What's your gram per watt?

[Hybridway]

Don't listen to any of that then.

People that detail their work are the only ones credible.

CO2 is a big advantage, I doubt anyone is using it would admit to 1 g/W.

You have to use common sense sometimes.

Wow. You say some dumb shit b.
I take it you're not a grower or if you are you're in a 2x2 tent or something?

You are talking total power consumption, something large scale growers worry about. They have to make the bottom line or they go out of business.

The metric of g/W is for grower skill, the total power consumption g/W is the efficiency of the build.

Take into account geography, they could have all of the same equipment yet an ambient temperature difference of 10° C.

Don't use stoner logic here.

Side note, if someone is using CO2 and they aren't getting 2+ g/W they don't have the skill to use it.

Quantitative data.

 

[Enigma]

Wow. You say some dumb shit b.
I take it you're not a grower or if you are you're in a 2x2 tent or something?

Making personal attacks is the quickest way to iggy.

 

[rollyouron]

1.7 with 30 day veg

 

[doz]

You are talking total power consumption, something large scale growers worry about. They have to make the bottom line or they go out of business.

The metric of g/W is for grower skill, the total power consumption g/W is the efficiency of the build.

Take into account geography, they could have all of the same equipment yet an ambient temperature difference of 10° C.

Don't use stoner logic here.

Side note, if someone is using CO2 and they aren't getting 2+ g/W they don't have the skill to use it.

Quantitative data.

Someone growing a low yielding strain w/ CO2 will not achieve near that..... Again, strain is the #1 dependent factor. After that, there are many factors. CO2 gives you an advantage, but not huge. Also, its difficult to utilize CO2 properly in many environments that are not dedicated grows which is why many people do not use it. Hell, even large scale grow operations do not even use it as the benefits to using it are outweighed by the cost of doing it properly (on the HVAC/Filtration side of things, much more cost involved to set it all up for CO2).

 

[Enigma]

Strains will have an effect on yield, we all know this. No one is arguing that point, the horse is dead, stop beating it.

CO2 is a HUGE avantage, I'm talking growth you can actually see, if you've been witness to a CO2 op then you would know.

You have to take into account all factors. If the ambient temperature is low enough to run CO2 burners then it would actually be cheaper to use CO2 in a sealed system.

Don't use stoner logic here, use common sense.

 

[doz]

Strains will have an effect on yield, we all know this. No one is arguing that point, the horse is dead, stop beating it.

CO2 is a HUGE avantage, I'm talking growth you can actually see, if you've been witness to a CO2 op then you would know.

You have to take into account all factors. If the ambient temperature is low enough to run CO2 burners then it would actually be cheaper to use CO2 in a sealed system.

Don't use stoner logic here, use common sense.

Trust me, no stoner logic.....

And lets be realistic since we are not using "stoner logic". 20% would be about average, or slightly above, for yield increase with CO2. This is also dependent upon many other factors, the most of which is light. But like I said, you also have increased costs to run it properly. Just adding a little co2 does not increase yields that much. To get strong results, you must do it properly w/ measurements taken (which means more equipment to monitor things). You also need to setup your room around a CO2 grow. For most people, it is just not worth the hassle. And unless you are growing in the cold of Winter, you probably wont have low enough ambient temps to justify burners. Not only that, burners will not increase your yield by 20%+. Common sense will tell you all of that

Most people do not run a sealed system due to temps. It takes a bit more A/C to run a sealed system and a dehu setup as well. Unless you are putting out consistent yields with CO2 to justify all that extra cost, its not worth it to most. Does CO2 work? Of course it does, we all know this..... But for the majority of growers, its not worth the hassle. I've thought about it but for me, it does not fit my grow. I am content with pulling a pound per month and my setup is very efficient (no extra A/C usage to speak of as the A/C goes no matter what, I work off the house A/C which doesnt quit in the summer days and no need for dehumidification).

 

[Enigma]

You're conceding my point, although your logic is off.

Cooler climates will need added heat, using heaters would be a waste of effort as CO2 burners would add heat and CO2. This would bring the temperatures up to fully utilize the CO2, add a bit of humidity to allow the stomata to stay open along with a beefier lighting system and an above "normal" nutrient concentration.

Again, CO2 brings growth you can actually see. You can watch the "grass" grow, so to speak.

In order to use CO2 the rest of your system has to be setup to accommodate it. If you're not getting drastically improved results something is wrong in the setup you are looking at.