plantbrain
Fishaholic
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2003
- Messages
- 476
- Reaction score
- 0
Just an FYI, if you seek less maintenance, then first, use less light.
This slows the rate of growth way down.
Also cost lots less over time and initially.
It's also the easiest thing to control growth that's the most stable.
Next is CO2.
Many who hate water changes go this route. Don't worry, you can easily sell it.
Since it looks like you are going to suffer and stick with CO2, you can also adjust the plant species around and chose easy to care for weeds.
Lower light and slower growth for say most of the tank, and then a few fast growers.
As far as avoiding water changes, that's why the non CO2 method is so good.
It has less labor than a non planted fish tank.
You do not do any water changes, that's part of the method.
The reason why EI is popular is due to no testing of the water or having test many parameters, calibrate test kits etc.
I knew this long ago.
The trade off for doing fewer water changes is having to test the water.
You cannot have both, you get one chore or the other and few folks test consistently or correctly, or calibrate the test kits.
Most just wing it and hope, it's called "neglect"
A water change on the other hand takes me about 2 hours a week for 6 large aquariums, this includes any cleaning, any filter cleaning, glass wiping, etc.
For a smaller 80-100 liter tank, this takes all of 10 minutes. 2 minutes to drain with a large hose and then a 5 to refill the bucket or use a hose for drain and fill.
3 minutes to clean.
I can do that faster than you can test any two parameters
And I know my tank will look better and is much easier to dose.
Can you automate a water change? Yes, pretty simple, automate NO3/PO4 testing? No.
Which is easier and takes less technical skill?
Water change.
which habit are more aquarist more likely to keep up on over time?
Water change.
There are methods that avoid both, but there are trade offs, so for your goals, the non CO2 is best suited, but if you think you can get away with no testing, improper testing, no water changes and have higher light/CO2, you will suffer.
You might be fine for awhile, lucky is more like it. You need to be realistic to some degree, you do not get to avoid all the work and have a nice looking healthy plant tank without some type of trade off.
Here is an example of a non CO2 planted tank without a water change for 9 months or so.
Growth is slow, but the lily leaves are pinched off about once every other week and grow back.
Crypts are easy to manage, fish are fed, their waste is now plant fertilizer. At higher light and CO2, the fish cannot supply enough waste and demand more nutrients, so then you need to dose. The water change is a simple method to manage nutrients, easier and faster than test kits for most people.
So for CO2 methods, that works better.
So there are certainly methods for everyone' habits, but you do not get pick a high growth tank and then not expect to do much.
It will teach you the pain, then you'll learn the hard way.
EI is already simpler than most any method out there for CO2 enriched methods.
The rest include water changes and test kits or a 101 products that add up the cost and are often questionable in their effectiveness.
They are trying to sell you things and want your money.
Hope this helps,
Regards,
Tom Barr
This slows the rate of growth way down.
Also cost lots less over time and initially.
It's also the easiest thing to control growth that's the most stable.
Next is CO2.
Many who hate water changes go this route. Don't worry, you can easily sell it.
Since it looks like you are going to suffer and stick with CO2, you can also adjust the plant species around and chose easy to care for weeds.
Lower light and slower growth for say most of the tank, and then a few fast growers.
As far as avoiding water changes, that's why the non CO2 method is so good.
It has less labor than a non planted fish tank.
You do not do any water changes, that's part of the method.
The reason why EI is popular is due to no testing of the water or having test many parameters, calibrate test kits etc.
I knew this long ago.
The trade off for doing fewer water changes is having to test the water.
You cannot have both, you get one chore or the other and few folks test consistently or correctly, or calibrate the test kits.
Most just wing it and hope, it's called "neglect"
A water change on the other hand takes me about 2 hours a week for 6 large aquariums, this includes any cleaning, any filter cleaning, glass wiping, etc.
For a smaller 80-100 liter tank, this takes all of 10 minutes. 2 minutes to drain with a large hose and then a 5 to refill the bucket or use a hose for drain and fill.
3 minutes to clean.
I can do that faster than you can test any two parameters
And I know my tank will look better and is much easier to dose.
Can you automate a water change? Yes, pretty simple, automate NO3/PO4 testing? No.
Which is easier and takes less technical skill?
Water change.
which habit are more aquarist more likely to keep up on over time?
Water change.
There are methods that avoid both, but there are trade offs, so for your goals, the non CO2 is best suited, but if you think you can get away with no testing, improper testing, no water changes and have higher light/CO2, you will suffer.
You might be fine for awhile, lucky is more like it. You need to be realistic to some degree, you do not get to avoid all the work and have a nice looking healthy plant tank without some type of trade off.
Here is an example of a non CO2 planted tank without a water change for 9 months or so.
Growth is slow, but the lily leaves are pinched off about once every other week and grow back.
Crypts are easy to manage, fish are fed, their waste is now plant fertilizer. At higher light and CO2, the fish cannot supply enough waste and demand more nutrients, so then you need to dose. The water change is a simple method to manage nutrients, easier and faster than test kits for most people.
So for CO2 methods, that works better.
So there are certainly methods for everyone' habits, but you do not get pick a high growth tank and then not expect to do much.
It will teach you the pain, then you'll learn the hard way.
EI is already simpler than most any method out there for CO2 enriched methods.
The rest include water changes and test kits or a 101 products that add up the cost and are often questionable in their effectiveness.
They are trying to sell you things and want your money.
Hope this helps,
Regards,
Tom Barr
