FishProfiles.com Message Forums

Hi all,
I thought the rule for watts/g was designed for incandescent lights. If I’m using a compact florescent, the wattage (the actual energy consumption) would be low. But that’s not on the part of light. That’s the energy it saves cutting down the heat dissipation.
Now if a 23w CF says it’s comparable to a 90w incandescent and I have, say, a 23 gallons tank, my w/g would be 1 or 3.91?
Thanks

Mughal,

I would use the standard formula of watts/gallons to determine wpatts per gallon or wpg. The light that is generated by the compact fluorescent will certaintly be more intense than the incandescent or standard fluorescent lamp.

However, I am running 384 watts of CF over a 125G tank or 3.07 wpg without CO2 ijection. I consider it to be a medium light tank.



__________
"To steal ideas from one person is plagiarism; to steal from many is research."
researched from Steven Wright

Ahaaan...thanks Bob.
Actually I was thinking the other way
BTW does your tank do without CO2 with this much lighting?

sorry if my questions sound stupid..im still an illiterate when it comes to planted tanks...

It does very well but at the time that I was setting it up, I was cautioned that it would turn into algae soup if I didn't use CO2.

I have planted the tank with rotalla, bacopa, echinodorus, anubias, cryptocoryne, ceratophyllum and polysperma. The ceratophyllum and polysperma are my nutrient sponges for nitrate control. The other plants are left to compete for nutrients against the algae. I dose 1/2 tspn of KNO3 each day with a tbsp of Excel for carbon. Water changes are 50% every other day for the discus. Substrate is EcoComplete.



Attached Image:


__________
"To steal ideas from one person is plagiarism; to steal from many is research."
researched from Steven Wright

Watts per gallon is an average measurement that can be affected by alot of variables. Type of lighting is one and pc lights put out more light per watt than incandescent or normal output flourescent. Actual dimensions of the tank also throw those numbers off a little as well as the height of the light above the tank and the quality of the reflector and bulbs used. It's only meant to be a rough estimate or guide not a strict rule that x plant requires x watts/gallon or that you absolutely need co2 at a certain light level. I've run tanks with 4wpg and no co2 or excel but it's tricky and anything can throw the tank off causing huge algea blooms. Sometimes it's just easier to run the co2 than try to plan a high light tank without it. Excel can take the place of co2 but some plants are sensitive to it and won't survive.

Hi all,
First of all, Bob, u've got a great tank...wowwwwwww. I really like the wild look..
A friend of mine is a discus fenatic and is setting up a new tank these days. He's really going to inspired
Sham, yes. U'r perfectly right. Plus I also think its more about the concentration of plantation in different parts of the tank, lighting requirements of those plants and proper orientation of lights...Reflectors can be great help.

Now my question. I have exactly 3w/g (actual wattage) CF. The tank is low, only 12 inches with DIY CO2. The lights are rated at 6400K. Is it good enough for medium light plants?

You should be able to grow most any of the plants that are considered medium light and all the low light plants. Possibly if the placing and everything else is just right a few of the more higher light plants.

Thanks everybody...

Here comes the next problem.
It just took 36 hours after I had upgraded the lighting and plants are now covered in a thick layer of whitish semi transparent fur like algea.
Its the first time Ive encountered such sort of algea. The parameters are..
Temp 29C
Nitrates 0 (No fish. Ive put the betta back to the bowl)
CO2, yeast/sugar. Started 24 hours after the introduction of new lights (I think thats where the problem started)
Fertilizer: PMDD. Started dosing lightly after the CO2 began working.

Thanks for ur continuous support!

EDIT: Ive done some seach and its probably the red or beard algea..

Hi,
There's an update. The introduction of CO2 and fertilization had a very positive effect and algea has been driven back significantly. There is no new growth visible, just some old patches of algea and they seem to be dying now. Hope to get rid of it totally.
Im playing a bit with the ratios in PMDD trying to find the combination that turns out to be the most suitable...Lets see.

The white fuzzy stuff was a bloom from your yeast mixture. Glad to hear that the CO2 seemed to alleviate the problem.



__________
"To steal ideas from one person is plagiarism; to steal from many is research."
researched from Steven Wright

Bob, I think it was red algae as it appeared before the introduction of CO2 and the fertz. Most of it is gone now.
I'm really amazed how things balance themselves in an aquarium. Anything goes out of balance and algae invades. The balance returns and away goes the algae.
It appeared in 24 hours after the introduction of new lighting and disappeared in next 24 hours after I had set up the CO2 and the fertilizer thing.
Now one of the anubii is emitting tiny oxygen bubbles like a small air stone