Uncle Ben's Gardening Tweeks and Pointers
- Thread starter Uncle Ben
- Start date
riddleme
Well-Known Member
perhaps I should put some on my burger instead of catsup?
are you aware of what is needed to utilize the extra CO2? If you are lacking something else CO2 wont help. I'd say the last thing I'd do is add CO2. I'd first dial in my lights, temps, humidity, etc...
But if you want to simply believe that CO2 improves everything, all the feedback in the world probably wont change your belief.
First of all, how are you measuring ppm? If you are using a EC meter to derive PPM, do you know what the conversion factor is?
When I use salt nutes I usually am feeding about 1500 PPM (conversion = .7) by the time I flower.
My preferred metric is EC as it is nonambigous.
I start my babies at a low EC of about .5, then move up to about 2.0 by the time I am flowering. I need to learn how to read my plants because I give all strains the same mix...
its me
Member
ya everything for the most part is done, and the co2 is the last thing im adding to the grow. and it is proven by numerous sorces that co2 is better for these plants i can tell a diff in jus the past week then ALL my other grows. you make it sound silly to use it and ur wrong from all these other sources. tell em UB dont mean to be a dick if it sounds that way im sure i might be missin somethin that you know that i dont...... but pritty sure im ok 4 now thanks for the feedback.
What exactly did I say that makes you think I don't value CO2? If you understood that from my post I must have not been clear because that was not my intention at all. It seems that I am not doing a good job of communicating. CO2 is one of the necessary things to grow plants, it is a must. The plant will not grow at all with out CO2.
What was the PPM of CO2 for your previous grows and what was it for the grow you say is better?
How did you measure the difference in crops? And what exactly was the difference?
More importantly did *anything* at all change at the time you saw the improvements. Just because you can correlate adding CO2 to a better harvest doesn't mean the CO2 caused it. If you are like most people and don't have a climate controlled sealed room then the outside weather can have an impact on things. There are so many factors that it would actually take a great deal of effort to measure exactly how much the CO2 helped.
I was working with some guys a few months ago who spent some of our budget on CO2. We had no way to measure it and the room was far from sealed. I week into the grow they where sure they saw the CO2 working. I argued that there was no way to measure anything and now we can't afford to fix our AC which was to address the measured temps that were hight...
Being that the money is already spent, it is a sunk cost. Making decisions considering sunk costs is bad business. It leads to projects that are doomed being finished because they already spent money.
There are many people who do things for a living, doesn't make them experts just professionals, there is a difference. I work with engineers and scientists at my job. All are professionals, but some are frankly idiots and some are exceptionally good at what they do. I hope this doesn't come across as offensive. I am not trying to be offensive I just don't know how to explain things without being seen as offensive sometimes... Maybe I should start using smilies to express myself better in forums.
Can you refer me to some sources for these claims? I've never heard this before and am open to learning more. I'm just pretty sure that is not how it works, but I've been wrong before and have so many of my ideas changed in the last couple days of reading this thread I realize I have a lot to learn and unlearn.
EdGreyfox
Well-Known Member
Jifoo,
Yes, it's a sunk cost in that it is already spent, but it is not a sunk cost in that it is still useable for the plans I had going anyway. This isn't the same as going ahead and completing a building or other commercial project that is no longer needed or that can't be used/sold profitably. This is the equivalent of a pizza place deciding that they are going to use up all their existing cans of sauce before they start buying a slightly different sauce from a less expensive supplier. The nutes I have will still do the job (plenty of people on these boards swear by FF, as do a lot of the folks I know locally), so there really isn't enough of a downside to using them up to make your analogy accurate. Now, if they had NPK values that were totally wrong or were harming my plants in some other way I'd agree, but that's not the case.
As for the whole expert/professional thing, I don't take any exception (this time), but when it comes to cost accounting I'm both. That's what I specialize in, which is one of the reasons you see my call BS so often in other threads when people start talking about production costs and what MMJ should sell for. I freely admit I've still got a lot to learn about growing MMJ, but when it comes to the costs involved I can tell you to the penny what my fixed costs are, and can give you an estimate on my variables that I would be willing to bet will fall within 2% of what they actually end up at. If anyone wants, I'll be happy to help them set up their own system to keep track of costs and you can decide for yourselves whether I know what I'm doing (you'll need to have microsoft office with excel though). Just don't ask me about income taxes- I avoid that kind of work like the plague.
Yes, it's a sunk cost in that it is already spent, but it is not a sunk cost in that it is still useable for the plans I had going anyway. This isn't the same as going ahead and completing a building or other commercial project that is no longer needed or that can't be used/sold profitably. This is the equivalent of a pizza place deciding that they are going to use up all their existing cans of sauce before they start buying a slightly different sauce from a less expensive supplier. The nutes I have will still do the job (plenty of people on these boards swear by FF, as do a lot of the folks I know locally), so there really isn't enough of a downside to using them up to make your analogy accurate. Now, if they had NPK values that were totally wrong or were harming my plants in some other way I'd agree, but that's not the case.
As for the whole expert/professional thing, I don't take any exception (this time), but when it comes to cost accounting I'm both. That's what I specialize in, which is one of the reasons you see my call BS so often in other threads when people start talking about production costs and what MMJ should sell for. I freely admit I've still got a lot to learn about growing MMJ, but when it comes to the costs involved I can tell you to the penny what my fixed costs are, and can give you an estimate on my variables that I would be willing to bet will fall within 2% of what they actually end up at. If anyone wants, I'll be happy to help them set up their own system to keep track of costs and you can decide for yourselves whether I know what I'm doing (you'll need to have microsoft office with excel though). Just don't ask me about income taxes- I avoid that kind of work like the plague.
DaveCoulier
Well-Known Member
Not a tweak or a pointer, but if you guys want to watch cool videos about plants, google video The Private Life of Plants. You should be able to find all 6 episodes. Im watching the first one right now. Some great time lapse videos of plants growing. The bramble one is pretty neat.
if you can use the asset or not doesn't affect it being a sunk cost
this explains my side better:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunk_costs
I'm not trying to say I'm right just because it says so in this link, I happen to subscribe to this school, that is all. Just wanted to give another side.
I'm just saying I wouldn't worry about not spending an additional $8 (or what ever the amount is) to have something more desirable.
Forget the analogy, if I spent a large amount of money (100's of dollars) on nutrients then came to think that a $8 box of cheaper nutes would help me, I'd through the other stuff out.
We may just have different opinions.
Again, not to attack credibility, but if someone (anyone, not even me or you) says they are good, that has no value to me until I see what they have done and get references. There are many out there (I'm not saying you are one) who consider themselves experts but are not at all and they are not the best judges of that because they are possible biased.
Two months ago, I would have said I am great at pruning... I really am doubting that now. I feel bad that I gave people advise that maybe made it harder for them. I was sure I was an expert, but now I am realizing how far I have to go.
Hey UB,
I assume you like to read...
Check this out: http://www.coopext.colostate.edu/4DMG/Plants/guidline.htm
Do you see any thing that doesn't seem helpful or that you would ignore?
I assume you like to read...
Check this out: http://www.coopext.colostate.edu/4DMG/Plants/guidline.htm
Do you see any thing that doesn't seem helpful or that you would ignore?
DaveCoulier
Well-Known Member
I checked out that site, and here is whats wrong.
Here is whats wrong:
If your planter does not have drainage holes in the bottom, be sure to provide for a drainage layer of stones or other non-degradable material in which excess water can collect away from the root zone and can be gradually reabsorbed. Plants grown in closed containers may not need watering as frequently.
Read this:
http://www.puyallup.wsu.edu/~Linda%20Chalker-Scott/Horticultural%20Myths_files/Myths/Container%20drainage.pdf
Similarly, a finger submerged an inch or so into the container soil should reveal a general sense of soil moisture. Or better yet, use a moisture meter. This is a foolproof, inexpensive device available at most nurseries. It will measure the soil as "wet", "moist" or "dry". For large container plants, a meter is almost essential.
The finger test is not reliable. The top of the soil can be moist, but the pot light, and the plant in need of water. I learned this just yesterday. A cooler environment at that level due to the shade of the canopy reduces evaporation and fewer roots in the top of the soil absorbing water lead to false "readings".
Nothing else seemed to stand out as wrong after that stuff.
EdGreyFox, good idea
UB,
What is your take on capillary mats? I grow in smart pots (felt pots for air pruning) that sit on a grid that rests on bricks to keep them in the air. On top of the grid (it is a metal grid that has holes about 4''x4'') I have a capillary mat to help even out the moisture. There can still be run off because the mat I use is just some microfiber type stuff they use to make 'super-absorbent' towels.
here is a diagram:
smart pots U U U
grid - - - - - - -
bricks XXXXXXX
pan |-------------|
floor __________
I was reading this:
http://www.onhort.com/Grower-101-When-Water-Becomes-an-Issue-article8793
but I like that my mat will allow run off after the mat is saturated, it wont pool up
I am going to read the doc you sent me. I don't think the article was saying to add gravel to improve drainage but rather there is no drainage and the rocks just keep the roots out of standing water. This reminds me of the way a guy named Soma grows.
see: http://www.somaseeds.nl/magazine_articles/GrowingwithGuano.html
or for a slightly modified version:
http://www.marijuanagrowing.eu/soma-style-growing-modified-t20384.html
;
UB,
What is your take on capillary mats? I grow in smart pots (felt pots for air pruning) that sit on a grid that rests on bricks to keep them in the air. On top of the grid (it is a metal grid that has holes about 4''x4'') I have a capillary mat to help even out the moisture. There can still be run off because the mat I use is just some microfiber type stuff they use to make 'super-absorbent' towels.
here is a diagram:
smart pots U U U
grid - - - - - - -
bricks XXXXXXX
pan |-------------|
floor __________
I was reading this:
http://www.onhort.com/Grower-101-When-Water-Becomes-an-Issue-article8793
but I like that my mat will allow run off after the mat is saturated, it wont pool up
I am going to read the doc you sent me. I don't think the article was saying to add gravel to improve drainage but rather there is no drainage and the rocks just keep the roots out of standing water. This reminds me of the way a guy named Soma grows.
see: http://www.somaseeds.nl/magazine_articles/GrowingwithGuano.html
or for a slightly modified version:
http://www.marijuanagrowing.eu/soma-style-growing-modified-t20384.html
;
Interesting article. I've always seed that stuff in the bottom of a pots as wasted space. Like many things in the universe, this seems counter-intuitive. Sure glad people are apply the scientific method instead of assuming stuff that appears obvious.
I never did this, but plan to tell my parents, they do it religiously. The irony of it gets me.
I never did this, but plan to tell my parents, they do it religiously. The irony of it gets me.
DaveCoulier
Well-Known Member
Yeah the site you linked didn't specifically mean place rocks or gravel there to aid drainage, but its still bad info. All you end up doing is raising your Perched Water Table in the pots, and thus decreasing the available "comfort space" for roots, as well as less soil they can feed from.
Its nice to see a newbie here not looking for spoon fed info. You are actually *gasp* researching first and then asking questions! Thats something I think we can all appreciate around here.
I like the use of Shamwows as a capillary mat. I looked into them once since a place near me sells the real mats, but I dont think they were cheap, nor are they really necessary. If you're ever in the spot you need to water from the bottom you've either waited too long to water, or your one of those tards who think the medium needs to completely dry out between waterings.
I don't think molasses is intended to be a plant nutrient but rather a sugar source for bacteria in the soil. Many people brew teas that multiple bacteria. They then water with this tea. Once the soil has been inoculated in this way you can continue to feed the bacteria with molasses.
If you want to learn more about these ideas look into bio-dynamic farming. There is some crazy shit there. Like using the moon cycles to tell you when to plant, etc. I'm not saying crazy as a bad thing or good thing, just seems strange. I'd like to do some experiments with bio-dynamic principals.
There is a saying in organics that goes "feed the soil not the plant"
some people say that using salt nutes will dry out the bacteria and don't use salts but rather fertilize with things like compost, worm crap, bat crap, etc.