|
 Some of these posts are very old and might contain outdated information. You may wish to search for newer posts instead.
|
 chickenbiscuits
Stranger
Registered: 08/23/10
Posts: 58
Last seen: 14 years, 4 months
|
 co2 gotta call out a mod 
#465831 - 08/23/10 11:44 AM (14 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
I was doing some reading on co2 around this forum..
I have used tanked co2 for years and it is lovely. Many posts say 30% increase.. Magash always says "why do you think all the breeders switched?"
not 30%... your plants can grow 250% what they do otherwise.
1500ppm co2, 92degrees, 47% rH Invest in a NICE controller. Have MULTIPLE thermo/hygrometers in differnt places high and low
co2 has to be dialed into a science!
Breeders go with mass airflow cause it is much easier to prevent disease and other problems. They are not going for yield and quality.. They are looking at 50000 plants all naturally seeking certain traits over generations. I can understand how magash likes mass airflow too.. The rooms are making clones, way different than a commercial indoor flowering room.
I just hate to see so many people turned off just cause they didnt dial it in. With co2 you will definitely outgrow any mass airflow system if done right.
Check out this link for some good info showing a graph of growth rate with different co2 enrichment levels.
co2 enrichment graph and info
Not trying to bash magash hes a good mod... Just hate to see so many people turn away so quickly.
Thanks and remember to stay on the chicken biscuits.
|
chickenbiscuits
Stranger
Registered: 08/23/10
Posts: 58
Last seen: 14 years, 4 months
|
|
also some other old turnoffs ive read for the co2 is not having the l/sq ft
first of all w/sq ft barely means jack.. i dont know why everyone on here talks in w/sq ft go by the Lumens. Theres so many different lumen ratings hps/mh/cfl now theres high output hps that throws out 95000 lumens on a 600w. A bottom of the line 1000w hps throws out 107000 lumens... Thats almost the same on a 600 as the 1000.
Light Movers are key to co2 is what im really getting at.
Throw a solar revolution on a 6000 l/sq ft grow and it barely puts into an applicable co2 enrichment rate. 6000x 130% = 7800 l/sq ft or what ya really want... 7500 l/sq ft with a good light mover...
7500x130% = 9750 l/sq ft OPTIMAL! co2 enrichment lighting. you can also blend spectrums w revolutions.
|
NobodyImportant
Science Is Subculture
 
Registered: 05/03/08
Posts: 4,981
Loc: Jawjuh.
Last seen: 11 years, 8 months
|
|
I dont really have any input on this because im a noob in this area but Im looking forward to some sciency arguments 
--------------------
 
Glass By: US Tubes, ZOB, Roor.de, Sheldon Black, Jerome Baker, Medicali, Kennaroo, Sand, Alex K, Local and Unknown Artists
|
grod31
Ranger
Registered: 12/23/09
Posts: 769
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
|
|
in the future please edit you original post, dont double post.
you shouldn't bump your own thread with 24-48 hours
with that said.
Welcome!
--------------------
DO NOT USE mushmagic.com- THEY LIE AND SELL DRUGS TO CHILDREN 
--------------------------------------------------
Back the tape up. I need it again!
Let it roll! Just as high as the fucker can go!
And when it comes to that fantastic note
where the rabbit bites its own head off,
I want you to THROW THAT FUCKING
RADIO INTO THE TUB WITH ME!
Not me. It would blast you through
the wall stone dead in ten seconds and they'd make me explain.
|
 Harry_Ba11sach
cannoisseur
Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 11,753
Loc: Nepal 
|
|
Quote:
chickenbiscuits said:
also some other old turnoffs ive read for the co2 is not having the l/sq ft
first of all w/sq ft barely means jack.. i dont know why everyone on here talks in w/sq ft go by the Lumens. Theres so many different lumen ratings hps/mh/cfl now theres high output hps that throws out 95000 lumens on a 600w. A bottom of the line 1000w hps throws out 107000 lumens... Thats almost the same on a 600 as the 1000.
Light Movers are key to co2 is what im really getting at.
Throw a solar revolution on a 6000 l/sq ft grow and it barely puts into an applicable co2 enrichment rate. 6000x 130% = 7800 l/sq ft or what ya really want... 7500 l/sq ft with a good light mover...
7500x130% = 9750 l/sq ft OPTIMAL! co2 enrichment lighting. you can also blend spectrums w revolutions.
HAHAHAHA LOL.
Lumens are used to measure light output visible to human eyes. This means that the maximum measured output is around 500-550 nanometers (green spectrum). I think it goes without saying that green is the WORST color of light for plants, and furthermore human eyes only need to see reflected light, whereas activating photosynthesis in chloroplasts requires penetration intensity necessary for conversion from photo energy to chemical energy.
I disagree with you on CO2 as well but I don't have enough time now to rebuke you.
In the future I would highly recommend you do some research before posting such claims. We have numerous highly intelligent posters here and blatant incorrect assertions will be disputed.
--------------------
|
starrider
Registered: 12/26/08
Posts: 125
|
|
I'm a new grower and I just turned on my Co2 Boost. What a difference it has made. Plants are growing out of control. big believer in CO2.
--------------------
"If the doors of perception were cleansed every thing would appear to man as it is, infinite."
William Blake
Anything I write is a lie. Any picture I post is a fake. I only write for entertainment.
|
chickenbiscuits
Stranger
Registered: 08/23/10
Posts: 58
Last seen: 14 years, 4 months
|
Re: co2 gotta call out a mod [Re: starrider]
#465885 - 08/23/10 01:04 PM (14 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
after reviewing my posts... im pretty sure that they are "blatantly" correct. i have researched and experimented with co2 for years and theres no doubt in my mind it will outgrow mass airflow.
as for the lumens thing... Maybe l/sq ft isnt the BEST way to measure all that. But it is surely better than all these people using w/sq ft.
Any co2 enrichment guide will tell you that you need more light. Typically between 7500-10000 L/sq ft.
Im not sure what exactly your argument is harry... i wish you had more time. Have you even used co2 correctly before?
|
Harry_Ba11sach
cannoisseur
Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 11,753
Loc: Nepal
|
|
you're contradicting yourself. You're saying that you need MORE light, but that people should use a light mover. Light movers are used to get even coverage when you can't afford to increase the amount of light. Example, I would use a 1000W on a rail over a 4x6 space if I couldn't afford 2 x 600W lights or 2 x 1000W.
And I will repeat; lumens are the WORST measurement for plant growth. They require intensity and penetration power, both of which can be at least somewhat gaged by using watts.
--------------------
|
13buds
Trichome Farmer
Registered: 08/19/10
Posts: 735
Loc: IN ETHERS TORSION FIELD
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
|
|
--------------------
 A M U
 13B UDS
|
chickenbiscuits
Stranger
Registered: 08/23/10
Posts: 58
Last seen: 14 years, 4 months
|
|
light movers are used for much more than just spreading a light out. as a matter of fact i use the same space with a light mover as i would without.
The main things I use a light mover for are for preventing hotspots, shadow shifting, and to create an evenly penetrated canopy. a light mover will get all inside and promote the most even growth possible, although between training and pruning you shouldnt have too much on the inside anyway.
I could also make a bold claim about light movers. You will definitely achieve a more even canopy using them. An even canopy is key to optimal results. without a light mover the only way to get even growth is to be rotating your plants all the time. Then you still have hotspots and some shadow shifting.
Maybe lumens is a bad way to measure what you need, but i couldnt say that is was worse than using w/sq ft. The fact remains, most professional growers will use l/sq ft far before W. The majority of good teks will recommend light requirements in l/sq ft.
I just dont understand why everyone on here uses w/sq ft when there are SO MANY variables as to how much light one light will produce than another.
Really though im not here to argue between Lumens and Watts. Thats a whole different subject I shouldve just stuck with the original post. WHY IS EVERYONE TRYING TO TURN ALL THESE NOOBS OFF CO2???? I want to see some evidence for a good ventilation system.
For example OG Kush... one of the most sought after strains out here in cali. Its not known to be a high yielding strain. ill use some watt figures for you.
The best ventilation system ive seen w OG would be blessed and lucky if they 1g/w on og... usually 1/2g/w
Co2 done RIGHT.... ive seen OG from the same mother do close to 1.5g/w
From what ive seen you'd have one of the best in the world to make OG do that with 300ppm co2 in the room.
Edited by chickenbiscuits (08/23/10 02:11 PM)
|
maryanne3087
Stranger
Registered: 06/27/10
Posts: 1,111
|
|
250% increase of yield by raising temps and co2?
I don't even see how this is possible, when to achieve optimal yields your plants need to be densely packed or your canopy has to be thick and full.
How will one fit 250% more plant material under the same amount of floorspace?
|
chickenbiscuits
Stranger
Registered: 08/23/10
Posts: 58
Last seen: 14 years, 4 months
|
Re: co2 gotta call out a mod [Re: maryanne3087]
#465944 - 08/23/10 02:23 PM (14 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
there are many things figured into this 250% some people even say 300%.
One of the main things is that your veg time is cut down. You will achieve your desired plant size to switch to flowering sometimes twice as fast. Your buds will develop bigger and denser as well. These combined with other factors can increase your farms overall productivity to these figures. Although YOU may not see this drastic of a difference, theres no doubt in my mind that, if done right, you WILL see a LARGE difference.
There are many reasons all this happens. Alot of it is to do with the plant being able to thrive in a higher temperature... I dont recall the EXACT figure but as temperature increases the more water air can hold.
For example you could have the exact same amount of water in the air in two different rooms one room is 85 one room is 95
The room thats 95 will have a much lower rH because the air can hold more water.
When there is this excess water in the air EVERYTHING happens faster. from photosynthesis to how fast the roots get oxygen.
I seem to remember that figure being...
For every 20 degrees of temperature rise the air can hold twice as much water.... dont quote me on that though.
Ive even seen high yielding strains like chronic yield over 3g/w on co2 enrichment systems.
|
maryanne3087
Stranger
Registered: 06/27/10
Posts: 1,111
|
|
I find it hard to believe that any strain can yield 3gram/watt esp when 1gram/watt fills the canopy with dense rockhard nugs. Is this a vertical or horizontal system?
I've heard of 2 grams/watt with dialed in vertical systems using a bazillion plants. With a horizontal lighting system I can't see 3gr/watt being remotely possible.
|
chickenbiscuits
Stranger
Registered: 08/23/10
Posts: 58
Last seen: 14 years, 4 months
|
|
Also i need to note that ALL my experience has been with smaller plant number per sq M than alot of you are used to. I have been a prop215 patient in california since 2004 and have ALWAYS done legal grows. Ive never grown hundreds of plant in a room. The veg is long and each plant yields several ounces.
so as far the light movers
SOG methods may not see the same results ive seen with the larger plants over the years. you may be able to create an even canopy w/o rotating or a light mover with these smaller plant methods.
|
chickenbiscuits
Stranger
Registered: 08/23/10
Posts: 58
Last seen: 14 years, 4 months
|
Re: co2 gotta call out a mod [Re: maryanne3087]
#465948 - 08/23/10 02:36 PM (14 years, 4 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
maryanne3087 said:
I find it hard to believe that any strain can yield 3gram/watt esp when 1gram/watt fills the canopy with dense rockhard nugs. Is this a vertical or horizontal system?
I've heard of 2 grams/watt with dialed in vertical systems using a bazillion plants. With a horizontal lighting system I can't see 3gr/watt being remotely possible.
well it is...
you have to have it dialed in exactly for sure. but 3g/w is totally possible although those strains are never that premium quality. Which is the only thing i grow.
I have seen these results, but have never achieved 3g/w myself...
|
Harry_Ba11sach
cannoisseur
Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 11,753
Loc: Nepal
|
|
Quote:
chickenbiscuits said:
When there is this excess water in the air EVERYTHING happens faster. from photosynthesis to how fast the roots get oxygen.
Oh jesus lordy christ, please explain yourself.
Quote:
chickenbiscuits said:
I shouldve just stuck with the original post. WHY IS EVERYONE TRYING TO TURN ALL THESE NOOBS OFF CO2????
Because noobs have enough to worry about without trying to balance CO2 production, A/C units and Dehumidifiers (all of which are necessary to run CO2 in a closed room). They have a hard enough time choosing between soil and hydro let along trying to figure out if they want tanks and solenoids or steady-stream propane burners. I think that's pretty much common sense 
--------------------
|
chickenbiscuits
Stranger
Registered: 08/23/10
Posts: 58
Last seen: 14 years, 4 months
|
|
a room with no co2 enrichment will usually sit 40%rH at the high range alotta guys like 25% even... co2 enriched 10deg rise in temp creates an atmosphere that will hold 50% more water then the rise in rH to 50% on top of that.
assume thats true.. and that water is 1/3 oxygen...
there are only two ways cannabis roots absorb oxygen which is key in their role. air and water. so with the temp rise and the rH your giving the roots at least 60% more oxygen in the same time.
This is one of many factors.
EVERYTHING happens faster. you use twice as much water, nutrients, water in the air. and surely more light though not double.
|
Harry_Ba11sach
cannoisseur
Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 11,753
Loc: Nepal
|
|
Quote:
chickenbiscuits said:
a room with no co2 enrichment will usually sit 40%rH at the high range alotta guys like 25% even... co2 enriched 10deg rise in temp creates an atmosphere that will hold 50% more water then the rise in rH to 50% on top of that.
assume thats true.. and that water is 1/3 oxygen...
there are only two ways cannabis roots absorb oxygen which is key in their role. air and water. so with the temp rise and the rH your giving the roots at least 60% more oxygen in the same time.
This is one of many factors.
EVERYTHING happens faster. you use twice as much water, nutrients, water in the air. and surely more light though not double.
You've never taken chemistry have you? Yes water could be considered 1/3rd oxygen if you're simply going by the number of parts, but count the fact that oxygen weights 16 to 18 times more than hydrogen and you'll clearly see that's an absurd comment. SECONDLY, roots need O2 GAS, Not oxygen bonded into other molecules. By your logic I could just grow my roots in pure maple syrup because sugar is C6H12O6, so it must be 1/3 oxygen right? 
A room with no CO2 enrichment will sit at whatever RH the ventilation and environment dictate. That EXACT SAME room with CO2 enrichment will sit at the EXACT SAME RH. My point here is that CO2 levels in no way influence the humidity.
THE ONLY part of your post that you were correct is that warmer air holds more humidity than cooler air. I'm extremely dismayed that you're trying to persuade others to follow you like sheep when it's painfully obvious that you lack even the most rudimentary understanding of the concepts you so willingly defend.
--------------------
|
chickenbiscuits
Stranger
Registered: 08/23/10
Posts: 58
Last seen: 14 years, 4 months
|
|
you just dont get it man.. your all in the box
|
Harry_Ba11sach
cannoisseur
Registered: 04/20/08
Posts: 11,753
Loc: Nepal
|
|
By all means, please use your bountiful scientific knowledge to point out where I'm wrong in that post
--------------------
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Edit 
Reply 
