Light vs CO2

[benkho]

was intending to get a 55w pl light for my 2 ft no co2 planted.

was wondering if i dont have co2, with 55w, just using bioload, will it improve my growth rate of my plants? it includes jap hairgrass, spiky moss, might be getting riccia as well..thanks

[ranmasatome]

short answer... not really.

[Shadow]

don't do that. Higher light wattage means plant will require/consume higher CO2 and higher nutient/fertelizer. If one of them not availble, it will stun the plant grow and algae will take over.

[benkho]

i currently have a 15w fl

i do does liquid ferts and seachem excel. so i was thinking to match the fertilisers, getting higher wattage of light will improve my tank..right?

[uklau]

Light drives CO2 uptake. The more light you have, the more CO2 you need to supply to your plant. With more light & CO2, plants needs more fertilizers (macro & micro). So, it's a chain reaction.

While you can increase the liquid fertilizers when you are on high light, increasing Excel dosing may not provide sufficient carbon source to the plant. On top of that, Excel is not cheap . Some hobbyists even go to the extend of using Excel in their existing CO2 injected tank.

[salexjared]

If you see that your plant is not growing to your satisfaction and you are willing to invest in the light, consider putting a bit more cash into the CO2 system.

You can start cheap with just a tank and a regulator with no solenoid.
You have to have someone turn it on and off for you when your light is on. But it is worth the trouble.

The tank will generally last you 4-6 months and it is not expensive to do a charge. So maintenance of the C02 is going to be not high.

If you want, I can spare you a simple setup (not tank, just the regulator) and the bubble counter (of course, you have to collect at my place if interested).