How do I raise my Alk levels

[Chris Jury]

Carlo and Boomer,

May I suggest that it may be best for the two of you not to respond to what the other has typed anymore. Right, wrong, or otherwise about whatever issue you are posting about, your posts aren't being effective at this point. The forum readers will not hear your comments, however correct they may be, simply because of the mood this thread has taken.

Chris

 

[Phyl]

Amen.



The end.

 

[Carlo]

Something for Chris to comment on that I'm right on this issue.

Something for Chris to comment on that I'm right on this issue.

Carlo states in his lat post
Based on the total volume (non-baked versus baked) the alkalinity affect will be the same (if total volume is dosed) but the direct pH change at dosing time will be different. This is what I was saying in the first place when you tried to correct me. The tank will reach equilibrium in time and the pH will adjust back to "normal".

This is my reply but to you
No it will not be the same Alk. Although the pH will adjust in time to pCO2 the pH may be higher and the Allk will be higher. If you take 100 L of seawater with a Alk 2.00 meq / l and add 4.2 grams of BS the Alk will rise to 2.5 meq/ l.. If you do the same with Soda Ash it will only take 2.6 grams to reach the same Alk of 2.5

If go by vol, and Carlo said vol., so in teaspoons, and with each teaspoon equal by vol. and raise the Alk with 1 teaspoon of BS it will raise the Alk to 2.6 meq / l and 1 teaspoon of SA will rise it to. 2.9 meq / l. How is that the same Carlo. Even if the pH shifts in either direction, for the sake of argument, the ratios at that pH the CO2:HCO3-:CO3 will be the same but the Alk will be higher.

You didn't read what I wrote. TOTAL VOLUME. Here's an example. If you start with a pound of baking soda and put it in the oven for an hour and end up with 1/2 pound (wild guess) these two (started at same amount) will have the same affect on alkalinity.

That is why Randy's article made sense in the context of how he used those terms.

Non of the rest of the answer mattered if you didn't catch that.

I'm sure a "welcome, glad to see you here" message did p*ss you off.

Since you brought it up. That did not at all, it was your belittling of the members and this forum right off the bat, which was not called for or needed. I have never seen anyone with a PM like that. Why not go ahead and post the whole PM ? They can judge for themselves. How's that. ?

You never got a welcome message before? I didn't belittle you in the message at all. Feel free to post exactly what I sent and also your response.

Buch-Park
If it makes no sense, then why did you bring it up? What you posted didn't make sense at all. I don't have him on a wild goose chase. You're stating things as fact but they are completely wrong and not even applicable to the situation..............I clearly got the reference to Dick & Jane Boomer. You were trying to layout a "concept" model. But the concept model you gave was wrong as well as most of the rest of the post in general that was supposed to take me to the next level.

Are you for real? You brought up the Bush Park equasions to cloud the issue of being wrong and was trying to get out of a corner. I did not bring them up. I have mentioned them in response to your posts. Nothing more.

For the 10th time or more in this thread, form when you first brought it up pH = CO2 x Alk. I said it was a meaningless, GET CARLO meaningless equation. Where did I say it was fact Carlo please point that out. Many times in these last posts you have brought this up a number of times. When will you GET IT Carlo. I was not trying to lay out a concept model. It was not meant to be a working model, I never said it was, I stated it was useless when you asked, what more can I say and how many time do I have to repeat myself. It is quite obvious it is not real, it is quite obvious I know what the real working models are but you continue to rant about it. I could have typed in pH = CO2 + Ak, also a useless equation. You will more than likely rant about it some more. You are beating dead horse.

This is the first time I recall you saying that to ME. If you said it earlier and I kept pushing you on the same thing then I apologize. I still don't get the reason for the whole first post you made however as it only muddied up things and was far worse then what I said which wasn't trying to be a chemistry level or take anyone to the "next level".
I agree it's a dead horse. Let's let the dead horse lie in peace.

Your next level as you said was this and my posts


Chris
Granted to a point but that later can be days if it is SA, as it also raises the Alk higher than BS ( a least the way most do it by not looking a weight or Mol values. Even if we go by mol values there is a difference ( see below). A higher Alk will lower the effect of pH drop with CO2 addition or increase ( do not confuse this with "CO2 has no effect on Alk or vise versa"). This is why we try to tell people to stay away from straight SA unless there is both a low pH and Alk issue. So, it in real terms, it does make a difference which one is added.

We did cover this and both agreed on the outcome of the SA addition "down the road" be it 12 hours or 5 days.

I'm going to post a pretty detailed couple of posts in a few minutes that covers what happens with the addition of cabonates, bicarbonets and kalk. It's not my wording. I got this from Both Randy and jdieck (RC). It's the clearest explanation I've ever seen or read so I figured I post it here since it goes with the topic so well.

Carlo

 

[billyr98]

wow that was a quick amen....

 

[Chris Jury]

Over the last week or so my ALK levels have tested pretty low. I am trying to find out how to raise them. Today it tested at 5.8 DKH (2.06 MEQ/L) and has tested around that value lately. I use the Salifert test kit and have been told by Salifert that there are no problems with the kit tht I have (theyve tested it). Here are my test results taken today at 8 PM (3 hours after lights came on).
Temp = 77.9
CA = 410 PPM
ALK = 5.8 DKH, 2.06 MEQ/L
PO4 = 0.03 PPM
MG = 1250
PH = 8.4
Salinity = 1.024
Nitrate, Nitrite and Ammo = 0

I've started dosing my system last week using the two part system, Anhydrous CAC12 and Arm & Hammer Baking Soda. Reading the Chemistry calculator on Reef Central it states in order to raise my CA an ALK levels to 420 and 2.9 respectively I need to add the following:

2.9 tsp of the calcium solution &
7.9 tsp of the baking soda solution

More information:
120 gallong tank, 40 gallon sump
Approximately 200 #'s of Live Rock
Approximately 250 #'s of Sand

1. If I add the 7.9 tsp of the baking soda solution will this raise my Alk levels?
2. If yes to question 1, can I add all at same time or at what dosage?
3. What amounts of both solutions should I add to maintain adequate levels - I assume I should find out the amount of CA & ALK decreases each day before that determination can be made or am I wrong?

Hope I added all info needed. I'll test again tomorrow.

This is the original post in this thread. So as to maintain some semblance of usefulness, and so as to get toward answering this person's questions I'd like to respond just to this original post.

That all sounds about right. You can add the baking soda all at once. It will lower the pH from 8.4 to ~ 8.3 assuming all your calculations were done correctly. By this I mean that you correctly calculated your water volume and therefore that amount of baking soda will raise the alkalinity by the calculated amount. If it raises the alkalinty more than that the pH will fall more, though even at double the desired change you're still only drop your pH from 8.4 to ~ 8.2, which is fine IMO.

To maintain your calcium and alkalinity I'd closely follow Randy's recipes for making up stock solutions. Ideally you'd be able to accurately weigh out your CaCl2 and NaHCO3. You want to end up with a 1:2 molar calcium:alkalinity ratio since that is the ratio in which they are used. Unfortunately measuring by volume is not very accurate. To really be accurate you need a mass measurment. Please do understand that a 1:2 ratio here is a MOLAR ratio, not a mass ratio. Calcium chloride usually comes as calcium chloride dihydrate (CaCl2*2H2O). The mass of the whole thing in grams is equal to 1 mole. Sodium bicarbonate comes as just that (NaHCO3). The mass of this in grams is equal to 1 mol. You can calculate the mass of 1 mole of either of these (or anything) by adding up the formula weight for all the elements in the compound (e.g., 1 calcium = 40.1, 2chloride = 2x35.5 = 71, 2H2 = 4x1 = 4, 2O = 2x16 = 32).

Once you have balanced stock solutions you just need to keep track of how fast calcium and alkalinity are getting eaten up and dose appropriately. Note: there is more than 4x as much calcium in sea water as alkalinity and calcium gets used at 1/2 the rate of alkalinity. A big change in alkalinity causes a small change in calcium. Even if it seems like alkalinity is dropping while calcium is pretty stable, they are both dropping. This drop is just a lot easier to measure with alkalinity than calcium.

cj

 

[Chris Jury]

And to clarify, when I talk about the addition of baking soda lowering pH, this will be the effect on pH immediately after the baking soda is added. Given enough time eventually CO2 will be lost from the water (either to the atmosphere or to photosynthesis) and the pH ultimately will be higher than when it started. You will end up with higher alkalinity AND higher TCO2 in your water, but the ratio of alkalinity:TCO2 will be higher than it previously was, thus producing an increase in pH.

cj

 

[pgordemer]

I guess there are no ears connected to the keyboards anymore. :'(

 

[Carlo]

Carlo & Chris
You just claimed you are 100 % correct on all theses issue be it SST or chemistryso it seems Carlo

Just to be clear Chris didn't say you were wrong. That was my interpretation of the events. Chris only cleared up how things work.

much cut

Boomer, I don't want to argue with you. I really don't. Let me even go as far as to say I KNOW you understand this stuff but made a few comments in a different way then you were thinking. You made mistakes and then felt boxed in from my responses. Had you just said it upfront that you made a mistake we would still be on page one or two of the thread. Just keep in mind I can only comment on what you put down in the post not what you are thinking.

I also think you have forgotten what you previously said at times and contradicted yourself. That makes it very hard to form a response because your answer is on both sides of the coin so to speak.

Chris is talking about corals and not abitoic precip in a tank, so you're off. You claim I can't get the facts straight you can't either on many issues. You completely misread what he was saying. Why not ask him about abiotic preicp and see what he says if Omegas is meaningless. I also said in that post that some can go above the Omega value but others can not and that for some unknown reason some even below that level get biotic, so lets not be leaving out what I said. There fore one should not psuh them.
[/quote]
I have, and he has already posted a basic overview here. Please go back and read what he said again without trying to read into it. Then if you question it, ask him directly or maybe would could even have a nice friendly nonthreatening NEW topic on it and share information.
[/quote]


Chris explains that coral calcification isn't saturated at 360 ppm and that some studies have shown that some species aren't saturated until well above NSW levels and that none of them saturate at 360 ppm or thereabouts. Much of that was paraphased. This clearly indicates that calcium levels higher then NSW are better for our tanks which is a misconception you could get from Boomer's post.

I see you conveniently left out my remarks to Chris on this issue, Why is that.? From what he has posted was contrary to my remarks. At least I show a correction and thanked him for the article. I also said corals do not need anymore than 360 ppm to grow.

[/quote]
That is not the same thing. That's like saying I can run my tank at 70F and they can grow (well not as bad). Who would want to do that? The point I was making is that it was an issue you kept bringing up earlier and insisted that they don't need more then 360 ppm except for the lazy/buffer factor. You were actually pretty adamant about it when you were telling me what Randy meant instead of what he wrote. This is important because I felt it was the basis for Randy's keyword use of MAY that had come up so much and why I kept saying he very well might have intentionally used that word regardless of what your opinion of what he meant. Do you see what I'm getting at Boomer?

The first part of Chris's post basically said there are 4 species of inorganic carbon that occur in water, gave the types, told what they are collectively called (SIGMA CO2, or TCO2) and then mentioned "At sea water pH only a tiny portion of this occurs as CO2, however (< 1%)."

And I believe I brought up about the same, there is an exact ratio of of these at any given pH, even if the alk is low or high. CO2:HCO3-:CO2 and ratio does not equal concentration.

For each eq of HCO3- you add 1 eq of Alk and 1 eq of CO2. When it is CO3-- you also add one eq of CO2 but 2 eq of Alk.

This is a true statement it is not me just posting it. And you seem to be disputing it. Ask Chris

Chris already covered it quite nicely but it appears you're not getting it. You are not adding CO2 directly and the way some of the buffers work is actually the opposite of this. I'm going to post the working model for what happens when you add buffers and such in a few.

Yah I know we keep saying last post and it never seems to end. If you look at this entire thread Carlo we both have made a numbers of errors.

I won't comment except to say the air is getting friendlier.

Carlo

 

[Carlo]

This if from a combination of jdieck (RC) and Randy (RC) and is the best description of the process I have seen.

Lets start with the CO2:
CO2 is a gas at room temperature. When dissolved into water, the CO2 becomes hydrated to form carbonic acid (H2CO3). Although this hydration step takes a few seconds, and though that may seem fast, the actual dissolution of CO2 from the air into the water may take hours to days. This is important to understand why it takes time after a change is made to achieve new stability.

Once carbonic acid forms, it very quickly equilibrates with the other acids and bases in solution. It can, for example, lose one or two protons (H+). How many of one or how many of twos depends upon the pH and a variety of other factors. In seawater at pH 8.1, most of it (87 percent) will lose one proton to form bicarbonate, a small amount will lose two protons to form carbonate (13 percent), and a very small amount will remain as carbonic acid H2CO3 (<>1 percent). All of these forms, however, interconvert faster than the blink of an eye, so one cannot identify one as carbonate and one as bicarbonate for more than a tiny fraction of a second. All one can really say is that on average X percent is in the form of bicarbonate, and Y percent in the form of carbonate.

The formula linked above shows the various forms of CO2 in water. From left to right, CO2, carbonic acid, bicarbonate and carbonate.

Once stability has been achieved, carbon dioxide has a specific solubility in water as carbonic acid (H2CO3). during my explanation keep in mind that Regardless of pH, at a given salt concentration this carbonic acid concentration is always the same. All that determines the concentration of H2CO3 is the amount of CO2 in the air. This is important to understand that the system will always try to go back to this concentration as far as the CO2 in the air and salinity remain the same.

As the PH increases the above formula moves to the right meaning carbonate increases and bicarbonate decreases and viceversa and for this to happen protons (H+) will be either taken up or released.

When something happens that changes the balance between the different forms (species) of CO2, like adding a supplement or the amount of dissolved CO2 inn the water like photosynthesis which drops it or respiration that increases it there will be exchanges between the different species that may result in CO2 either being released or dissolved into the water.

The stable state between alkalinity, PH and CO2 is the following formula linked below:

where Ac is the carbonate alkalinity, pCO2 is the concentration CO2 in the air. KH is the Henry’s law constant for CO2 (which describes the solubility of CO2 in water from the air to form carbonic acid, H2CO3), K1 is the first dissociation constant for H2CO3 (describing the dissociation of H2CO3 to HCO3-), K2 is the second dissociation constant for H2CO3 (describing the dissociation of HCO3- to CO3--) and H+ is the number of protons. The higher the protons the lower the PH.

Note in the formula that all are constants except Ac, Pco2 and H+
So for a given constant amount of CO2 in the air higher protons (lower PH) will result in lower alkalinity and viceversa.
This can be seen in the following linked chart that shows using the equation the theoretical relationship between carbonate alkalinity and pH for seawater in equilibrium for preindustrial air (green; containing 278 ppm carbon dioxide), current air (blue; containing 350 ppm carbon dioxide) and possible future air (red; containing 700 ppm carbon dioxide)
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/ima...002/figure2.gif

So note that after adding alkalinity once equilibrium is achieved the end result will be higher PH (move along the blue line) unless you change the amount of CO2 in the air or TEMPORARILY alter the balance again by a supplement, photosynthesis or respiration. (moving horizontally switching between blue green or red lines. So for the PH to remain constant when changing alkalinity you need to move vertically changing the amount of CO2 in the water but as I described above this is temporary as the system will tend toward equilibrium eventually returning to the blue line.

Achieving equilibrium after the addition of a supplement like Kalk (Hydroxide), Baking soda (carbonate) or Washing Soda (carbonate) will always take two chemical reactions, the first one is almost immediate, the second one may take hours to days as it will imply exchanging CO2 between the water and surrounding air.

 

[Carlo]

Hydroxide (Kalk) Addition
For hydroxide addition (OH), the first thing that happens is that bicarbonate is converted into carbonate:

HCO3- + OH- to CO3--

and the small amount of carbonic acid present is converted into bicarbonate:

H2CO3 + OH- to HCO3- + H2O

In this situation, the tank is now deficient in H2CO3 (because the small equilibrium amount of H2CO3 normally present was partially converted to bicarbonate by the OH- addition), and the tank proceeds to absorb CO2 from the air, bringing the pH back down a bit by releasing protons (H+). There are many ways to show these reactions, but the net process is what I described at the beginning that involves CO2 from the air becoming carbonic acid, the carbonic acid deprotonating to bicarbonate, and some of the bicarbonate deprotonating to carbonate:

CO2 (atmosphere) + H2O to H2CO3

H2CO3 to HCO3- + H+

HCO3- to CO3-- + H+

Because these reactions release protons all serve to lower the pH. When equilibrium is reached, however, the pH has not dropped all of the way back to the point before the hydroxide was added, but is slightly elevated. When all is said and done, and the tank has fully equilibrated with the air, the hydroxide addition has caused the tank to experience an increase in bicarbonate and carbonate, and in pH.

So as you can see we did not added or removed CO2 with the supplement but we forced an unbalance in the amount of carbonic acid. By immediately converting it to bicarbonate the PH increased, then as the CO2 is drawn in over time the PH starts to drop back down.

Why does Kalk maintains a higher PH that the one usually achieved by the addition of alkalinity. Because the first reaction (converting the carbonic acid) is faster than it's recovery by drawing CO2 from the air if instead of one shot addition of Kalk we keep on adding it continuously then we do not let the system stabilize and force the system to maintain a lower level of carbonic acid than it would otherwise maintain if we let it reach equilibrium.

So although not chemically correct we could say that in this case we artificially maintain a system which is deficient in carbonic acid and dissolved CO2.

 

[Carlo]

Washing Soda or Baked baking soda (Carbonate) Addition
The case for carbonate addition is similar to that for hydroxide. In this situation, the pH rises because much of the carbonate combines with H+ to form bicarbonate. This obviously reduces the H+, which results in a higher pH:

H+ + CO3-- (added) to HCO3-

In this case, the net short-term effect is that carbonate and bicarbonate increase, and the pH rises. In the long term, the higher pH causes more CO2 to be pulled in from the air, as was the case with hydroxide additions. This limits the pH rise, and further increases the bicarbonate concentration. Still, the end effect is the same as hydroxide addition: the tank experiences an increase in bicarbonate and carbonate, and in pH.
Similarly if we keep a continuous addition we would have a system deficient on dissolved CO2 and carbonic acid.

 

[Carlo]

Baking Soda (Bicarbonate) Addition
The addition of bicarbonate as an alkalinity supplement is rather different. In this case, the bicarbonate partially dissociates into carbonate and H+, and the tank experiences an increase in bicarbonate and carbonate, and a drop in pH due to the increase in H+.:

HCO3- to H+ + CO3--

Consequently, the immediate effect on pH is for it to drop. The drop is small because not much of the bicarbonate dissociates at normal tank pH, but enough does to drive the pH a bit lower.

In the long term, however, the effect is different. Since a substantial amount of bicarbonate was added and the pH did not change much, the tank is now overloaded with bicarbonate with respect to what it would normally have in equilibrium with air. Some of the bicarbonate picks up a proton, becomes carbonic acid, and the pH rises as the CO2 is blown off to the atmosphere:

HCO3- + H+ to H2CO3 to CO2 + H2O

So the long-term effect of bicarbonate addition (as it is for any addition to carbonate alkalinity) is to raise pH even though the short-term effect was to lower it.
So as you can see, we did not really added CO2 per se but caused an increase in carbonic acid which in order to achieve equilibrium had to release it's CO2 back into the air.

 

[Carlo]

Effluent from a Calcium Reactor
The addition of calcium reactor effluent is similar to the addition of baking soda but with a double hit. The effluent is basically carbonic acid and bicarbonate (surprisingly in a properly set reactor very little or no dissolved CO2 contrary to the general belief) In this case, in addition to the bicarbonate partially dissociating into carbonate and H+, we have the combined effect of excess of carbonic acid. The immediate effect on pH is for it to drop more than it would with only the addition of bicarbonate.

The tank is now overloaded with bicarbonate and carbonic acid with respect to what it would normally have in equilibrium with air. Some of the bicarbonate picks up a proton, becomes carbonic acid, while the carbonic acid blows off the CO2 to the atmosphere the pH rises.

Again as we add effluent continuously we do not give the system a chance to achieve equilibrium thus forcing a system to maintain excess of carbonic acid and a continued lower PH level.

 

[Carlo]

So as you can clearly see in the processes above there is not such a thing as CO2 being added when adding baking soda. The addition of Baking Soda creates an excess of carbonic acid which will blow off CO2 to achieve equilibrium. What forces the PH to drop is the conversion of the bicarbonate to carbonate releasing protons (H+).

Everyone can clearly see this now, right? 8)

Anyway, regardless of the banter back and forth I hope the last few posts are of help to anyone try to grasp this.

Can we chill Boomer?

Carlo

 

[Chris Jury]

When you add any kind of inorganic carbon to water (assuming the pH isn't too high or too low) you will get all 4 species in solution. How much there is of each specie (relative proportion) depends on the pH. If you add baking soda (sodium bicarbonate) you will get CO2, H2CO3, HCO3-, and CO3-- from that CO2 almost as fast as it hits the water. If you add washing soda (sodium carbonate) you'll get the same 4 species, though in a different proportion. If you add CO2 gas you'll get all 4 species, but in a different proportion. Within the range that sea water occurs, you will get all 4 species no matter what form of inorganic carbon is added. The only thing that is different is proportion of each specie added.

The effluent is basically carbonic acid and bicarbonate (surprisingly in a properly set reactor very little or no dissolved CO2 contrary to the general belief) In this case, in addition to the bicarbonate partially dissociating into carbonate and H+, we have the combined effect of excess of carbonic acid

I'll preface by saying that this is detail that is probably not useful to the average hobbyist. However, I'm unsure of how Randy is lead to that conclusion. Since the rate of hydration of CO2 over to H2CO3 is very slow (half time of ~ 23 seconds) and the rate of dehydration of H2CO3 over to CO2 is very fast (half time of ~0.03 seconds) most of the carbon between these two species is as CO2. At standard salinity, temp, and pressure there are ~670 molecules of CO2 for every 1 molecule of H2CO3. Since we can't tell them apart by normal analytical means anyway, we usually just write one or the other to represent the sum of both, even though we know that almost all of the carbon here is as CO2. Even so, this is still < 1% of the total inorganic carbon in normal seawater, and not more than ~10 - 15% at the low pH of reactor effluent.

cj

 

[Carlo]

(surprisingly in a properly set reactor very little or no dissolved CO2 contrary to the general belief)

Yes lots of detail for sure.

This in regard to the actual CO2 being injected into the calcium reactor. He's saying surpisingly little of the injected CO2 is making it into the effluent if the reactor is setup properly.

Carlo

 

[Chris Jury]

Ok, that makes more sense, but it is worded poorly. A large portion of CO2 DOES in fact come out with the effluent. Actually, the pCO2 of most calcium reactor effluent is incredibly high--hundreds of times what's in the air. If it weren't the pH would shoot up an all the aragonite we just dissolved would precipitate right back out

 

[Carlo]

I say a number of people who run reactors and have low pH issues would agree with your assessment on the situation too.

I would have liked to have seen a better explanation on the reactor section. Leaves a little bit to be desired.

Carlo

 

[Boomer]

Carlo
You didn't read what I wrote. TOTAL VOLUME. Here's an example. If you start with a pound of baking soda and put it in the oven for an hour and end up with 1/2 pound (wild guess) these two (started at same amount) will have the same affect on alkalinity.
I never disagreed with what happens to BS in an oven and how it drives off CO2 or how much x lbs BS = y lbs of SA. My posts were all on what happens when it hits the water and said that is that one needs to worry about if you add the same amounts.
Based on the total volume (non-baked versus baked) the alkalinity affect will be the same (if total volume is dosed) but the direct pH change at dosing time will be different. This is what I was saying in the first place when you tried to correct me. The tank will reach equilibrium in time and the pH will adjust back to "normal".
I missed read this statement as you were adding it to water my fault. Where equal amounts of either will yield the same Alk,. Meaning if 1 tsp of BS is added and 1 tsp of SA is added you will get the same Alk. I can't find the post where I think you said that there is just to much of our crap to read through

If you add equal amount of either by weigh or vol SA, which is how people add it will raise the Alk more than BS. I just showed in my last post that they will not yield the same Alk. I used jd's calculator.

Here was the post 2 NaHCO3 -> Na2CO3 + H2O + CO2
***More or less baking will only alter the pH rise on addition to the aquarium"***
That must be a typo on Randy's part and not the first. **this part***what is he saying it will only alter the pH when added to the aquarium. That is the error, it will raise the Alk I just showed you in my last post using jd's calculator

pH= Alk x CO2
I said
"Meaning the actually equation has no real merit, it is a term often used ......Dick & Jane"
"I have explained this once already so don't' be making it an issue."
"Not at all any you know it for fact and are just unwilling to admit it. It has been explained ah about 3 or 4 times, so no need to repeat myself again."
And in my first post on this proves it is not real
There has to be , as in Dick & Jane terms pH = Alk x CO2. Example and to make it simple we will assume there is not B Alk.
pH = 8.3
Alk = 2.5 meq/ l
CO2 = 0.41 ppm
pH = 8.3
Alk = 3.0 meq/ l
CO2 = 0.50 ppm
pH = 8.3
Alk = 4 meq/ l
CO2 = 0.66 ppm
pH = CO2 x Alk
pH = 4 x .66 = 2.56 pH..So how could it be real Carlo? It is obvious it is not real
I also explained to Chris it was not real and said it can't work. And you now claim you just saw it now. Give me a break you have been ranting on it on almost all your posts and each time I have said how many times do I need to explain it. You are making a mountain out of a mole hill, to try and disprove something I have said is not a true equation repeatedly .
also
Of course it makes no sense that is why I called it Dick & Jane, as most don't want me to elaborate on it. In short if you know the Alk and CO2 you can calculate the pH. It is a function of, CA, Salinity, temp., pK1 and pK2. I could have said pH = CO2 + Alk or pH = CO2/ Alk. It is obvious you can't get pH from these. Carlo has you on a wild goose chase for nothing and I'm sorry for it. I have many posts on the CO2 carbonate system on RC on the chem forum and elsewhere. So sorry you were dragged in to this.







CHRIS

I would like Chris to answer this ONLY So try to chill out on it Carlo

Chris already covered it quite nicely but it appears you're not getting it. You are not adding CO2 directly and the way

Where did I say direct addition, it is indirect ? I said upon the addition of a buffer, such as HCO3-, there will be an addition of CO2. If you add such a buffer the CO2 will go up. And Chris has stated if you add baking soda (sodium bicarbonate) you will get CO2, H2CO3, HCO3-, and CO3-- from that CO2 almost as fast as it hits the water
If the pH is 8.3, alk 2.25 and you add a buffer to raise the Alk up to 2.5 there is an increase in CO2 if the pH is the same. If you go back and read what Chris just said he said upon the addition of HCO3- there will be pH drop due to CO2, so that is an addition of of CO2.

So as you can clearly see in the processes above there is not such a thing as CO2 being added when adding baking soda.

If you have a
pH = 8.1
Alk = 1.5
CO2 = .437 ppm
and add a buffer that yields a pH and alk of

pH = 8.3
Alk = 4 meq / l
CO2 = .667 ppm pHnnbs

Please show me how that is incorrect. ? These are from CO2 equations for seawater. If these were two different tanks that is what the CO2 would be in each. Are you in disagreement here ? The tank with the higher Alk and high pH has more CO2.Are you in disagreement here ? The balance between the Alk and CO2 dictate the pH. Also from Randy he has stated that in seawater most of the CO2 is as free CO2 and and very little if any H2CO3.

And yes I have chilled out we all need to get chilled out.

 

[mfisher2112]

Call me crazy, but did anyone actually HELP this poor guy with his tank problem?

I think it's time to (I know, not the popular option) lock this thing down. It's never going to end.

And quite frankly, I'd like to see the poor guy get his tank under control more than I would like to see which one of these guys can piss further into the perverbial wind without getting wet.

We've done this member a great disservice by allowing his question to become a soap box contest for egos.

I for one am embarassed. And you guys should be too.

Chase, you have my apologies that this even ocurred at a time when you were trying to get help with your tank. If I knew how to help you, I would do it myself.