Forums36
Topics40,902
Posts557,134
Members18,452
|
Most Online3,612 Jan 10th, 2023
|
|
11 members (Boondoggle, Bigtrh24, Freg, Sunil, FishinRod, Theo Gallus, jpsdad, Bill Cody, Augie, Jason D, PRCS),
955
guests, and
206
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 5
|
OP
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 5 |
I have a question that I can’t find an answer too. I decided that you guys would be the best source for information. This question is more academic in nature and maybe some of the science behind my thought process is flawed.
I am asking about marginal trout water, lakes and ponds, that have adequate depth to provide cold climate but become devoid of oxygen at that depth during summer. If you were to aerate the water with a diffuser or bubbler you disrupt the thermocline and bring warm water down to the depths and defeat the purpose of creating good trout habitat. I know you can elevate the diffusers to try and leave some undisturbed cold water or only run them at night to minimize thermal problems. I understand that these oxygen devoid zone are occurring because light is not reaching to these depths and photosynthesis is not able to occur, and that bacteria are respiring using up any oxygen that was there. What would happen if you created a bunch of grow lamps in a water proof glass casing, and they were vacuum insulated to minimize heat transfer, and submerged them to the bottom of your marginal lake and had them running off of solar power 24/7 during the summer? Would these lights be able to support enough plant life or phytoplankton at depth to oxygenate enough water to provide safe summer refuge for holdover trout? What they give off too much heat to be useful? Thanks for any and all responses. I think that this could work and I think it would be a reasonable solution to low oxygen at depth. Thanks again, Oliver
Last edited by oliver10; 05/02/14 11:08 AM.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 20,043 Likes: 1
Hall of Fame Lunker
|
Hall of Fame Lunker
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 20,043 Likes: 1 |
I love your thinking out of the box! I'll have to think about this one for a while.
Bill Cody is our resident phytoplankton expert among other things so I'd value his input.
Bill?
If pigs could fly bacon would be harder to come by and there would be a lot of damaged trees.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 5
|
OP
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 5 |
I have been pondering this on my own for quite a while and I can't find any "good" answers. With new lighting tech and solar tech an idea like this might work and be affordable. Ten years ago it would have been way to expensive.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 20,043 Likes: 1
Hall of Fame Lunker
|
Hall of Fame Lunker
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 20,043 Likes: 1 |
And keep in mind it takes someone to think out of the box to come up with something like this so it's no surprise you aren't getting any answers. Most people including some scientists don't go out of their comfort range when it comes to ideas.
One negative I see is how far will the light will carry in the water and how many lights you would need to to make difference? It's also possible you could get phytoplankton going well in a small area but would be overwhelmed by anoxic water that comes in via natural infiltration. Another negative would be how long the lights stay clean enough to diffuser optimum amounts of light. Films on objects develop quickly in the water. Just a few thoughts of course and by no means meant to deride your idea.
It's probably something that has to be done to determine it's feasibility and effectiveness. At first in a small pond and with frequent data from an oxygen meter. Probably off a pier or with remote sensors.
Last edited by Cecil Baird1; 05/02/14 12:05 PM.
If pigs could fly bacon would be harder to come by and there would be a lot of damaged trees.
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 5
|
OP
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 5 |
Well you could just get high gage fiberoptic cable and run it to the depth. Not sure if it would be enough light
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 5
|
OP
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 5 |
Another negative would be how long the lights stay clean enough to diffuser optimum amounts of light. Films on objects develop quickly in the water. This would be a problem. However if most lake only have 4-6 weeks of trouble time July to late August. Cleaning them a few times might not be such a huge deal.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,930 Likes: 2
|
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,930 Likes: 2 |
Goofing off is a slang term for engaging in recreation or an idle pastime while obligations of work or society are neglected........... Wikipedia
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 5
|
OP
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 5 |
Wow. That is amazing thanks
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 15,112 Likes: 478
Moderator Ambassador Field Correspondent Lunker
|
Moderator Ambassador Field Correspondent Lunker
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 15,112 Likes: 478 |
If you have ever seen the inside of an algae culture incubator, you will realize you probably cannot create enough light and bright enough to grow algae in the hypolimnion. Even nature (sun) does not have enough or create enough light intensity on a cloudy day to keep phytoplankton growing adequately to produce a surplus of DO. Fish kills can happen due to lack of DO after several cloudy day periods. Research the light intensity needed for growing algae cultures. Now extrapolate that to the volume or area of your hypolimnion.
aka Pond Doctor & Dr. Perca Read Pond Boss Magazine - America's Journal of Pond Management
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 6,692
Hall of Fame 2015 Lunker
|
Hall of Fame 2015 Lunker
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 6,692 |
Thanks Bill!!!
|
|
|
Moderated by Bill Cody, Bruce Condello, catmandoo, Chris Steelman, Dave Davidson1, esshup, ewest, FireIsHot, Omaha, Sunil, teehjaeh57
|
|