are 6 3+inch discus in there right now a a handful of other small fish and a lot of plants. I have really good circulation and have check the co2 in a few areas in the tank. I think it is really important to have good flow if you run your co2 high because some areas could become really much higher in concentration that you think, and i think that is where one can run into problems.

Tom Barr will tell you that 30ppm is quite safe for fish, and i know he has experimented with higher levels of co2. I have read that smaller fish are more tolerant of higher co2 levels. In the future depending apon your goals, we may see levels greater than 30ppm become the norm. I will say i think it is risky to get around 30ppm or higher without a ph controller.

Stevie D


----------



## chagovatoloco (Nov 17, 2007)

What type of negative effects are you noticing, did they stop breeding are they panicking? How many tanks have you observed this on? Is the 15ppm for tanks with low light or for high light tanks?


----------



## Squawkbert (Jan 3, 2007)

I suspect it would be prudent for you to double check the calibration of your pH meter and the dKH of your drop checker's solution before you go off dismissing the work of numerous others on the subject.

Personally, I know my 4dKH solution is spot-on as I made it myself from baking soda whose moisture content was known and corrected for and water that is of the highest purity, right from the tap of a Milli-Q Gradient A10 TOC polishing unit fed by an Elix water system (top shelf stuff, even by lab standards). When my drop checker is green, I'm in the 15PPM-30PPM CO2 window. My fish are fine.

pH controllers are only as good as their probes. If probes are neglected, CO2 delivery accuracy will suffer. If your probe gets gunked up at a pH above your set point, your CO2 tank will remain "on" until the pH drops to a certain point - which may be never, as far as your probe is concerned. You should also regularly calibrate the probe using standard buffers bracketing the range of pH values you anticipate the probe seeing. In addition to accuracy, you need to pay attention to the response time of the probe.

pH controllers are not "set it and forget it" devices.


----------



## Sunstar (Sep 17, 2008)

my drop checker is at an "olive" colour. I am watching it carefully. My observations is when the bottle is low on co2, the drop checker goes blue green. I've been feeding my tank for months prior to the drop checker. The only time this is going to change is when I get my DIY and the distilled water I require. I don't want to be trying to spend hours distilling it in my kitchen again.


----------



## ray-the-pilot (May 14, 2008)

Seattle_Aquarist said:


> Hi Ray,
> 
> I use a drop checker with 4.0 kh/dh water and 4 drops of indicator solution. I shoot for blue green / dark green which should be 30 PPM. As the plants grow I have to increase the flow, conversely if I do a large trim or restart a tank have to remember to decrease the flow. My plants are growing well with minimal algae.


My feeling is that you have the perfect tank but I doubt that your CO2 is at 30 ppm.

Dark green corresponds to a pH in your drop checker of about 7.0. The CO2 level that corresponds to this is about 12 ppm which agrees with my own observations.


----------



## ray-the-pilot (May 14, 2008)

StevieD said:


> I don't know about that. On my 26 gallon bowfront, it is a bit overcrowded and i know i have at least 25ppm of co2 and had upwards of i would say 40 or more.. Not until then did i remotely begin to see signs of stress. I think i have a problem of not enough oxygen than too much co2. There are 6 3+inch discus in there right now a a handful of other small fish and a lot of plants. I have really good circulation and have check the co2 in a few areas in the tank. I think it is really important to have good flow if you run your co2 high because some areas could become really much higher in concentration that you think, and i think that is where one can run into problems.
> 
> Tom Barr will tell you that 30ppm is quite safe for fish, and i know he has experimented with higher levels of co2. I have read that smaller fish are more tolerant of higher co2 levels. In the future depending apon your goals, we may see levels greater than 30ppm become the norm. I will say i think it is risky to get around 30ppm or higher without a ph controller.
> 
> Stevie D


Here is the experiment you need to do. Start at no added CO2 and observe the activity and the mating behavior of your fish. Keep them at this level for a few weeks to confirm how they act. Then increase the CO2 to 5 ppm. and check them out for a week or two. Increase CO2 to 10 ppm and see how they react after a week or two. Continue increasing CO2 until you are sure you notice a change in their behavior. Then drop the CO2 back. If the fish return to their normal behavior you know that CO2 is causing a problem.

BTW You will notice a change in your fish behavior long before they are at the top of the tank sucking in air.


----------



## ray-the-pilot (May 14, 2008)

chagovatoloco said:


> What type of negative effects are you noticing, did they stop breeding are they panicking? How many tanks have you observed this on? Is the 15ppm for tanks with low light or for high light tanks?


None of the above.

Here is how you do it:

http://www.aquaticplantcentral.com/forumapc/showthread.php?p=427002#post427002


----------



## ray-the-pilot (May 14, 2008)

Squawkbert said:


> I suspect it would be prudent for you to double check the calibration of your pH meter and the dKH of your drop checker's solution before you go off dismissing the work of numerous others on the subject.
> 
> pH controllers are only as good as their probes. If probes are neglected, CO2 delivery accuracy will suffer. If your probe gets gunked up at a pH above your set point, your CO2 tank will remain "on" until the pH drops to a certain point - which may be never, as far as your probe is concerned. You should also regularly calibrate the probe using standard buffers bracketing the range of pH values you anticipate the probe seeing. In addition to accuracy, you need to pay attention to the response time of the probe.
> 
> pH controllers are not "set it and forget it" devices.


Good advice but I don't think you have actually used a pH controller.

I calibrate my controller about every other week. I have a pocket pH meter that I use to verify my controller every few days. I also have a drop checker that I use to verify that my controller is working.

I can measure the CO2 level in my tank to +/- 2ppm.


----------



## Nevermore (Mar 26, 2007)

ray-the-pilot said:


> None of the above.
> 
> Here is how you do it:
> 
> http://www.aquaticplantcentral.com/forumapc/showthread.php?p=427002#post427002


The link just gives you the previous page (?)


----------



## ray-the-pilot (May 14, 2008)

Nevermore said:


> The link just gives you the previous page (?)


Maybe I was being obtuse, sorry. At the bottom of that post I explain how to find out when your fish are being affected by CO2.


----------



## Nevermore (Mar 26, 2007)

Is this a reliable way to quantify the amount of CO2 in your tank? Measuring the pH change of a small amount of tank water that has sat out in a paper cup for 24 hours compared to that inside the tank. A difference of 1 degree is supposed to equal 30 ppm.


----------



## ray-the-pilot (May 14, 2008)

This is a really good idea but there is a problem. In every tank there are different chemicals that affect the pH of the water. Each tank is unique; so, when you take CO2 out of the water (letting it sit) you cannot know what effect these chemicals have on the change in pH.

The way to overcome this is to add a known quantity of CO2 into your tank and find out how much the pH changes. I explained how to do this here:

http://www.aquaticplantcentral.com/forumapc/equipment/56522-how-calibrate-your-drop-checker.html


----------



## Nevermore (Mar 26, 2007)

Thanks! I'll try that. I have a pH meter already.


----------



## chagovatoloco (Nov 17, 2007)

I agree that normal behavior stops before they are gasping at the surface for air and this dose stress the fish, If that is what you are saying. Fish behavior should be a concern when adding co2 not just plant growth and algae control. But I know many who have had fish breed and thrive in water with 30 ppm co2 (ph meter proven). The drop checker is a lose science and men are more prone to color blindness than women. This is why I think of the drop checker as a base line needing fine tuning. Fish behavior being a key factor among others. I also know those who have tested water in nature and found 30ppm co2.


----------



## Nevermore (Mar 26, 2007)

chagovatoloco said:


> I agree that normal behavior stops before they are gasping at the surface for air and this dose stress the fish, If that is what you are saying. Fish behavior should be a concern when adding co2 not just plant growth and algae control. But I know many who have had fish breed and thrive in water with 30 ppm co2 (ph meter proven). The drop checker is a lose science and men are more prone to color blindness than women. This is why I think of the drop checker as a base line needing fine tuning. Fish behavior being a key factor among others. I also know those who have tested water in nature and found 30ppm co2.


A pH meter won't prove that there's 30 ppm CO2 in the water. You need a CO2 dissolved gas analyzer. I have a pH meter and I wish I knew how much CO2 I had in my aquarium.


----------



## Manwithnofish (Mar 12, 2008)

From Ray-the-pilot:


> The CO2 level that corresponds to this is about 12 ppm


Maybe I'm wrong, but isn't all this based on some presumed relationship between pH and CO2....and doesn't kH figure into this equation?

How does all this relate to this....http://www.aquaticplantcentral.com/forumapc/general-aquarium-plants-discussions/56902-co2-calculator.html

According to that, then depending on the amount of Phosphates in your tank, your equation may be unreliable?

Is it possible to get to the factual truth about this? Is there a chemist in the house?

In the words of the immortal John Lennon, 
"Im sick and tired of hearing things
From uptight, short-sighted, narrow-minded hypocritics
All I want is the truth
Just gimme some truth"


----------



## chagovatoloco (Nov 17, 2007)

Nevermore said:


> A pH meter won't prove that there's 30 ppm CO2 in the water. You need a CO2 dissolved gas analyzer. I have a pH meter and I wish I knew how much CO2 I had in my aquarium.


Tom barr did prove this with a co2 dissolved gas analyzer ( I don't recall saying any thing about a ph meter). He has also done a lot of studying with this analyzer on many different tanks. As for a chemist I believe ray is one.


----------



## Manwithnofish (Mar 12, 2008)

> As for a chemist I believe ray is one.


My question was not whether or not Ray-the-chemist was a pilot....my question is.....isn't the point about Phosphates a valid one...or is Ray-the-chemist using a different equation / relationship? What is Ray-the-chemist doing that makes Chuck-the-CO2-table-maker wrong?


----------



## houseofcards (Feb 16, 2005)

I believe that Joe-the-plumber can work this all out.


----------



## ray-the-pilot (May 14, 2008)

*Let me repeat YOU NEED TO CALIBRATE!*

Quotes:

"A pH meter won't prove that there's 30 ppm CO2 in the water. You need a CO2 dissolved gas analyzer. I have a pH meter and I wish I knew how much CO2 I had in my aquarium." Nevermore

"Maybe I'm wrong, but isn't all this based on some presumed relationship between pH and CO2....and doesn't kH figure into this equation?" Manwithnofish

"What is Ray-the-chemist doing that makes Chuck-the-CO2-table-maker wrong?" Manwithnofish

Let me answer all these questions together.

The problem with any analysis is that you need a KNOWN REFERENCE STANDARD to compare your sample with. In the case of CO2 you kneed a known reference standard of CO2 dissolved in water.

In none of the methods described above does anyone check their test with a known reference. They are faced with all the problems you describe.

If you check out my post "How to calibrate your drop checker" you can find a way to calibrate your pH meter with a known concentration of CO2.

Here is an interesting fact. My tank works well when my drop checker is dark green using my pH meter this corresponds to a pH of about 7.1 (in my 4 dKH drop checker). If you go to Chuck's table you will find that this corresponds to a CO2 level of 12 ppm not 30 ppm.

Now I could be wrong. The word from God that 30 ppm is right may be true. But I would really like someone to check out some of the things I post themselves to verify what I've done. That is the way things progress not by making statements like: Tom Barr (ie God) says it is so; therefore, it must be true.)


----------



## chagovatoloco (Nov 17, 2007)

*Re: Let me repeat YOU NEED TO CALIBRATE!*



ray-the-pilot said:


> Quotes:
> 
> The problem with any analysis is that you need a KNOWN REFERENCE STANDARD to compare your sample with.


Finally something we agree on

The reason so many of us respect Tom Barr "GOD" is that he had done so much to help many of us when we where starting. His research has helped so many that would be lost otherwise have beautifully planted aquariums. He also has gone to great lengths to make the hobby affordable, proving it can be done with out a lot of expensive equipment. Call him "GOD" if you want but he has done more for this hobby than most.


----------



## ray-the-pilot (May 14, 2008)

*Re: Let me repeat YOU NEED TO CALIBRATE!*

Well I can understand your position. When automobiles became popular there were a lot of people claiming that they would never replace the horse. 
Some people are happy with 20th century technology in the 21st century. I'm just not one of them. I want to expand the hobby not live in the past.

BTW I posted an inexpensive way to calibrate your drop checker. It explains how to make a "KNOWN REFERENCE STANDARD" for your tank. Did you try it?

BTW 2 Cheap is not necessarily the best. Some people look for the best. If a lot of people find that something is great, the price will go down.


----------



## chagovatoloco (Nov 17, 2007)

I didn't see that post, do you have a link? If you really want to prove the ph controller some test should be in order. I believe you are saying that an aquarium with a ph controller will do better and have less algae with more growth than an aquarium with a drop checker solenoid. It that is the case we can scientifically prove or disprove this hypothesis. Two tanks same substrate, plants, lighting, fert dosing ext.... If someone where to do and Experiment like this it would show proof. And I think that is what is needed to come to a scientific conclusion to this theory. No?


----------



## Manwithnofish (Mar 12, 2008)

> In none of the methods described above does anyone check their test with a known reference.


 Ray-the-pilot. So does this mean that there isn't a "simple" chemical equation that states a relationship between CO2, pH, and kH?



> If someone where to do and Experiment like this it would show proof. And I think that is what is needed to come to a scientific conclusion to this theory.


 Chag..

Personally, I'm not interested in the results of such an experiment, because I'm not interested in a pH controller. Therefore, it really doesn't matter to me if it is better. I believe too many people are having "success" with a drop checker and I'll learn to make my system work with it or shut it all down and quit. Bottom line: I do not believe that you have to have a pH controller to be successful.

But, I absolutely think it's great that other people have them and are happy with them.


----------



## ray-the-pilot (May 14, 2008)

chagovatoloco said:


> I didn't see that post, do you have a link? If you really want to prove the ph controller some test should be in order. I believe you are saying that an aquarium with a ph controller will do better and have less algae with more growth than an aquarium with a drop checker solenoid. It that is the case we can scientifically prove or disprove this hypothesis. Two tanks same substrate, plants, lighting, fert dosing ext.... If someone where to do and Experiment like this it would show proof. And I think that is what is needed to come to a scientific conclusion to this theory. No?


I suppose your test would prove something to the person who does it but I wouldn't call it scientific.

Your test is like asking a person to cook a meal on a wood burning stove and a gas burning stove. The test being which meal tastes better? I don't think you would find that much of a difference in taste between the two ways; however, I'm sure the person who did this test would decide that it was much better to have a gas stove in their home.

I'm not sure why you have such a blind spot when it comes to using a pH controller?
Yes you can grow plants without one that is true. But you can grow them without CO2 so what! Just because Tom Barr says you don't need one doesn't mean that it is not a valuable tool to have in your arsenal.

I actually own a regulator, bubble counter, solenoid valve and the other stuff that Tom Barr says you need and that system is erratic, produces wide swings in my aquarium environment and is not good enough for me. It may be good enough for Tom Barr but I have a higher standard. Is there something wrong with that?

Here is how to calibrate your pH meter/controller using a reference:

http://www.aquaticplantcentral.com/forumapc/equipment/56522-how-calibrate-your-drop-checker.html


----------



## ray-the-pilot (May 14, 2008)

Manwithnofish said:


> Ray-the-pilot. So does this mean that there isn't a "simple" chemical equation that states a relationship between CO2, pH, and kH?
> 
> Chag..
> 
> ...


Yes there is a simple mathematical relationship between pH, kH and CO2. It is the Henderson-Hasselbalch equation. Unfortunately, it is a relative equation. What that means is you have to have a reference standard to compare with when you are using it. That is why you calibrate a pH meter with know reference solutions before you check an unknown.

I agree, you don't need a pH controller to grow plants and you don't need CO2 either. If you are happy with your drop checker, that's great. I am more demanding and need the higher level of control I get with a pH controller. Is there a problem with that?


----------



## Manwithnofish (Mar 12, 2008)

> I agree, you don't need a pH controller to grow plants and you don't need CO2 either. If you are happy with your drop checker, that's great. I am more demanding and need the higher level of control I get with a pH controller. Is there a problem with that?


A problem? I don't think so. What any individual chooses to do is obviously their choice. And it's great that there is diversity in our approaches. It's just that not everyone is going to subscribe to what someone else may be doing (and with great success). We don't have to argue that everyone does something the same way (the best way) or it's wrong. You offered a very excellant approach to this issue. Thanks for sharing your way. As for me, I'm just looking for another way. I'm really not sure I ever wanted to get so involved in chemistry to own a pH controller and meter or to solve chemical equations in order to have an aquarium in my house. If I ever change my mind (which happens frequently), I'll know just who to look up, so I'll think of you as a resource for controlling pH or CO2 or both.


----------



## Muirner (Jan 9, 2007)

I can report that I personally inject CO2 into my 55G tank at home using nothing more then a drop checker for reference. I have kept a close eye on my fish and to this day i still see great color in all my rasboras, my endlers mate up a storm with high survival rates, and plants are doing great. 

While CO2 is dangerious for fish, i do not notice any ill effects with the drop checker a solid green with 4 dKH standard solution in the drop checker. One thing i didnt see is what kind of solution are you using in your drop checker as this will provide different CO2 levels turning the checker green.


----------



## chagovatoloco (Nov 17, 2007)

Ray- I'm glad that you are happy with your ph meter and no I don't have a problem with that. May be I am harsh on them because I have had great success with out one and don't feel it is needed. I have not ever seen a tank that dose better with one and until I do it is unlikely that I will try one.


----------



## Indignation (Mar 9, 2008)

ray-the-pilot said:


> I'm not sure why you have such a blind spot when it comes to using a pH controller?
> Yes you can grow plants without one that is true. But you can grow them without CO2 so what! Just because Tom Barr says you don't need one doesn't mean that it is not a valuable tool to have in your arsenal.
> 
> I actually own a regulator, bubble counter, solenoid valve and the other stuff that Tom Barr says you need and that system is erratic, produces wide swings in my aquarium environment and is not good enough for me. It may be good enough for Tom Barr but I have a higher standard. Is there something wrong with that?


Quick question - can your "higher standard" produce tanks that look like this? or this?  If so, please share pictures!
Tom Barr, and many others like him, have tried pH monitors. They find them unnecessary in most situations. We, as hobbyists, look to people like Tom Barr for knowledge and inspiration. This is because we can mimic his methods easily, with great results.

He also backs up his claims with good reproducible data, following standard scientific methodology. 
Take a look at this thread for some great info on measuring co2 in the aquarium. The article also covers fish reactions to different ppm of co2. He uses a dissolved co2 meter, which is a far more accurate, direct observation than a pH meter using inference could produce. If you really want an "ultra high-tech" aquarium, look into getting one!


----------



## ray-the-pilot (May 14, 2008)

First let me point out that I never said that Tom Barr couldn’t grow plants well. He is very talented and artistic. What I am saying is that when it comes to technology, he is , well ... backwards.
This seems pretty obvious to me and I’m confused why it’s not obvious to you. Let me explain why.

Imagine it is winter and you want to heat a room. What you do is get one of those electric heaters the kind with the glowing wires. Then you hook it up to a voltage regulator. Now when you turn the regulator up the wire gets hotter and when you turn the regulator down the wire gets cooler. Now you play with the voltage regulator (turning it up and down) until the heat it produces exactly balances the heat going out of the room and the room is a comfortable 70. 

After a while the outside gets cooler and the room is too cold. Later still the outside gets hotter and the room is to hot. What do you do? Well you could play with the voltage regulator whenever you are uncomfortable, you could live with the temperature changes or you could install a thermostat. 

With a thermostat, you set it to some point and it goes on when the temperature is too low and goes off when the temperature is too high. You don’t need to diddle with the voltage regulator and you are always comfortable. Now did you absolutely need that thermostat? No but it is obvious to most people that having one is way better.

This is exactly the same as installing a pH controller. 

Your bubble counter is exactly like the resistance heater. You can only turn it up and down. The controller is exactly like the thermostat. Yes you can work with just a bubble counter but why would you if you can afford a controller?

Maybe it’s the term pH that is causing this problem. Call it a CO2 controller. That is what is does. It controls the level of CO2 in your tank. 

If you still think that a CO2 controller is not a vast improvement, then maybe you are afraid of technology.

BTW If you take the average of Tom's reported readings you get 16 ppm the same as I recommend.


----------



## freydo (Jan 7, 2006)

i don't know why you're suggesting/pushing the benefits of a pH controller. yes they're great for people who want to "control" every setting for their tanks, but in the end there are lots of people who don't the see the benefit or the need.

it's definitely not because they're afraid of technology, i'm sure not. they just don't want to get encumbered with more "stuff". the problem with more stuff, is the greater chance of more stuff failing. this is the same with adding a solenoid to control the flow of co2 into the tank. a lot of those solenoids have failed and caused co2 to dump into the tank and kill all fish. i'm sure you can't tell me that pH controllers will never fail, because i'm sure they have. 

honestly, i think you know your stuff, however you're getting onto the point of being obnoxious. you actually remind of another member who was the same. if in fact you're not the same person. you've went past the point of praising the benefits of adding a pH controller to a tank setup, to beating a dead horse that everyone needs one to even keep their tanks alive.

i think you've made your point quite a while ago, and it's time for you and everyone else to step back, take a breath and let it go. because i think this discussion has gone past being useful.


----------



## Squawkbert (Jan 3, 2007)

1) My understanding is that you're shooting for a range of 15-30PPM CO2 (which pretty well covers the green range of a 4dKH drop checker).

2) I don't doubt the efficacy or precision of a pH controller, my issue is with encouraging the masses to use them without making them aware of the potential pitfalls and required maintenance, calibrations etc.

My main objection to the OP was the "riot inciting" title of it.

When I encourage others to try out CO2, I encourage them to bump up their flow rate very slowly. I also encourage the use of dual stage regulators (to help prevent, or at least minimize "end of tank dump"). I advocate Drop checkers as a simple, easy way to monitor pH accurately enough to allow one to sleep a little better at night (just before "lights out" being a good time to monitor CO2 - to see that you aren't adding it much faster than the plants can deal with it). As there is significant potential to kill off your livestock with pressurized CO2, some modicum of caution and responsibility is warranted. I don't think inducing panic with such post titles is at all beneficial to the hobby.


----------



## ray-the-pilot (May 14, 2008)

I don’t want to start a riot (and I doubt that I could) but since no one here has a pH controller, no one here really knows what effect CO2 has on “their fish.” 

First let me point out that CO2 above the equilibrium concentration with air does not occur in nature. This level of CO2 is well below 5 ppm so when you are adding CO2 to your tank your fish (and plants) are going someplace no fish has gone before (at least in nature). 
The experiment everyone needs to do with their own tank is this. 

Start by shutting off all CO2. Do this for a couple of days. If your tank is planted, the plants will use up all the available CO2. Record the pH of your tank. Watch your fish’s activity, mating behavior and general welfare. This is what is normal for them. Now starting at the pH you recorded, gradually decrease the pH setting of your controller. Do this over a period of a week or more so you can observe your fish and plants after everything comes to equilibrium. As the pH decreases (CO2 increases) the activity of your plants will increase and the activity of you fish will decrease. Different plant and fish react differently to changes in CO2 there is no perfect CO2 level for all plants and fish. In my tank, some fish can take higher levels of CO2 (like SAE, Catfish and loaches). Others are more sensitive to change in CO2 and decline in activity (like hatchet fish, and Oto cats).

Having wild changes in pH (and by implication CO2 levels) is not good for fish. In fact for many fish, the program recommended is contrary to their natural activity cycle. High CO2 in the day will make fish more active at night when many would normally not be active. 

My feeling is this: If you want to keep plants and some fish together there is no way you can keep CO2 levels at 30 ppm. But then I could be wrong and would like some people to try some of the things I recommend themselves instead of complaining that Tom Barr doesn’t do that.


----------



## vancat (Nov 5, 2004)

"Start by shutting off all CO2. Do this for a couple of days. If your tank is planted, the plants will use up all the available CO2. Record the pH of your tank. Watch your fish’s activity, mating behavior and general welfare. This is what is normal for them."

What if that higher pH is not what they like? Then they would not be displaying normal behavior.
My fish like a lower pH (which the CO2 induces). With the higher CO2 comes a lower pH.

I'm just sayin'.


----------



## SpeedEuphoria (Jul 9, 2008)

ray-the-pilot said:


> I calibrate my controller about every other week. I have a pocket pH meter that I use to verify my controller every few days. I also have a drop checker that I use to verify that my controller is working.
> 
> I can measure the CO2 level in my tank to +/- 2ppm.


Are you testing your KH/phosphates in your tank regularly? as it can change overtime which affects how much CO2 you think you have.


----------



## StevieD (Sep 23, 2008)

I have reason to believe if you use a controller, your chance of dealing with algae goes down as long as you are using the controller correctly. One thing you do have to keep an eye out for is if your KH changes, which can happen and does with me. That is what the drop checker is for. I do believe the system in general is more stable with a ph controller and not having the co2 changing all the time, and there may very well be things we do not understand between the relationship between fish and co2. Common sense dictates that we don't want our heaters to have huge swings over the course of a day. In fact we don't really want any of our parameters wildly swinging from hour to hour. Does it work with just a selonoid?? Of course it does.. but keep a close eye on who is having a lot of algae problems. Usually the DIY co2 folks and people just using a selonoid. If you have experience, and once you figure how much the tank requires, this is a non-issue. I've had practically no issues with algae, and started off with a ph controller. In fact i tried to get some algae to grow for the ottos and nerites. I used extremely high light and still not any noticible algae besides what the few ottos and nerites already take care of, and there are only a few. My plants grew out of control though.

One more thing, plants use more co2 during different times in the day, especially if you vary the lighting intensity (noon burst). A PH controller accounts for that and always assures the optimal level of co2 as long as it is set correctly instead of their being too much sometimes, and not enough others.

While there are things you have to do to maintain a system with a ph controller, as well as monitor you water parameters and make minor adjustments, adjustments still need to made with just a solenoid setup as well. Without stirring up some heat, like anything else i think it comes down to people justifying not having to spend extra money on something they don't need and convince themselves is isn't a better way of doing things. It is quite a large expense to get into ph controllers, there are some extra things to maintain, and you have to replace the probe...who wants to deal with that if you don't have to right?? It does not mean it isn't a better overall solution for many reasons, some which we are not even thinking about or have been proven. 

I really like Ray's analogy about the heating coil and thermostat. How many of you would be willing to run you house's heating without a thermostat?? Would you convince yourself it is the best way to do things?? Just some things to think about...

Stevie D


----------



## SpeedEuphoria (Jul 9, 2008)

StevieD said:


> I really like Ray's analogy about the heating coil and thermostat. How many of you would be willing to run you house's heating without a thermostat?? Would you convince yourself it is the best way to do things?? Just some things to think about...


We can use all kinds of analogy's but most if not all do not apply direct correlation. For the thermostat one, thermostats are cheap, even programmable ones. Heating your house is far more important then a fish tank as a hobby. What about at night? I like my heat set lower at night to save money on my bill and also b/c I cannot sleep when its hot. I dont have to calibrate my home thermostat frequently and buy new thermistors for it. I dont have to worry about other variables in the house throwing off the thermostat.

That being said, a thermostat in a house is cheap and very effective. A PH controller is prob the best for stability but that analogy is not appropriate. Now if the PH controller had a better program and more options/features or if it was a true CO2 meter then it would be more worth it IMO.


----------



## ray-the-pilot (May 14, 2008)

SpeedEuphoria said:


> That being said, a thermostat in a house is cheap and very effective. A PH controller is prob the best for stability but that analogy is not appropriate. Now if the PH controller had a better program and more options/features or if it was a true CO2 meter then it would be more worth it IMO.


For a large part of my life we only had a non-programmable one setpoint thermostat in my house. True it was not as good as the programmable one I have now but I would never accept using a voltage regulator heating system in my home.

But we are talking fish here they can take it right!

Despite the static from people who do not have CO2 controllers they are accurate and easy to use. I have one and it controls my CO2 to +/- 2%. I can easily adjust the pearling rate of my plants to any degree I wish. I use my hatchet fish as markers as well because they seem to show the biggest decline in activity with CO2. I can adjust my drop checker to any color I want and it stays that way. Don't you think that that is the kind of control you would like to have in your aquarium!


----------



## HeyPK (Jan 23, 2004)

If you want to measure the amount of CO2 in your aquarium water, you can do it with a kit that basically (no pun intended) titrates a water sample with dilute sodium hydroxide solution until a pH of around 8 is reached, at which point phenolphthalein (a color pH indicator) turns pink. Previous posters have rightly pointed out that any procedure, based on pH, measures other substances besides dissolved CO2 that make the water acidic, so, therefore, you are not getting an accurate measurement of CO2 content. 

Here is how to get around that:

Do the procedure on two samples, one directly from the aquarium, and the other from a sample of aquarium water that has been allowed to stand for about a day in a container with a decent amount of surface area open to the room air. In the second sample, the CO2 content will be in equilibrium with that in the atmosphere, which is about 0.03% CO2. Since CO2 should be the only volatile component in the water that can escape to the air, all the other substances that might affect the pH will be the same in both samples. The difference between the two samples gives you the difference between the amount of CO2 in your tank and the amount of CO2 in the tank water when it is at equilibrium with the air. Since water in equilibrium with the atmosphere is not considered to have enough CO2 to adequately grow most aquarium plants, you will have a useful way of measuring how much CO2 useful for growing plants you have in your tank. Knowing that, you can do observations on relating the amount of CO2 in your tank to the behavior of your fish.


----------



## Nevermore (Mar 26, 2007)

Well, I have to say that I'm really glad that Ray raised this issue. It's given me a lot to think about. I have been aware that my fish are always eager to eat in the mornings and much less interested in the evenings. My cichlids especially; sometimes they'll just spit out the food in the evenings. I've pondered why this would be but never had an explanation until now. I turn my CO2 off at night and I'm wondering whether their lack of interest in food is tied to the CO2 running all day. I run it at 1.8 bps.


----------



## Manwithnofish (Mar 12, 2008)

Nevermore said:


> I run it at 1.8 bps.


How do you regulate 1.8 bubbles per second?


----------



## Nevermore (Mar 26, 2007)

Manwithnofish said:


> How do you regulate 1.8 bubbles per second?


I counted bubbles for 30 sec and got 53


----------



## Manwithnofish (Mar 12, 2008)

How did you derive that you needed 53 bubbles in 30 seconds? Is that just where it wound up after a long trial period or is this some sort of contrived quantity based on solid scientific bubble theory?


----------



## chagovatoloco (Nov 17, 2007)

Manwithnofish said:


> How did you derive that you needed 53 bubbles in 30 seconds? Is that just where it wound up after a long trial period or is this some sort of contrived quantity based on solid scientific bubble theory?


:rofl:


----------



## Nevermore (Mar 26, 2007)

Manwithnofish said:


> How did you derive that you needed 53 bubbles in 30 seconds? Is that just where it wound up after a long trial period or is this some sort of contrived quantity based on solid scientific bubble theory?


No, I was actually trying to keep it at 1 bps as per the PPS-Pro protocol but found I could not get rid of black beard algae and staghorn algae in my aquarium. I raised the CO2 little by little until the bba and staghorn would no longer reappear each time after I manually removed it.


----------



## Manwithnofish (Mar 12, 2008)

chagovatoloco said:


> :rofl:


Oh, I get it! The old silent reply treatment. Well it will take more that silent to make me be quiet.


----------



## Nevermore (Mar 26, 2007)

chagovatoloco said:


> :rofl:


I actually joined SFBAAPS of which you are a member. I quit the group when I found out that group members set their CO2 levels by taking the CO2 to where fish are gasping at the surface and then backing it off a little from there. That's where I was told you want to have your CO2 at. That was their secret to fighting algae. The member telling me this said that members often lose a lot of fish at first as they struggle to get their CO2 to that perfect point. I was absolutely appalled.


----------



## helgymatt (Sep 12, 2007)

Nevermore said:


> I actually joined SFBAAPS of which you are a member. I quit the group when I found out that group members set their CO2 levels by taking the CO2 to where fish are gasping at the surface and then backing it off a little from there. That's where I was told you want to have your CO2 at. That was their secret to fighting algae. The member telling me this said that members often lose a lot of fish at first as they struggle to get their CO2 to that perfect point. I was absolutely appalled.


This is the way I do it. Its pretty obvious when a fish just starts to gasp for air, and then really easy to back the CO2 off. Appalled...??? How about all the first tymers who fill their tank full of fish the day they set it up and all the fish die from ammonia. I would think there are much, much fewer fish lost to that than CO2 overdose.

Many experienced plant keepers don't even own a drop checker, and don't believe in them. They simply rely on observing their plants and fish.


----------



## davemonkey (Mar 29, 2008)

helgymatt said:


> This is the way I do it. Its pretty obvious when a fish just starts to gasp for air, and then really easy to back the CO2 off. Appalled...??? How about all the first tymers who fill their tank full of fish the day they set it up and all the fish die from ammonia. I would think there are much, much fewer fish lost to that than CO2 overdose.
> 
> Many experienced plant keepers don't even own a drop checker, and don't believe in them. They simply rely on observing their plants and fish.


Right now I'm just running DIY, but I know several people that do their pressurized CO2 measuring that way. No drop checkers, some don't even own a single test kit (and neither do I). Just simple observations of what the fish /plants can handle.

In my experience, it takes quite a bit of time to kill fish with CO2. You'd have to let it go unchecked for several minutes to kill them. I once tied a 5 gallon jug of home-brew into my DIY (15 cups of sugar and 3 tsp of yeast). CO2 bubbles were spewing into my tank (I would venture to guess 10 or more bps) and within minutes all the fish were gasping. I unhooked the connection as quickly as I could and within a minute, the fish were fine again. No casualties. If that didn't kill them, then cranking up the pressurized to the threshold and then backing off should not do any harm unless you break the threshold for way too long.

-Dave


----------



## Sunstar (Sep 17, 2008)

I watch my fish and use the drop checker colour. I had the co2 too high yesterday and they were showing signs, backed it off and soon enough, they were fine.

Observation is a keen part of fish keeping of this nature. I can look at my tank now and tell if something is not right. And usually I find the problem.


----------



## helgymatt (Sep 12, 2007)

Sunstar said:


> Observation is a keen part of fish keeping of this nature. I can look at my tank now and tell if something is not right. And usually I find the problem.


I have a compulsive habit to look staight at my aquairum when I walk in the door! Looking for pearling, bubble count, dead fish....75 gallons on the floor I like to avoid the alter two.

Its an addiction!


----------



## Sunstar (Sep 17, 2008)

helgymatt said:


> I have a compulsive habit to look staight at my aquairum when I walk in the door! Looking for pearling, bubble count, dead fish....75 gallons on the floor I like to avoid the alter two.
> 
> Its an addiction!


So true. So true.

I had a gallon leak out a few days ago. I had disconnected my DIY but left the end dangling in the tank below (empty) came home after a couple hours... Something's odd....water drop!

but it was easily fixed. I had a check valve too....


----------



## chagovatoloco (Nov 17, 2007)

Nevermore said:


> No, I was actually trying to keep it at 1 bps as per the PPS-Pro protocol but found I could not get rid of black beard algae and staghorn algae in my aquarium. I raised the CO2 little by little until the bba and staghorn would no longer reappear each time after I manually removed it.


I did not mean to offend you. I just thought the scientific bubble theory was quite amusing. There is a trick to adding co2 with out some sort of controller which means you must watch your fish and observe every thing that happens in the tank. We do push the limit and it may seem mean but I have never had a fish death to co2. And I back it off to the point where fish behavior changes. My club is a good group of people and they are one of the oldest in the country. As you have already said bps dose not work. The system needs to be fine tuned and this is the way I do it. The truth is, like ray said to measure c02 you need a reference point. Which a drop checker provides or you can splurge and get a ph meter either one is a vast improvement over the bps theory.


----------



## houseofcards (Feb 16, 2005)

_Having wild changes in pH (and by implication CO2 levels) is not good for fish. In fact for many fish, the program recommended is contrary to their natural activity cycle. High CO2 in the day will make fish more active at night when many would normally not be active. _

Ray if this is true, how come my fish look look fine after doing 50% water changes. My tap ph is around 7.5 and my tank is around 6.5. Isn't this a wild ph/co2 change within a matter of minutes?


----------



## ray-the-pilot (May 14, 2008)

What kind of fish do you have and are they breeding? I’ve had some difficult to breed fish like Oto Cats and Neon tetras reproduce in my tank. 
If you take care of your fish and mimic their natural environment they are more likely to reproduce.


----------



## houseofcards (Feb 16, 2005)

Ray you made a statement:

_Having wild changes in pH (and by implication CO2 levels) is not good for fish. In fact for many fish, the program recommended is contrary to their natural activity cycle. High CO2 in the day will make fish more active at night when many would normally not be active. _

Then I asked this question:

Ray if this is true, how come my fish look look fine after doing 50% water changes. My tap ph is around 7.5 and my tank is around 6.5. Isn't this a wild ph/co2 change within a matter of minutes?

I'm curious to what you take is on this?

BTW my fish are mostly a large school of cardinals going on 4 years. Are you saying if I keep my ph constant they will start breeding?


----------



## helgymatt (Sep 12, 2007)

pH changes from CO2 poses no problems. pH changes because of other reasons can, like using chemicals and different water sources. 

My angelfish bred every other week in my planted tank that fluctuates a whole pH unit every day.


----------



## houseofcards (Feb 16, 2005)

helgymatt said:


> pH changes from CO2 poses no problems. pH changes because of other reasons can, like using chemicals and different water sources.
> 
> My angelfish bred every other week in my planted tank that fluctuates a whole pH unit every day.


In fact, doesn't a water change bring on the breeding sometimes.


----------



## helgymatt (Sep 12, 2007)

houseofcards said:


> In fact, doesn't a water change bring on the breeding sometimes.


Not sure about this...


----------



## ray-the-pilot (May 14, 2008)

A whole pH unit! I would be worried about that not because of the change in pH but because this corresponds to a 10 fold increase in CO2. CO2 levels ranging from 50 – 5 seem unhealthy but I guess Angelfish can take it.


----------



## helgymatt (Sep 12, 2007)

ray-the-pilot said:


> A whole pH unit! I would be worried about that not because of the change in pH but because this corresponds to a 10 fold increase in CO2. CO2 levels ranging from 50 - 5 seem unhealthy but I guess Angelfish can take it.


Yes a ten fold increase, but I don't see if really meaning much. pH is a direct relationship between KH and pH. Look at this chart. 
http://freshwateraquariumplants.com/carbondioxidechart.html
My KH is about 3. At pH 7.2 I have about 5 ppm CO2 - My pH drops to 6.3 which means my CO2 is then between 35-56 ppm. - which explains why my drop checker is yellow/green and not green (drop checkers are green at ~25-30ppm

What is the basis for saying this is unhealthy until you have tried it and know that the fish can tolerate it? My fish and plants are perfectly healthy.


----------



## bsmith (Dec 13, 2006)

Yes. This is how breeders of cory cat's evoke it. It simulates the rainy season when massive downpours flood the rivers and cause ph to change drastically. 



houseofcards said:


> In fact, doesn't a water change bring on the breeding sometimes.


----------



## chagovatoloco (Nov 17, 2007)

Ray, have you ran a tank with out a ph meter? I am curios if you added one and after using just a drop checker. My tanks are fine and I have little to no algae but fish breeding is different. Breeding I know very little of, have you ever had fish breed in a planted tank with no ph meter?


----------



## helgymatt (Sep 12, 2007)

chagovatoloco said:


> Ray, have you ran a tank with out a ph meter? I am curios if you added one and after using just a drop checker. My tanks are fine and I have little to no algae but fish breeding is different. Breeding I know very little of, have you ever had fish breed in a planted tank with no ph meter?


My angles bred like mad- no pH meter.


----------



## Sunstar (Sep 17, 2008)

I wish my fish would stop breeding... the things are going out of their minds trying to fill my tank wiht more and more bodies. I am gonna get most of the LB out. Co2 is not my issue right now, its keeping ammonia in check.


----------



## helgymatt (Sep 12, 2007)

Here is a quote by Tom Barr - Considered to be very experienced plant and fish keeper - and a scientist.



> I do NOT buy anyone's drop checker CO2 ppm's claims............. period.
> Not my own, not other folks.
> 
> I've measured too much CO2 with far more responsive and precise equipment to know the limitations with drop checkers.
> ...


http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/water-parameters/71471-co2-measurements-using-situ-co2-meter.html


----------



## chagovatoloco (Nov 17, 2007)

Speaking of co2, since tom has proven that the levels vary greatly from the top to bottom and It would seem that we want more co2 lower where the plants are. I have a in line co2 reactor so the co2 comes out of my spray bar leading me to believe that if I aim the spray bar at the bottom I will raise the co2 ppm at that level.


----------



## helgymatt (Sep 12, 2007)

chagovatoloco said:


> Speaking of co2, since tom has proven that the levels vary greatly from the top to bottom and It would seem that we want more co2 lower where the plants are. I have a in line co2 reactor so the co2 comes out of my spray bar leading me to believe that if I aim the spray bar at the bottom I will raise the co2 ppm at that level.


Seems logical,

Or try to place the spray bar at the bottom of the tank (may be more difficult)


----------



## ray-the-pilot (May 14, 2008)

chagovatoloco said:


> Speaking of co2, since tom has proven that the levels vary greatly from the top to bottom and It would seem that we want more co2 lower where the plants are. I have a in line co2 reactor so the co2 comes out of my spray bar leading me to believe that if I aim the spray bar at the bottom I will raise the co2 ppm at that level.


Here is Tom's logic.

I only have a voltage regulated heater. Oh my God, when I put a themometer next to my heating vent is says 90deg. When I put the thermometer next to my window it says 55 deg. My heat varies all over the place.

Well Tom your right. That is why I have a thermostat and good air circulation in my house. Maybe you need a CO2 controller and a better filter. Then you will not have such a big variation in tank conditions and be able to raise Oto cats.

Here is the really funny thing about Tom's experiment. I can stick my pH probe in front of the reactor outlet and tell that there is more CO2 there. I can also tell that just like in my house, the gradient levels off to a comfortable uniform level because the controller is going on and off and is not always on.

This is really poor science!


----------



## freydo (Jan 7, 2006)

ray-the-pilot said:


> Here is Tom's logic.
> 
> I only have a voltage regulated heater. Oh my God, when I put a themometer next to my heating vent is says 90deg. When I put the thermometer next to my window it says 55 deg. My heat varies all over the place.
> 
> ...


seriously... i think you need to stop with the thermostat analogies, register on the forum that Tom Barr is a member of (if you haven't already) and pose your questions and hypothesis, and get a decent discussion going. if you think his opinions are based on poor science, then you should call him on it, instead of heckling from the bleachers. otherwise move on.


----------



## helgymatt (Sep 12, 2007)

edit


----------



## helgymatt (Sep 12, 2007)

ray-the-pilot said:


> Here is Tom's logic.
> 
> I only have a voltage regulated heater. Oh my God, when I put a themometer next to my heating vent is says 90deg. When I put the thermometer next to my window it says 55 deg. My heat varies all over the place.
> 
> ...


Really, what is your point? If you want to compare your thermostat in your house with CO2 then fine! But, what is your point in this analogy? Tom is arguing that drop checkers cannot be relied upon as the only means to determine if your CO2 is good. Basically that the CO2 varies throughout the tank and having good flow will only help things. If you really think Tom has poor flow, then ask him about it. Of all the people who would have good flow, I'm sure Tom is one of them! Don't start bashing Tom for pointing something so simple out to all of us that had never been shown scientifically before!


----------



## Indignation (Mar 9, 2008)

ray-the-pilot said:


> Here is the really funny thing about Tom's experiment. I can stick my pH probe in front of the reactor outlet and tell that there is more CO2 there.


 Speaking of poor science... No, you can't. you can tell you have a lower ph. From this, you could infer you might have higher co2. I could also infer you have peat in your filter.  See what not posting any of your variables/conditions does? 
For someone who likes to poke at Tom Barr, you certainly aren't providing anything better. At least Mr. Barr provides the courtesy of posting his data. I agree with the above posters, if you truly think you've found something Mr. Barr missed, be a good fellow scientist and let him know. By not doing that, you're coming across as a crack-pot.


----------



## Sunstar (Sep 17, 2008)

Indignation said:


> Speaking of poor science... No, you can't. you can tell you have a lower ph. From this, you could infer you might have lower co2. I could also infer you have peat in your filter.  See what not posting any of your variables/conditions does?
> For someone who likes to poke at Tom Barr, you certainly aren't providing anything better. At least Mr. Barr provides the courtesy of posting his data. I agree with the above posters, if you truly think you've found something Mr. Barr missed, be a good fellow scientist and let him know. By not doing that, you're coming across as a crack-pot.


Crack-pot wasn't my choice of word... but I would be interested in his science as well.

Anyway. This is why I chose a drop checker.

This hobby is already very expensive, and for me, I get the things I feel are necessary, I cannot be out buying wickedly cool gadgets when the visual que is sufficent enough.

Everything is on my list, even a PH meter, but that is closer to the end of my list and that is because I haven't gone salt water yet.


----------



## helgymatt (Sep 12, 2007)

Sunstar said:


> This is why I chose a drop checker.
> 
> This hobby is already very expensive, and for me, I get the things I feel are necessary, I cannot be out buying wickedly cool gadgets when the visual que is sufficent enough.
> 
> Everything is on my list, even a PH meter, but that is closer to the end of my list and that is because I haven't gone salt water yet.


Tom is not promoting people go out and buy a two thousand dollar meter to measure CO2. That would be rediculous. He is only trying to make the point that CO2 varies in a tank more than people think. Because of this variance using a drop checker is not the end all solution to determining if CO2 is right. I know I have said this several times already, but I feel people just don't get this...

I use two drop checkers in my tank, but I use them as indicators that CO2 is in a "range"....Mostly they just indicate to me nothing has gone wrong, like CO2 tank empty or something. Once the checker is green, I bump up the CO2 slowly until I really see the plants happy and fish too. I find I can get a lot more CO2 in the tank even after the drop checkers are green (actually one is yellow, and one is green - indicating unequal levels in my tank!). After figuring out this method of Optimal CO2 I have had much more growth.


----------



## chagovatoloco (Nov 17, 2007)

I have a drop checker. but there is one thing that I do notice. As I add co2 the levels continually rise thought out the photo period for the first few hours the fish are fine but at the last hour they may be showing signs of stress. Meaning the level just keeps building up and up and up. Yes the plants do use the co2 but not as fast as I am adding it so there is excess. The more I think about it I can't get around the fact that a ph meter would level this out. And wouldn't a consistent co2 level help keep bba and other algae away? I know co2 varies though out the tank and that it will never be totally even but the ph meter might smooth it out some.


----------



## jargonchipmunk (Oct 25, 2008)

The funny thing about this thread is that everyone has agreed with everyone else on the most basic of principals... plants and fish need to be healthy, and each of us has found a way to make that happen. I digress, Ray has actually tried to tell people that their fish aren't healthy when he's never seen them. I guess that'd be the caveat to that. At any rate, aquariums are not nature, they are emulators. Ph does NOT remain constant in nature, save VERY large bodies of water, and we're not dealing with saltwater here, and by and large, not dealing with the African rift lakes either where Ph is pretty darned constant throughout. 

If your fish are healthier than Tom Barr's fish, great! If your plants grow a miniscule amount faster than Tom Barr's tanks fantastic! (although I'd really have to see a side-by-side on this one. no, it wouldn't be "scientific" but doubting the harsh reality of what a side-by-side comparison of methods would do is simply admitting defeat.) From everything I've read (I'm a big forum stalker lol) Barr relies the MOST heavily on observation of plant and fish health/growth to find his sweet spot for Co2. This ability comes from all of his experience and scientific testing, so he's used everything from drop checkers to controllers, gas testing devices, and whatever's in between all this to do REAL scientific testing, with a certified "control." Unfortunately, most of us don't have these years of dedicated testing under our belts to go on, so we must rely on some device other than our eyes to KNOW what's going on in the tank. Most people use the drop checker because it's cheaper. Most SMART people use the drop checker as a START and go from there, and end up with a lush (hopefully algaefree) aquarium with happy, breeding, eating, partying-when-you-turn-the-lights-off fish.

I'm not by any means saying Barr's a "god." There's only one of those, but Barr has certainly put in his time where planted tanks are concerned and had MASSIVE success with them on all levels. I can't remember the last time I heard of Ray-the-pilot's Estimative Index fertilizing methods. I've heard of Barr's though. In fact, I use it with great results, as well as some of his advices on Co2 levels from thebarrreport.com forums. Heck, that would be a great place for you to copy and paste this thread. I'd be interested to see both points of view come together. (from a scientific standpoint, not a drama one)

my $0.02


----------



## Sunstar (Sep 17, 2008)

helgymatt said:


> Tom is not promoting people go out and buy a two thousand dollar meter to measure CO2. That would be rediculous. He is only trying to make the point that CO2 varies in a tank more than people think. Because of this variance using a drop checker is not the end all solution to determining if CO2 is right. I know I have said this several times already, but I feel people just don't get this...
> 
> I use two drop checkers in my tank, but I use them as indicators that CO2 is in a "range"....Mostly they just indicate to me nothing has gone wrong, like CO2 tank empty or something. Once the checker is green, I bump up the CO2 slowly until I really see the plants happy and fish too. I find I can get a lot more CO2 in the tank even after the drop checkers are green (actually one is yellow, and one is green - indicating unequal levels in my tank!). After figuring out this method of Optimal CO2 I have had much more growth.


two drop checkers... that sounds like a good idea. I have a second one that I might consider doing that with. $2000!? I thought 100 dollars was alot.


----------



## jmhart (Nov 13, 2007)

This thread is rife with bad science and ill-drawn conclusions...I read the whole thing, there's just too much to comment on. 

One thing that glared out at me was whoever claimed that the drop method of co2 analysis was faulty. If you set a cup of tank water out over night(assuming no further contamination) the only thing that will change the pH is absence of co2. Boom, done, co2 measurement. At that point, you can(if you want) use the Henderson-Hasselbalch equation, as Ray mentioned, to calculate lost co2 concentration. You can also just look at the co2 chart, because, trough trial and error, Chuck's cart is essentially based on this relationship.

I've never had a conversation with Tom pertaining to pH controllers, so I don't care to comment on his thoughts. However, based on my own experiences both using a pH controller and not(I currently have two tanks, one with, one without). A pH controller is, indeed, a tremendous convinence, but is certainly not required. 

I have read Tom's thoughts regarding the "30 ppm" guideline. It's exactly that, a guideline, and it certainly belongs in quotes. That number has evolved over the course of the last 20 years, and due to the inaccuracies of cheap testing equipment, the number "30 ppm" really doesn't mean much, unfortunately. 

Every tank is different, so one target is certainly impossible to specifiy, hence the guideline. Ray is right about one thing. You should find out what level is safe for your fish. In fact, push your co2 as high as you can, and when you start seeing issues with your fish, back it off just a little. Whether this is 15ppm or 45ppm, this is the level that is safe for your tank. By use of a drop checker, bubble counter, and pH controller, my tank remains at this point for me(which is ~33ppm by the chart, yellow on the drop checker, 6.4 on the pH controller, and my Rams spawn weekly). 

I'm sure I'll have more, but I'm at work with too many distractions.


----------

