ACT - Aerated Compost Tea

Discussion in 'Growing Organic Marijuana' started by Microbeman, Sep 21, 2012.

  1. #41 Microbeman, Oct 18, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 18, 2012


    Not so fancy really, at least not as fancy as some of those $2000++ vortex brewers. I will say that IMO ACT makers which use an airlift are more efficient because of the capacity to raise dissolved oxygen (DO2).

    Many people attribute this efficiency to a vortex in machines which create a vortex but also use multiple (or single) airlifts.

    Because of this scientific error, they get carried away with the numbers of riser pipes and place them on an angle for 'apparent' aesthetics and razmattaz. A straight vertical rise is the correct use of an airlift for the purposes of increasing the DO2 capacity of a pump. (see attached PDF).

    We tested the DO2 in our new 12 gallon bioreactor with a vortex configured and without. There was no measurable difference between the two.

    The time when one would wish to incorporate more than one airlift is if the capacity of the pump in relation to the volume of the water justifies it (or if you just love the look and cleaning that extra pipe).


    e.g. I used two airlifts in a design for a 1000 gallon bioreactor (ACT maker) [for a hay farm] with a cone bottom tank and a huge regenerative air blower [190 CFM]. Even with two airlifts it ran like a jet engine.

    One can decide to build their own brewer and rather than rewrite a bunch of stuff, here is a link to some tips to help with that http://www.microbeorganics.com/#So_You_Wanna_Build_A_Compost_Tea_Brewer

    OR one can decide to purchase one of the machines on the market.
     

    Attached Files:

  2. Microbemans brewer is still considerably less expensive than my own homemade brewer -

    I'd much rather see Microbeman do all the work building it...Plug-n-Play.

    j
     

    Attached Files:


  3. Extractors, correctly made are an excellent way to utilize compost. The difference between extract and ACT is that in extract, the microbes are extracted in mostly dormant form (cysts & spores) to be activated later in the soil. The other difference is that one uses 10% [vermi]compost for extract and 2 to 3% to make ACT.

    As far as the information on the site linked, they state incorrectly that nutrients are being extracted and that the nutrients are taken up by foliar application. I have been asking for legitimate literature showing that organic molecules can be absorbed by stomata or plant epidermal tissue for years.

    Dr. H.B. Tukey did show in the 1950s that soluble nutrients were assimilated through the leaf surface but all information 'which I know of' indicating that organic molecules can be assimilated is anecdotal.

    Don't get me wrong. I want this to be true. It would be great if somehow nutrients from ACT or extract were absorbed at the leaf interface. It would be great if it were so, that nutrients were floating around in solution in ACT after protozoa consume bacteria/archaea but I know of no scientific evidence of this.

    Getting back to the site linked to, did you notice the reviews were overrun with porno? Seems odd.
     
  4. Inspired :hello:
     

    Attached Files:

  5. Boogie brew? Lots of misinformation on their website. The sprayer they use tears up fungal hyphae.
     
  6. So to have a quality ACT maker you just need to have a design with a good pump and cram as much oxygen into the water without splashing?? Is this right?

    I like the design of the cone bottom vortex but you are saying that it has no actual real benefit compared to regular barrel/flat bottom shaped containers?
     
  7. For a good laugh;

    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLA2Fx1DciY]Tea READY in HOURS! Boogie Brew Beneficial Tea For Garden - Brewing cheap tea at home indoor - YouTube[/ame]
     
  8. Not quite. Splashing is fine. Splashing is good because it breaks the surface tension allowing enhanced gas exchange.

    AND

    I did not say a cone bottom does not have a benefit, otherwise I would not have used one. I just said that it is the airlift rather than the vortex which is responsible for the high DO2 rates. The great benefit to a cone bottom tank (& the vortex created) is that everything is thoroughly mixed. There will be no still pockets.

    There is a rudimentary design for a cone bottom airlift on my webpage. It is similar in configuration to Jerry's machine.
     
  9. You're right MM, fancy isn't the right term. When I say fancy what I mean is "fancier than a 1 gallon bucket and an aquarium pump". Yea, that's how I roll :p. I should have said that if I could afford a proper brewer, yours would be my choice. Those $2000 brewers seem gimicky to me.
     
  10. [quote name='"Microbeman"']

    Boogie brew? Lots of misinformation on their website. The sprayer they use tears up fungal hyphae.[/quote]

    Actually just the dIsplay model sixty five and the stand, nothing else. They had multiple sizes so they were happy to see it go I think.
     
  11. Hey no worries by the way ITG.

    If you folks out there are contemplating purchasing a brewer or some kind of microbial boosting amendment for your tea or soil, take a listen and look at what the seller is presenting. Are they using some kind of fancy non-related name? Not a good sign.
    Are they giving information which is accurate? For example in the link and the video presented, they state that the foam shows it is microbially active and they say that the mycorrhizal is growing in the foam. Neither of these things are correct.

    Foam is an extremely unreliable indicator of microbial activity. Just using molasses and/or many different plant materials will create foam (saponins) and endomycorrhizal fungi does not grow in ACT and only endo type mycorrhizal are of benefit to cannabis plants. These statements are rampant amongst hydro store owners/workers and greed motivated compost tea brewer manufacturers. It accentuates their ignorance and their apathy for you, the grower (sucker).

    Many of them believe this nonsense themselves but what does this illustrate if they can't even take the time and expend the effort to learn the truth or even a semblance of it?

    If they claim the product they are selling produces microbes, they should have a microscope right there so they can show you these microorganisms. It is just another expense for honest business practice.

    Some guy with a big grin talking about 'yer bennies and mycos' does not have a clue.
     


  12. Is it functional? You can make a good machine out of it.
     
  13. MM, I have a question about mycorrhizae fungi. I know that the mycorrhizal will not grow in an ACT, but what about in a soil with no plant roots? It seems like adding a mycorrhizal inoculant to a new batch of soil (when you mix it) and then letting it sit for a month is kind of a waste, since the mycorrhizal fungi depend on symbiosis with the plant to survive (I could be wrong on this). I've told people this in the past, so I want to confirm it with you. What I'm asking is if there is any benefit to introducing mycorrhizal fungi to soil, then letting it sit for a month vs adding the mycorrhizal inoculant directly to plant roots (or to the soil right before the plant is added)?

    I caught that comment about the microbes growing in the foam, lol. Does that mean that if I add bubble bath I'll get a more microbially rich ACT? :rolleyes:
     
  14. [quote name='"Microbeman"']

    Is it functional? You can make a good machine out of it.[/quote]

    It is functional, they had it on sale as a kit but sold me just the tank with fitting and stand. I assume I should just take the elbow, make it a T and use a straight pipe back up like you recommend.

    Edit...I cannot seem to attach photos from phone
     
  15. Only if you climb in and are really dirty from a day 'inthegarden' ;)

    It is absolutely a waste of time inoculating soil with endomycorrhizal spores, thinking the fungi will grow out in the absence of live roots. It is contact with roots which causes the spores to germinate. The most practical method of inoculation (as in my sticky) is to treat roots or(and) prepped cuttings with the spores.

    Note to Admin; Please stick this thread. I really don't wish to repeat all this stuff.
     
  16. There is a rudimentary design for a cone bottom airlift on my webpage. It is similar in configuration to Jerry's machine.

    And it was MM who, over a year ago helped me with around a hundred design questions when I was building my brewer.


    Yes, the cone bottom tank is ideal to prevent and kind of dead spots, although with a decent air pump I don't know if that's possible anyhow - but there's no doubt that it helps mix the living hell out of it.

    I caught that comment about the microbes growing in the foam, lol. Does that mean that if I add bubble bath I'll get a more microbially rich ACT?

    Yes, yes it does - nice, squeaky clean microbes.

    There's nothing worse than a stinky microbe.

    J
     
  17. Thanks MM, that's what I thought but I wanted to make sure I wasn't telling people the wrong thing.

    I can't believe this hasn't been stickied yet. :confused:
     
  18. What power microscope do you need to look at you ACT.
     
  19. Thanks mm, So single airlifts that go straight up is best?? And will too much splashing disturb the spiral of the water in vortex design?

    Nice brewer you have there Jerry how many gallons is it?
     
  20. 15 gallons with a 72 LPM Alita air pump set up with an airlift. It works perfectly.

    J
     

Share This Page