LECA vs Lava rock - salts accumulation

[DavTom]

Thanks again Ray. Indeed, Kelpak seems quite popular here in the NL. I will try to find an equivalent for Quantum. If you are interested I will share it here in this post if I managed to find something...

One more question Ray.

Yesterday I went to bed late to read all the articles in your website. I have fair experience in planted aquariums (let's call them underwater gardens as my focus are the plants and not the fish; fish in comparison to plants are piece-of-cake to grow; actually they pose an hard-limit on the level of CO2 I can push in the aquarium and by doing so they make growing stunning plants more complex.)

Since about a year I am having great results applying my aquarium knowledge to just a few simple Phals, which I managed to get in continues blooming for a year long, and still going on, though to a lesser extent. I think it is because I have reduced a bit light experimenting, now I am back with the same light conditions.

All what I read in your website make sense to me, especially many things I was not yet aware of...(thanks for that!) with one single exception about the light requirements chapter.

Light Level Recommendations › First Rays LLC

As you can imagine, also in aquariums light is a key-factor, maybe even more because under water it is more difficult to achieve a nice equilibrium. And the higher the light the faster things can get wrong... So I have read tons of articles and forums about light requirements...

I fully understand the logic in that light chapter. What puzzle me is that I have never seen it mentioned anywhere that the light requirements (lux or better PAR, or whatever they are expressed by) of plants are those at the peak intensity of the sun. Meaning that if we apply steadily them for the full light period, we provide twice as much light energy than what plants do need. Since I believe that you are right as you must have applied that with your orchids, how is it possible that this remains quite under the carpet instead of making headlines for all the light requirements discussion?

Dav

[Ray]

Originally Posted by DavTom

What puzzle me is that I have never seen it mentioned anywhere that the light requirements (lux or better PAR, or whatever they are expressed by) of plants are those at the peak intensity of the sun. Meaning that if we apply steadily them for the full light period, we provide twice as much light energy than what plants do need. Since I believe that you are right as you must have applied that with your orchids, how is it possible that this remains quite under the carpet instead of making headlines for all the light requirements discussion?

Dav

I **think** it originated from the original culture sheets issued by the American Orchid Society. They have been around a l-o-n-g time, and were actually originally typed/mimeographed and passed on by hand. (I scanned them for the AOS, so they could make them electronically available in the late 80's or thereabout.)

When they were first written, growing under artificial light was rare, so the only recommendations they had to go on were peak daytime intensities. I suspect that after that, artificial lighting was mostly supplemental, and not the total source - that has occurred much more recently.

Why nobody translated that "peak value" to continuous is anybody's guess.

[DavTom]

Thank you, got it now! Case closed.

I have purchased the LECA, which is now soaking with Ca(NO3)2 and MgSO4. Tomorrow I will repot 5 small orchids I am growing since a couple of weeks in a small stealth grow space (it is a very small cupboard: 1 feet W; 3 feet L and 3 feet H).

I will reduce significantly the K concentration in my current feralization solution that I make from my aquarium dry salts, which is now very high in potassium (about 200 ppm). Not sure though if I will go as low in K as the K-Lite ;-)

I cant wait to see the results...

Thanks for all your help so far and for your website.

[Fuerte Rav]

Originally Posted by Ray

Can’t help with quantum, but KelpMax is the US name for Kelpak, which you should be able to purchase locally.

Y’all will get a chuckle out of this:

When I first discovered Kelpak and got samples (in 2010), I was so impressed with it that I thought other growers would be as well, so inquired about wholesale purchasing for resale, and was told I could not resell it. After a long negotiation, the producer relented, but only if I sold it under my own trade name - hence KelpMax.

In recent discussions about the availability of 1L bottles (instead of me having to repackage them), they commented that they would prefer if I sold it as Kelpak.

It appears that it will be less expensive for me to acquire the product in their 1L bottles than the current situation of me getting large jugs, buying bottles and labels and repackaging them myself, so once we get the supply chain set up (1st or 2nd quarter of next year, hopefully), I’m hoping to offer it at a lower price.

I hope you can get it shipped to the US cheaper than I can get it in Europe! I'm not complaining - I'm so pleased to be able to get it - but it costs the same again for postage as it does for the 1L bottle. The postage doesn't reduce with quantity - every bottle is charged the same for postage, so 15€ for bottle and 15€ for postage. Don't know how that compares with your current pricing.

[DavTom]

Originally Posted by Fuerte Rav

I hope you can get it shipped to the US cheaper than I can get it in Europe! I'm not complaining - I'm so pleased to be able to get it - but it costs the same again for postage as it does for the 1L bottle. The postage doesn't reduce with quantity - every bottle is charged the same for postage, so 15€ for bottle and 15€ for postage. Don't know how that compares with your current pricing.

Hi, thanks for the info. I am in Europe too (NL).

Dav