is co2 worth getting?

a mongo frog

Well-Known Member
would I see a noticeable difference with about 2 weeks till harvest? and with the regulator how do I use it? Do I just turn the tank on a little and open the flowmeter till it gets full?
You could also benefit from a green house controller. Thats how i run co2 with a safety exhaust when it gets to hot. Exhaust hooks up to cooling port. But is not really necessary i guess. My room sweet spot for og is 81 degrees. so anything over 83 my exhaust kicks on while stopping the co2. Also exhausts right after lights out to help bring dark cycle temps down. Just why i do and probably a few others. Everyone garden and sweet spot is different.
 

digging

Well-Known Member
I recently read, and I will quote Ed Rosenthal “ If you’re not using C02, you’re just wasting your electricity “

I have just started running C02 in sealed rooms. I am in the middle of dialing in my rooms with the help of the Pulse sensors. I need more humidity to run the correct VPD #’s. Ordered larger humidifiers, should arrive this week.

Faster growth using C02 will be a joy to watch and experience.

Can anyone suggest a ppm of C02 for a veg room?
 

Aqua Man

Well-Known Member
I recently read, and I will quote Ed Rosenthal “ If you’re not using C02, you’re just wasting your electricity “

I have just started running C02 in sealed rooms. I am in the middle of dialing in my rooms with the help of the Pulse sensors. I need more humidity to run the correct VPD #’s. Ordered larger humidifiers, should arrive this week.

Faster growth using C02 will be a joy to watch and experience.

Can anyone suggest a ppm of C02 for a veg room?
Light will determine how much Co2 will benefit your plant but if you are providing enough I have read as high as 1800ppm+ can be beneficial. Its generally accepted that 1200-1500ppm is ideal. If you don't not have the lighting to drive photosynthesis rates higher Co2 will do nothing to benefit you so there is more to that statement than just add Co2, like there is with most statements. Light is usually the limiting factor in photosynthesis when you can provide more light than can be used by the plant for photosynthesis then Co2 becomes the limiting factor so supplementing extra will increase photosynthesis and growth rates.If you don't have the lighting you will get no benefit from Co2 and that's an absolute fact.
 
Last edited:

Aqua Man

Well-Known Member
You could also benefit from a green house controller. Thats how i run co2 with a safety exhaust when it gets to hot. Exhaust hooks up to cooling port. But is not really necessary i guess. My room sweet spot for og is 81 degrees. so anything over 83 my exhaust kicks on while stopping the co2. Also exhausts right after lights out to help bring dark cycle temps down. Just why i do and probably a few others. Everyone garden and sweet spot is different.
You might be able to squeeze a little more growth out with a small temp increase. But if its dialed in its dialed in and best left alone
 

Aqua Man

Well-Known Member
What kind of Co2 system are those outdoor growers with 12ft plants using?
Apples and Oranges. Not sure what you are saying? Are you suggesting the growth rates of out door exceed that of a sealed Co2 supplemented room under ideal conditions?

Whats the intent of this comment?
 

xtsho

Well-Known Member
Apples and Oranges. Not sure what you are saying? Are you suggesting the growth rates of out door exceed that of a sealed Co2 supplemented room under ideal conditions?

Whats the intent of this comment?
I guess the comment was meant to say you don't need Co2 for good grows. I'm not saying that Co2 doesn't increase yields indoors. I just think too many people want to use it as a shortcut for good growing. I don't think most people have their systems setup properly to see much of a benefit and are just literally draining money out of a cannister. I've seen people using Co2 in unsealed rooms with an exhaust fan running. It should be something that should be well thought out and planned for. Some just think all they need to do is buy some Co2 and let it loose.

I'm not referring to the OP.
 

Aqua Man

Well-Known Member
I guess the comment was meant to say you don't need Co2 for good grows. I'm not saying that Co2 doesn't increase yields indoors. I just think too many people want to use it as a shortcut for good growing. I don't think most people have their systems setup properly to see much of a benefit and are just literally draining money out of a cannister. I've seen people using Co2 in unsealed rooms with an exhaust fan running. It should be something that should be well thought out and planned for. Some just think all they need to do is buy some Co2 and let it loose.

I'm not referring to the OP.
I agree with almost everything you have said. But its not a shortcut to good growing in fact I feel it makes growing a little more challenging and less room for error. Like anything you speed up you get less time to react and creates its own learning curve. Its not for everyone. Once you have everything dialed I would say Co2 is a next step to increasing yields and growth rates. Most definitely it's not some magic gas that solves all your problems. Also most definitely there are far more ppl throwing Co2 at grows that are not optimized for it than people who are optimized for it. Not only that but also claiming they are getting all these increased yields and faster growth even with setups that scientifically would not be possible.

Its like any craze people don't fully understand, they just go with the flow and feel the need to express exaggerated results.
 

xtsho

Well-Known Member
I agree with almost everything you have said. But its not a shortcut to good growing in fact I feel it makes growing a little more challenging and less room for error. Like anything you speed up you get less time to react and creates its own learning curve. Its not for everyone. Once you have everything dialed I would say Co2 is a next step to increasing yields and growth rates. Most definitely it's not some magic gas that solves all your problems. Also most definitely there are far more ppl throwing Co2 at grows that are not optimized for it than people who are optimized for it. Not only that but also claiming they are getting all these increased yields and faster growth even with setups that scientifically would not be possible.

Its like any craze people don't fully understand, they just go with the flow and feel the need to express exaggerated results.



:bigjoint:
 

digging

Well-Known Member
Aqua Man is correct about requiring significant lighting to be able to enjoy the benefit of C02 enrichment.

In my readings I have also read that unless you have at the very minimum of 700 umol of lighting to the top of the crop, as well as completely sealed rooms C02 would be a waste.

So Ed Rosenthal was most likely taking for granted that one would already have the needed requirements to say “ If your not using C02, you are just wasting electricity “

Also as Aqua Man stated C02 is the last piece of the maximizing your room puzzle, unless you built sealed rooms intentionally to begin with, and then you have no choice but to run C02.
 

Kingrow1

Well-Known Member
I agree with almost everything you have said. But its not a shortcut to good growing in fact I feel it makes growing a little more challenging and less room for error. Like anything you speed up you get less time to react and creates its own learning curve. Its not for everyone. Once you have everything dialed I would say Co2 is a next step to increasing yields and growth rates. Most definitely it's not some magic gas that solves all your problems. Also most definitely there are far more ppl throwing Co2 at grows that are not optimized for it than people who are optimized for it. Not only that but also claiming they are getting all these increased yields and faster growth even with setups that scientifically would not be possible.

Its like any craze people don't fully understand, they just go with the flow and feel the need to express exaggerated results.

Good write up, thats how i understand it. Were all knowledgable on its action but getting it to work....

I teach newbies where to place a thermometer that are already running co2 and i question why yhat is :-)
 

Aqua Man

Well-Known Member
Good write up, thats how i understand it. Were all knowledgable on its action but getting it to work....

I teach newbies where to place a thermometer that are already running co2 and i question why yhat is :-)
Misinformation everywhere... $$$ is motive. It can absolutely make a big difference but without the proper education and equipment its useless. Much like a F1 race car given to a 10 yr old and expected to produce the same results. Its just not going to happen. But you don't learn by sitting on your hands so put in the time to research and plan then put in the time to gain experience and it can be very rewarding.

I always try to explain things to the best of my ability sometimes they are long winded posts or to much detail but the little things are often whats missed. And even then i make mistakes and sometimes have misunderstood the info i'm passing along as well so it's always best to seek multiple sources of information. I know i do
 

Dr. Who

Well-Known Member
This is my setup so far. from what the hydro guy said I guess the plants want around 85F with 1500ppm of co2 for best results?

"Hydro guy said" idiot!

Almost NO ONE can employ 1500 ppm effectively!

You simply have to supply more light energy then is cost effective to use!
The real world limit is 1300 ppm......Even then, you better be hitting it with lots of umols... I have 1400 watts (NOT a real measure of light energy) of HID to make the 1300 effective.

You want to have that 85 deg F as the low end of the temp and run your RH at 80%.....This is all lights on stuff.
Be sure you exhaust out of the room the tent is in.....Control the temps the room the tent is in, to normal run zones for temps and RH - so like 72 F and 50% RH.

If you really want to be effective...Get an environmental control and program it by the temp and RH guidelines I gave you....

https://4hydroponics.com/autopilot-digital-environmental-controller.html

This gassing thing. Can be effective for small scale growers in tents.... Once you get up to enclosed area's or whole buildings.... You have other issues, and those make the cost's rise to be something that is basically. Not worth spending money on.....

Good luck.
 

Dr. Who

Well-Known Member
I recently read, and I will quote Ed Rosenthal “ If you’re not using C02, you’re just wasting your electricity “

I have just started running C02 in sealed rooms. I am in the middle of dialing in my rooms with the help of the Pulse sensors. I need more humidity to run the correct VPD #’s. Ordered larger humidifiers, should arrive this week.

Faster growth using C02 will be a joy to watch and experience.

Can anyone suggest a ppm of C02 for a veg room?

With all respect to Ed..... I have yet to see any major commercial operation use gas!

You do NOT gas in veg! It is NEVER cost effective!
Ed is also talking about Bloom only.....Re read that section of his book....

You must live in a real,real dry area...... I have never had any problem with the plants raising the RH in rooms to 81% and it will go higher. The environmental control will kick out for RH once in awhile, mostly for heat though.
 
Last edited:

Dr. Who

Well-Known Member
Light will determine how much Co2 will benefit your plant but if you are providing enough I have read as high as 1800ppm+ can be beneficial. Its generally accepted that 1200-1500ppm is ideal. If you don't not have the lighting to drive photosynthesis rates higher Co2 will do nothing to benefit you so there is more to that statement than just add Co2, like there is with most statements. Light is usually the limiting factor in photosynthesis when you can provide more light than can be used by the plant for photosynthesis then Co2 becomes the limiting factor so supplementing extra will increase photosynthesis and growth rates.If you don't have the lighting you will get no benefit from Co2 and that's an absolute fact.
You have to understand that once your supplying 1300 ppm that to make anything effective after that. Your going to be required to supply an amount of light energy that is now, getting hard to actually deliver.
Not only that but the curve in the relationship in the amount of light energy needed to that amount of gas over 1300 and above to actually be effective. Rises on a bell curve style of need to make that 1800 ppm you mentioned....Impossible to supply, and that's even for the professional commercial grower.... Those statements of 1500 ppm are out of the average realm of 98% of the growing community!

That 1800 ppm level was done in lab testing conditions only......Never to be used effectively at home or on the commercial market..It's simply the laws of science. At least at this time in lighting science....

What Co2 really does is replace the ability of the plant to effectively "grow" at normal growth rates that the light saturation point removes during the normal grow day. This light saturation point hits the plant earlier then many think. It's (the plant) cells in the leaves actually begin to change on the peptide level. This change is to actually protect the plant from the intense light of day. This includes UVB protection.
This reduces active plant growth by around 30 - 33%+ per day.

At night, the plants reverses gears, and the cells change back to being able to use all the light energy they get.

Gassing will stimulate the plant to increase it's actions to negate the need to protect it's self. It then grows at normal rates, longer and you reclaim that 30% or so lost growth from light saturation points.

All C-3 plants have this "light saturation" point.. The droop you may see in your plants later in the day or right after lights out.. Is this "saturation point" showing you it's effect.
 

Aqua Man

Well-Known Member
You have to understand that once your supplying 1300 ppm that to make anything effective after that. Your going to be required to supply an amount of light energy that is now, getting hard to actually deliver.
Not only that but the curve in the relationship in the amount of light energy needed to that amount of gas over 1300 and above to actually be effective. Rises on a bell curve style of need to make that 1800 ppm you mentioned....Impossible to supply, and that's even for the professional commercial grower.... Those statements of 1500 ppm are out of the average realm of 98% of the growing community!

That 1800 ppm level was done in lab testing conditions only......Never to be used effectively at home or on the commercial market..It's simply the laws of science. At least at this time in lighting science....

What Co2 really does is replace the ability of the plant to effectively "grow" at normal growth rates that the light saturation point removes during the normal grow day. This light saturation point hits the plant earlier then many think. It's (the plant) cells in the leaves actually begin to change on the peptide level. This change is to actually protect the plant from the intense light of day. This includes UVB protection.
This reduces active plant growth by around 30 - 33%+ per day.

At night, the plants reverses gears, and the cells change back to being able to use all the light energy they get.

Gassing will stimulate the plant to increase it's actions to negate the need to protect it's self. It then grows at normal rates, longer and you reclaim that 30% or so lost growth from light saturation points.

All C-3 plants have this "light saturation" point.. The droop you may see in your plants later in the day or right after lights out.. Is this "saturation point" showing you it's effect.
No argument here. Simply stating that if you can provide enough light 1800+ ppm has shown to increase benefits and of course this was done in a lab study (with the amount of papers i have read on it it would take me some time to try and find it) It was simply a statement not a recommendation. Lets be honest Co2 is not really a good commercial option where production cost/yield is the goal. I was keeping it simple but i do understand how Co2 and the cavlin cycle work. I'm trying to communicate in as simple terms as possible and always encourage people to check multiple sources.
 

Flowki

Well-Known Member
You have to understand that once your supplying 1300 ppm that to make anything effective after that. Your going to be required to supply an amount of light energy that is now, getting hard to actually deliver.
Not only that but the curve in the relationship in the amount of light energy needed to that amount of gas over 1300 and above to actually be effective. Rises on a bell curve style of need to make that 1800 ppm you mentioned....Impossible to supply, and that's even for the professional commercial grower.... Those statements of 1500 ppm are out of the average realm of 98% of the growing community!

That 1800 ppm level was done in lab testing conditions only......Never to be used effectively at home or on the commercial market..It's simply the laws of science. At least at this time in lighting science....

What Co2 really does is replace the ability of the plant to effectively "grow" at normal growth rates that the light saturation point removes during the normal grow day. This light saturation point hits the plant earlier then many think. It's (the plant) cells in the leaves actually begin to change on the peptide level. This change is to actually protect the plant from the intense light of day. This includes UVB protection.
This reduces active plant growth by around 30 - 33%+ per day.

At night, the plants reverses gears, and the cells change back to being able to use all the light energy they get.

Gassing will stimulate the plant to increase it's actions to negate the need to protect it's self. It then grows at normal rates, longer and you reclaim that 30% or so lost growth from light saturation points.

All C-3 plants have this "light saturation" point.. The droop you may see in your plants later in the day or right after lights out.. Is this "saturation point" showing you it's effect.
Highly likely I'm jumping the gun here but does that also imply that another rout (maybe not as desirable) is to reduce light intensity so that lower (or more optimal) saturation reduces lost growth time?. Maybe you don't get as much yield but total room gpw efficiency goes up?.

I guess I mean it from the angle where you are providing too much light for ambient co2 levels but don't really have the desire for sealed room+co2.
 

Apalchen

Well-Known Member
I having been growing quite some time without C02. I will be adding it in as I get the money. But honestly it scares me to make a lot of changes all at once. This go will be first run in new room, under new lights(gavitas). Even if I had the money for C02 now I would hesitant to run it with so many changes all at once. Like someone up above said if your not completely dialed in already it’s not gonna help and might hurt as the faster a plant grows the faster problems get out of hand. I also still can’t decide on burner vs tank. I have some people tell me that for a 4K room I’ll go thru 2 tanks a week and then others say they only go thru one tank every 3 weeks. That’s a big difference in cost and time spent trading out tanks.
 
Top