Originally Posted by livebearerlove
QUESTION: so do I leave it on 24/7?
Beautiful tank, it is inspiring to see what you can grow even without CO2.
I ran CO2 24/7 (w/inline diffusor) in a 17gallon with a 1.45(day minimmum) - 1.6(night maximum) ph drop for over a year, and will continue to run it that way in my new scape.
In small tanks its practical to run CO2 24/7, why bother buying an expensive regulator or a cheap solenoid that could malfunction. Your kit has a hard to adjust valve but that is perfectly fine if you set it and forget it at such low CO2 tank pressures.
Watch your fish and pH the first night or two but with good O2 exchange it isn't a problem. I am probably pushing the CO2 much higher than you need to(2bps), even 1bps is probably more than you need in a 10g(I'd start with 30bpm and check pH), the only major downside to 24/7 in nano tanks is that you waste CO2.
The trick is to have high surface area(not too deep tank, you are fine in a rectangular standard 10g), good surface agitation (lily pipe, skimmer).
I currently have a plastic tub with similar dimensions to my tank with no skimmer and it has been fine as well.
Originally Posted by Bunsen Honeydew
I think that this warrants more discussion, but I don't want to hijack LBL's thread more with this. If you don't mind, I will post another thread on the topic when I have a little more time to get into it. I haven't derived this one myself in awhile (since I was teaching this 15 years ago), so I probably should to compare to this chart and give it the proper rigor.
Beleive me I understand, I am a former Chemist(over a decade ago) I taught for 6+ years in the Generel Chemistry labs at McGill while working on my pHD, I was more than a bit rusty when I first started on this forum. A few month ago Tom Barr sophistry tripped me up and I referenced this chart when I first started posting here, I have learned not to ever reference this material in future and I think you will arrive at the same conclusions given your background and careful study.
IMO Barr is very good at simplifying down concepts for the masses but often the message is misleading or applied wrong by novices(like in this thread) and he rarely emphasizes caveats to his methods which is the problem with reading his material and following it or parroting blindly.