Chemical Cure
New member
Co2 levels start at 500 gas for a room, add an extra 500 co2 for seedling to harvest.
-
Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
-
Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!
Co2 Simple
- Thread starter Chemical Cure
- Start date
Can you post a photo to show us what you are talking about? Are you saying 500 ppm for veg and 1000 ppm of CO2 for seedlings?
Is 1000 ppm CO2 dangerous?
1,000–2,000 ppm: level associated with complaints of drowsiness and poor air. 2,000–5,000 ppm: level associated with headaches, sleepiness, and stagnant, stale, stuffy air. Poor concentration, loss of attention, increased heart rate, and slight nausea may also be present. Mar 29, 2023, Google
Is 1000 ppm CO2 dangerous?
1,000–2,000 ppm: level associated with complaints of drowsiness and poor air. 2,000–5,000 ppm: level associated with headaches, sleepiness, and stagnant, stale, stuffy air. Poor concentration, loss of attention, increased heart rate, and slight nausea may also be present. Mar 29, 2023, Google
Ca++
Well-known member
It depends on your needs. We can certainly grow without it, and those using it are not the record holders. Despite what the science tells us.
Here's one such science based table
Here's another
That second one says that by 600umol, you probably can't use much more light, as you are co2 limited.
At 1000umol, many would be aiming for 1200ppm, which falls into the ill building syndrome of indoor air quality for people. However, just that light and co2 won't get the result without some temperature. At 25c, your temp would be a bottleneck. You need to be touching 30 to get everything lined up. They will drink quite a lot, and be hungry. While it's easy enough to write this stuff out, people tend to drop the ball somewhere. Even that graph isn't actually right. It shows the co2 curve too high at lower light, and the light curve to low at higher light. It may not even be for cannabis, now I think about it. Though it comes off a cannabis focused page.
Here's one such science based table
Here's another
That second one says that by 600umol, you probably can't use much more light, as you are co2 limited.
At 1000umol, many would be aiming for 1200ppm, which falls into the ill building syndrome of indoor air quality for people. However, just that light and co2 won't get the result without some temperature. At 25c, your temp would be a bottleneck. You need to be touching 30 to get everything lined up. They will drink quite a lot, and be hungry. While it's easy enough to write this stuff out, people tend to drop the ball somewhere. Even that graph isn't actually right. It shows the co2 curve too high at lower light, and the light curve to low at higher light. It may not even be for cannabis, now I think about it. Though it comes off a cannabis focused page.
Three Berries
Active member
1200 ppm isn't anything. A modern closed house will equal that easily. 3k is where I find it becomes uncomfortable. It's 650 in my house now and I have had windows open all day.
Ca++
Well-known member
You perhaps have a high threshold TB.
In group tests, 1000ppm lowered cognitive function 15%, and 1400ppm was making people 50% more stupid.
https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/10.1289/ehp.1510037#r39
Typically complaints of poor working conditions start around 1100ppm. This is where measurement follows complaint, so there is no bias as seen in tests people are aware of.
In group tests, 1000ppm lowered cognitive function 15%, and 1400ppm was making people 50% more stupid.
https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/10.1289/ehp.1510037#r39
Typically complaints of poor working conditions start around 1100ppm. This is where measurement follows complaint, so there is no bias as seen in tests people are aware of.
Three Berries
Active member
I call BS. The OSHA 8 hr PEL Limit use to be 10k.
Ca++
Well-known member
In a dutch study, the task of reading text and typing it, was unaffected at 5000ppm. The 10 college kids were exposed for 2.5 hours each, and detected nothing.
This is well over your 3000ppm threshold. So they would probably call BS to what you are saying.
Putting kids in a metal chamber to copy text for 2.5 hours really should of made them feel different, regardless of co2 levels. It's also a task that barely needs a brain. So it's not a great study.
People are not all the same. However, sick building syndrome research has had inspectors called into countless buildings, to find levels over 1000ppm responsible. It's blind testing on a huge scale. My personal tolerance isn't worth talking about, in the light of such documentation.
I can't see your link from my location. You say it used to be 10K though. I'm not sure what it is now. The study I linked to thought using 500 1000 2500 would be a study of really low levels, but were surprised to see such great effect. They did it again days apart. Mondays and Fridays. Trying to take other things out of the equation. It's compelling evidence.
The building codes of many countries want under 1200ppm, even if the weather is freezing. This is usually stated as a gain above atmospheric levels. 600-700ppm being common.
These are real world figures of today. I have two air quality monitors, both of which revolve around the idea of 1000ppm.
This is well over your 3000ppm threshold. So they would probably call BS to what you are saying.
Putting kids in a metal chamber to copy text for 2.5 hours really should of made them feel different, regardless of co2 levels. It's also a task that barely needs a brain. So it's not a great study.
People are not all the same. However, sick building syndrome research has had inspectors called into countless buildings, to find levels over 1000ppm responsible. It's blind testing on a huge scale. My personal tolerance isn't worth talking about, in the light of such documentation.
I can't see your link from my location. You say it used to be 10K though. I'm not sure what it is now. The study I linked to thought using 500 1000 2500 would be a study of really low levels, but were surprised to see such great effect. They did it again days apart. Mondays and Fridays. Trying to take other things out of the equation. It's compelling evidence.
The building codes of many countries want under 1200ppm, even if the weather is freezing. This is usually stated as a gain above atmospheric levels. 600-700ppm being common.
These are real world figures of today. I have two air quality monitors, both of which revolve around the idea of 1000ppm.
Three Berries
Active member
The current US OSHA Permissible Exposure Limit of 8 hours is 5kppm. That is 5kppm per hour for 8 hours. It was 10k before all the CO2 hysteria.
1000 ppm is nothing I see outside ranges that go from 350ppm late afternoon-~700 an hour after dawn, on a daily cycle during the height of corn growing season here in Illinois.
99.9% of people do not know what the CO2 level is where they are.
1000 ppm is nothing I see outside ranges that go from 350ppm late afternoon-~700 an hour after dawn, on a daily cycle during the height of corn growing season here in Illinois.
99.9% of people do not know what the CO2 level is where they are.
Chemical Cure
New member
I was meaning a room is around 500 ppm Co2 levels, not to gas at 500 ppm for veg. 1000 ppm Co2 start to finish from seedling to harvest.
Last edited:
