scorpionul wrote:debitul mi se pare prea puternic: 950l/h adica de aproape 20x 54l cat ai tu, cred ca e un pic cam mult.

scorpionul wrote:de ce prefera lumea difuzor la borcane?

CO2 mist is not about dissolving efficiency, it's actually counter to that.
That is part of the controversy for many.

It's about delivery of pure or near pure CO2 gas to the plants directly, rather than adding very diluted 30ppm in a thick visicous medium, water.

Even if a pure gas bubble hits the plant leaf once every 5 minutes, that's still far more than the 30ppm in the water and the rate of diffusion is much more rapid into the plant.

It's very tough to prove that the CO2 that enters the plant is CO2 dissolved in water or in the gas phase. I'm not sure how to show that, so I'm not even going to touch that quagmire but I know another way:

So rather than that method, I've approached it from a O2 plant production as a measure of increased growth. You can measure the CO2 ppm levels in any two tanks for comparisons. So if they are close, then the mist is the main variable. You can even do something like this in a tank, see how well the plants grow near the mist outlet without blasting the mist all around the tank.

This is pretty damn clear data and folks can visually see the difference when done right.

Folks that claim it does not work or that I'm nuts simply have not tried this approach nor looked at the pearling and O2 level difference.

It's plain as day. I doubt I can prove the gas vs the liquid gets to the plants better, but I can show it does produce better growth.
Some folks have added the mist to a reactor, that works also, but.......you should simply use the venturi reactor is that is your goal, cheaper, simpler etc.

Does essentially the same type of thing.
Regards,
Tom Barr