unlimited cheap c02

[purpledomgoddes]

energy recovery/simplicity

energy recovery/simplicity

project for high tech enthusiasts:
design hvac/energy recovery system that extracts heat (hot air) from gardening area(s) that is then fed to step down line(s) to generate steam, thus power. mini-turbine/grid/etc.
mimic industrial sites near landfills that use methane gas to power their equipment and/or provide power to neighboring areas.
the heat generated by gardening areas, w/ all the other high tech stuff (machines) is potentially recyclable. build an eco-friendly/true closed/75-85% efficient set up. c02 is easy. cleanroom construct is little more difficult. even then, the above low tech c02 option can be used.
there are still things that are easier when low tech is employed - along side high tech innovations.
some japanese rock gardens only have 3 flowers - but each of the thousands of stones that surround them are precisely placed. simply beautiful...

 

[NiteTiger]

Might as well go ahead and make wine. Same process, better end result

Although, I've never noticed an appreciable rise in CO2 concentration, and certainly not to the 1500 ppm that's recommended for plants. Especially not with just 4. 16 just seems like it would take up too much room?

If you've got it working for you though, awesome

 

[purpledomgoddes]

try a 20 gal res. externally located. heated w/ immersion heater. 10 gal of sugar on hand. 50 cfm fan to step down vinyl tubing actually+literally wrapped around vegetables. equivalent of 16-20 individual gallons.
can even use cheap frozen orange juice/food bank juice/dollar store juice/etc.
do control w/ out above. note differences.
some gardener on these boards w/ meter/gauges/monitor measure concentrations w/ above method, if inclined+have room/motivation. the physical science/bacterial/raw material/age old proven methods of the reaction is an undisputed scientific fact: the by product of fermentation is c02.
the next variables are how much/at what rate/how to vent-circulate-imposed onto/into vegetables w/ tubing to insure maximum saturation.
so, if 1500 is the alledged desired level of c02 concentration in the area, the gardeners w/ gens/tanks/machines/etc MUST HAVE available instruments to actually measure the c02 assimilated by their plants...
and the assimilation rate is exactly 1500 ppm...

 

[badugi]

Here's the thing, you're talking about doing all this to generate CO2... yes. You mention using standard equipment used for measuring & metering traditional sources, and having a tightly sealed room (means you'll likely need A/C & dehumidifier). Who's sealing their room that tight (i.e., $$), spending money on sniffer equipment, and at the same time going with a fermentation method of CO2 production? I dunno I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying these things just don't make sense in cost dynamics. Just my as usual.

I don't know for a fact or from experience but I have an understanding that too high a level of CO2 is toxic (10,000ppm = bad news). Also, if you seal the room that tight, how do you plan on cooling it? Again, goes back to cost dynamic concept / principle.

 

[purpledomgoddes]

same as w/ number and fertilizers. do the plants actually assimilate 1000 ppm/ec of the applied solute? brix/raw mins/etc. can wire everything up or nothing at all. medium to little as possible is efficient option.

 

[NiteTiger]

I did not doubt that the process created CO2, I'm well aware it does. I'm just saying when I tried it, it didn't achieve the desired levels. Not alleged, recommended.

Have you tried this yourself? If so, I'd love to see some pics of your setup, and the monitoring equipment you're using. How are you shutting off the CO2 at lights out? Also, what temp are you keeping the room?

Once again, pics would rock

 

[BlindDate]

Dumb idea. A waste of time.

 

[LolaGal]

I've got my gals in a closed room, so I just hope some C02 is better than no c02. I can't afford a big setup with all the cool bells and whistles, so I just stick with water,sugar, and yeast. It helps a little I hope, anyway it's fun to play with.....meanwhile I'm learning a lot about making sour mash....LOL. Anybody got an old still they don't use? This makes lots of alcohol. I ran a batch (with corn meal) through refining process and got some Evil pure grain tasting stuff. Hiccup...hiccup

 

[purpledomgoddes]

Here's the thing, you're talking about doing all this to generate CO2... yes. You mention using standard equipment used for measuring & metering traditional sources, and having a tightly sealed room (means you'll likely need A/C & dehumidifier). Who's sealing their room that tight (i.e., $$), spending money on sniffer equipment, and at the same time going with a fermentation method of CO2 production? I dunno I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying these things just don't make sense in cost dynamics. Just my as usual.

I don't know for a fact or from experience but I have an understanding that too high a level of CO2 is toxic (10,000ppm = bad news). Also, if you seal the room that tight, how do you plan on cooling it? Again, goes back to cost dynamic concept / principle.

the point of the thread is to go LOW TECH and avoid meters/tank/gens/etc. but they definitely can be used to measure concentration in area. not necessary though.
sealing a room tightly does not incur any more financial burden than having an unsealed room. simple expanding foam in an aerosol can can pluf air leaks. sqaure the room, level the room, choose materials and check for air leaks thoroughly and constantly. caulk/silicaon/epoxy are available too.
10.000ppm is used in cea/space untis (controlled environment ag) to eliminate insects, not at constant rate.
the room will need to be cooled whether sealed or unsealed. hvac industry generally seals room to better control temp as oppsed to permitting cooled air to be externally vented/drift into non target cooled environs. if concerned w/ heat - reverse engineer begining w/ hvac issues first. c02 is easy. just have the gas present and the tomatoes will use what they need.


Have you tried this yourself? If so, I'd love to see some pics of your setup, and the monitoring equipment you're using. How are you shutting off the CO2 at lights out? Also, what temp are you keeping the room?

Once again, pics would rock

no pics. method too easy to duplicate. juice, sugar, container. no monitored wanted/needed.
not shut off at night w/out ill effects.
temps are ruthlessly manipulated to affect diff. generally high day+night 78-88. high night temps to distribute energy acquired during day. 76-81. dropped to ~ 60 1hr prior to day to trick into thinking long cold night. sometimes higher night temps than day temps. rh 35-45-55 depending.

Evil pure

fire...

 

[NiteTiger]

I thought temps needed to be higher than that for the proper application of CO2. Also, the night shut off, as I understood it, was because the plant didn't uptake CO2 at night.

The whole high night temps to distribute energy gathered during the day, that is absolutely inaccurate.

So, you're promoting this method without any actual way to know if it actually generating the proper amount of CO2?

And you didn't answer the main question - have you tried it yourself? If you have, I'd like to see a pic of your setup. I'm not interested in the ease of setup, I want to see your setup.

 

[purpledomgoddes]

no pics forthcoming. not promoting. pointing out a scientific method. if uninterested, don't do.
no notes/books handy but vaguely recall that intake/uptake is reduced in dark period, not stopped. inclusion of buckets 24/7 w/ air circ w/ no ill effects observed.
even scientist don't know 'proper amount' of c02. the general rule is 1500ppm, but more/les has/can be used.
key is to make available.
w/out instruments connected directly to plant also don't know if 'proper amount' is being assimilated/absorbed/chemically broke down/processed by plant.
seems unbalanced to spend barrel of coins of tanks/regs/gens/etc w/out coins on electrodes/etc to see rates/times/saturation point of uptake by plant.
point of thread is low tech, readily available materials for application where tanks/regs/gens are not feasible for whatever reason.

 

[purpledomgoddes]

if in fact plnats 'breathe in' c02, they still have to 'breathe' at night, if at a lesser rate. like the metabolism of humans is greater while they are active (day).

 

[NiteTiger]

Ah, okay, I see now, you're just repeating what you've read. I thought you'd had actual experience yourself.

The reason I was asking is precisely because I have actually tried it, and it didn't do squat. Levels got nowhere near high enough, actually only got a few points above ambient.

I appreciate that you're trying to make a contribution, but in the future, please specify whether you have actual evidence, or just have a theory. Promoting something as startling as your title with no actual proof does not lend you any authenticity.

Next time, give it a whirl yourself first, so you can actually show the results, or post it as an idea that others can experiment with. Don't make as bold a claim as you have with no actual proof.

 

[purpledomgoddes]

inclusion of buckets 24/7 w/ air circ w/ no ill effects observed.
from^.
again, no meters/regs/etc. just observation against control (non-applied) specimens. if tried by a gardener/gardeners w/out success, abandon - as has been done. no loss.
but the fact of the matter is that if a gardener places buckets/soda bottles/jugs/tubs in their area, and the area is adequately sealed, there will be an increase of c02 in the air circulation.
put a plant in a 1'x1'x1' cardboard box w/ 2l bottle w/ air tubing applied directly over/onto/in palnt. put another plant (same size/etc) in another box (area) and observe differences.
did your experiment observe absolutely no increase in desired results? how much surface area did the container have? square+more surface area=more bubbles=more c02 dispersed into atmosphere.
are you asserting no c02 is produced? that it is not trapped inside of a sealed room (or even in the airflow of a vented area)? that the plants are not uptaking more c02 than what was previously in the ambient atmoshere (250-350ppm)? where did the c02 go that was produced by this ancient method for pennies or less?
it goes into the plants. even if the ppm is raised by a measly 100ppm w/ a few 2l bottles, is that not better than the previous ppm?

 

[purpledomgoddes]

excuse not being bold enough for pics+seeming to promote+seeming to know+++. have lurked since og/cw.
reason why continued to lurk was demise of og/cw+not desiring to get into thread drama.
although capable of acquiring, never focused much on c02 - rather focus on temp manipluation(root/ambient)/aggressive foliar/light cycles/music (soundwaves).
a 20 gal rectangular tub will have a floating mass of mash/kicker that will be visibly bubbling=giving off c02 gas. enough to move on to other areas of concern.
do not know it all. only posted because this has worked. if it doesn't work in another situation, stop.

 

[junior_grower]

Plants don't use CO2 at night. The use of Co2 is directly related to the production of organic sugars. This process is called photosynthesis, and more directly the Calvin cycle.

3 CO2 + 6 NADPH + 5 H2O + 9 ATP → C3H5O3-PO32- + 2 H+ + 6 NADP+ + 9 ADP + 8 Pi

 

[badugi]

the point of the thread is to go LOW TECH and avoid meters/tank/gens/etc.

You're the one who mentioned using standard equipment used to measure and meter CO2 in typical setups, when I asked how you plan on regulating it. So without that equipment then, how do you plan on it?

sealing a room tightly does not incur any more financial burden than having an unsealed room. simple expanding foam in an aerosol can can pluf air leaks. sqaure the room, level the room, choose materials and check for air leaks thoroughly and constantly. caulk/silicaon/epoxy are available too.

It also traps a lot of heat, too. I think BlindDate once said it best... I forgot the exact words but something like "adding CO2 goes way beyond a bottle".

 

[ureapwhatusow]

a couple points

A) most advanced grow techniques should make noticable differences in growth when properly applied

B) DIY is not always someone looking for a cheap alternative but is an necessity for thse who cant afford to be found growing MJ. In this particular case the alternate techniques actually have the benefit of creating CO2 wihtout the addition of heat

so i dont think generating your own CO2 is a waste of time but conversely if your not seeing a big differnetial in the use of CO2 your environment is either already perfect or there is another factor throttling the growth of your plant so wihtout tools to measure teh CO2 there is no way to qualify and quantify the results

 

[purpledomgoddes]

from any standard biology text:

the cuticle-covered epidermis conserves water but how do carbon dioxide and water
get past it? they do so at tiny openings called stomata. water evaporates from the plant and carbon dioxide moves in MAINLY (emphasis added to show even scientist don't know EXACTLY HOW) at these openings...
whether a stoma opens or closes depends on how much water and carbon dioxide are in the two guards cells. photosynthesis starts when the sun comes up. as the morning progresses, carbon dioxide levels drop in cells-including guard cells.
the decrease helps trigger active transport of potassium ions into the guard cells. so do blue wavelengths of light, which penetrate the atmosphere better as the sun arcs higher in the sky. water follows potassium into the cells, by osmosis. the inward movement of water provides the fluid pressure to open stomata....

so... it would seem that rh (relative humidity), or more precisely, vapor pressure deficit (coupled w/ atmospheric pressure+water available to roots to push up at 100+psi), at least partially contributes to the opening of stomata. not purely a dark reaction, but one that can/should be manipulated just like diff (night/dark 'diff'erent temps.

 

[purpledomgoddes]

not trying to re-invent a square-hybrid-fuel cell wheel here. just want to supply c02.
maybe this thread should be closed by the moderator.
have detailed a method that MAY be useful to SOME gardeners.
old books + folks on og/cw used to tell gardeners just to walk into their areas daily and breathe to supply a little c02.
now, if one places a 5-20 gal bucket/tub in a room and sees the bubbles coming off into the atmoshere it is 'dumb' or a 'waste of time'. fine. don't do it.
or build a 12" plasma display for the c02 monitor like a big screen. do what pleases you. that is the point. this is only an OPTION.
more options+good, generally.

and again, folks here keep speaking about no way to monitor the levels in the room - but nobody speaks about monitoring the levels the plant is actually assimilating. why go high tech to supply the gas to the room, but not go high tech to monitor the actual uptake?
what if the plant (or plants[denoting the myriad VARIETIES of plants, even w/in a species]), have a shut off saturation point of 750ppm, and you have doubled that amount in concentration w/ no benefit.
balance the tech out if you promote tanks/regs/gens/monitors - spend some coins on electrodes if you're high tech. but from a neutral standpoint (no tanks/monitors etc) it would seem that only room is getting the c02 - w/ absolutely no regard for the true absorbtion rate of the gas. there are devices available/buildable to monitor these things - but regular commercial stores are apt to sell their tanks/gens/reg/etc, maybe because they know gardeners are not apt enough - YET - to be testing actual assimilation/absorbtion on a wide scale.
so gas it up if you choose.
other areas of interest are more interesting to some:
diff
vapor pressure deficit
angle of light
array of sprectrum
harmonic (soundwave) influence
etc.
thx for the interest. really old as dirt method+scalable. hope helps some.
maybe time to close. everything needed is above.