Joined
·
3 Posts
:help:
Which is better?
I am not [STRIKE]really[/STRIKE] bothered about energy consumption as I'm not paying for it.
This is my opinion:
PROS
High Tech
Faster growth
Generally more attractive
More interesting (I have a habit of tearing my aquascapes apart :angryfire when they stop changing; I am an impatient person.)
Low Tech
Cheaper
Less maintenance
Less risk of gassing fish/inverts (via CO2 injection)
CONS
High Tech
More expensive
Higher risk of gassing fish/inverts
Availability of CO2 refills
Waste of tech for easy plants (whether 'waste of tech' makes sense I do not know. Probably not, but you know what I mean.)
Low Tech
Less attractive
Less changeable - most plants grow slowly because of less nutrients (so I am more likely to tear it up :angryfire:angryfire:angryfire)
Unsuitable for demanding plants
Any thoughts?
Which is better?
I am not [STRIKE]really[/STRIKE] bothered about energy consumption as I'm not paying for it.
This is my opinion:
PROS
High Tech
Faster growth
Generally more attractive
More interesting (I have a habit of tearing my aquascapes apart :angryfire when they stop changing; I am an impatient person.)
Low Tech
Cheaper
Less maintenance
Less risk of gassing fish/inverts (via CO2 injection)
CONS
High Tech
More expensive
Higher risk of gassing fish/inverts
Availability of CO2 refills
Waste of tech for easy plants (whether 'waste of tech' makes sense I do not know. Probably not, but you know what I mean.)
Low Tech
Less attractive
Less changeable - most plants grow slowly because of less nutrients (so I am more likely to tear it up :angryfire:angryfire:angryfire)
Unsuitable for demanding plants
Any thoughts?