Evening Ode,
You made a lot of interesting points about instrumentation.
>>But using conductivity to get PPM isn't exactly a valid way to do these
things anyhow.
Seems this point has been made before, by you and others.
It's just better than not being able to afford to do it right.
Without a federal grant, it is not economically feasible for most of us
to implement this instrumentation, is that what you are saying?
It's better to do the job relatively badly than not at all, I suppose.
Only one small question.
Are there any steps between this low cost, ineffective attempt and the
high dollar lab methods?
No matter how hard anyone tries, EC and ppm are not the same, and it is
only a simulation. In some cases, it is not even that when dealing with
nutrients.
We have had this same discussion thousands of time relative to plant
nutrients.
Some people bet the crop on EC. While EC is important, I prefer to
calculate the ppm based on weight of nutrients added to a specific volume
of water. With recirculating systems, it will be changed in 24 hours anyway.
With a drip and drain to waste, a constant ppm can be
maintained. Seems the environment people think we will destroy the earth
by wasting a nutrient solution so weak that my dog drinks it.
And I have too. It tastes lightly salty. Dogs seem to like salty foods
almost as much as humans.
Possibly the rain is as bad on the earth as a well balanced nutrient
solution. When every grass, weed, and tree, grows like crazy from the
waste solution, how can it be so bad?
Wayne
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.776 / Virus Database: 523 - Release Date: 10/12/2004
