This article was downloaded by: [Monash University Library]

On: 03 February 2015, At: 17:12

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number:
1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street,
London W1T 3JH, UK

Communications in Soil
Science and Plant Analysis
Publication details, including instructions for
authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/lcss20

A novel approach to
calculate acid additions
for alkalinity control in
greenhouse irrigation water
a b a
Brian E. Whipker , Douglas A. Bailey , Paul
a a
V. Nelson , William C. Fonteno & P. Allen
a
Hammer
a
Department of Horticulture , Purdue
University , 1165 Horticulture Building, West
Lafayette, IN, 47907–1165
b
Department of Horticulture , Iowa State
University , 147 Horticulture Hall, Ames, IA,
50011
Published online: 11 Nov 2008.

To cite this article: Brian E. Whipker , Douglas A. Bailey , Paul V. Nelson ,

William C. Fonteno & P. Allen Hammer (1996) A novel approach to calculate
acid additions for alkalinity control in greenhouse irrigation water ,
Communications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis, 27:5-8, 959-976, DOI:
10.1080/00103629609369610

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00103629609369610

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all
the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our
platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors
make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy,
 completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of
the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis.
The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be
independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and
Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings,
demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in
relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study
purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution,
reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access
Downloaded by [Monash University Library] at 17:12 03 February 2015

and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-

conditions
 COMMUN. SOIL SCI. PLANT ANAL., 27(5-8), 959-976 (1996)

A NOVEL APPROACH TO CALCULATE ACID ADDITIONS FOR

ALKALINITY CONTROL IN GREENHOUSE IRRIGATION
WATER1
Brian E. Whipker2, Douglas A. Bailey3, Paul V. Nelson3, William C.
Downloaded by [Monash University Library] at 17:12 03 February 2015

Fonteno 3 , and P. Allen Hammer

Department of Horticulture, 1165 Horticulture Building, Purdue University, West
Lafayette, IN 47907-1165

ABSTRACT: Excessive alkalinity in greenhouse irrigation water can increase

substrate solution pH, resulting in reduced micronutrient availability for plants. A
spreadsheet was designed to offer a quick and practical method for calculating: 1)
amount of nitric, phosphoric, and sulfuric acid required to achieve an endpoint
alkalinity or pH in irrigation water; 2) the amount of nutrients added by the acid
addition; and 3) acid costs. It calculates both pH and alkalinity after acidification,
regardless of endpoint selected. The spreadsheet accounts for the pH dependent
reaction which determines the relative percentage of each of the carbonate species -
carbonates (CO32-), bicarbonates (HCO3-), and carbonic acid (H2CO3) - present in
the solution. In addition, the acidification calculations account for the starting pH of
the solution, the alkalinity found in the initial solution, and the dissociation
characteristics of the acid selected to neutralize the alkalinity. The spreadsheet was
validated with six water sources from Indiana and North Carolina. Those results
showed alkalinity neutralization within an acceptable range of both target alkalinity

1. Journal Paper No. 14711 of the Agricultural Experiment Station of Purdue University, West
Lafayette, IN 47907. The project was funded in part with a grant from the Fred C. Gloeckner
Foundation.
2. Current address: Department of Horticulture, Iowa State University, 147 Horticulture Hall,
Ames, IA 50011.
3. Department of Horticultural Science, North Carolina State University, Raleigh. NC 27695-
7609.

959

Copyright © 1996 by Marcel Dekker, Inc.

 960 WHIPKER ET AL.

and pH. The spreadsheet provides a chemical basis for acidification and provides
results useful for making grower recommendations for acid additions to irrigation
water to neutralize alkalinity.

INTRODUCTION
Nutrient availability and subsequent plant growth can be affected severely by
high substrate and irrigation water pH (Biernbaum, 1992; Biernbaum, 1994a;
Downloaded by [Monash University Library] at 17:12 03 February 2015

Hammer, 1983; Hammer, 1985; Kidder and Hanlon, 1985; Koranski, 1983;
Peterson, 1984; Peterson and Ludwig, 1984). However, the major factor regulating
pH rise in substrate solutions is the level of alkalinity in the solution. Dissolved
bicarbonates and carbonates are the major chemicals contributing to alkalinity, but
dissolved hydroxides, ammonia, borates, organic bases, phosphates, and silicates
can also contribute to alkalinity (Ludwig, 1985). The relative concentration of the
carbonate species - carbonates (CO32), bicarbonates (HCO3-), and carbonic acid
(H2CO3) - is the main buffering system controlling irrigation solution pH as well as
the substrate solution pH (Lindsay, 1979). The use of irrigation water containing a
high concentration of carbonates and bicarbonates will rise the substrate solution
pH to undesirable levels during plant production (Biernbaum, 1994a). Carbonate
and bicarbonate ions can have toxic effects on root growth of plants (Matkin and
Petersen, 1971; Wadleigh and Brown, 1952). However, the toxic effects of
bicarbonates are believed to be due to interference with root uptake of essential
elements and an associated increase in substrate solution pH rather than the direct
uptake of bicarbonate by plants (Lindsay and Thorne, 1954; Lunt et al., 1956).
For these reasons, it is necessary to reduce the alkalinity of irrigation waters in
greenhouse production. The addition of nitric (HN03), phosphoric (H3PO4), or
sulfuric (H2SO4) acids to irrigation water is the most common method of reducing
alkalinity. Phosphoric acid is generally recommended as the acid of choice for
injecting into irrigation water systems because of safety concerns in handling acids.
Irrigation water requiring the neutralization of greater than 1.5 meq/L alkalinity can
cause excessive levels of phosphorus from phosphoric acid to leach into the
groundwater (Yeager and Barrett, 1985) or inhibit plant growth (Bingham, 1963;
Whipker and Hammer, 1994). For this reason, H2SO4 or HN0 3 are recommended
as alternatives.
Grower recommendations for acidification currently found in the literature do
not allow neutralization to endpoint pHs or alkalinity levels (Biernbaum, 1992,
 CALCULATING ACID ADDITIONS 961

1994b, and 1994c; Hammer, 1983; Ludwig, 1985; Matkin and Petersen, 1971).
For example, most recommendations do not take the starting pH into account when
recommending acid rates (Hammer, 1983; Ludwig, 1985); nor do they account for
the pH-dependent dissociation rate of H 3 PO 4 (Biernbaum, 1992, 1994b, and
1994c; Matkin and Petersen, 1971). Acidification calculations must take into
account the starting pH of the solution, the alkalinity found in the initial solution,
and the dissociation characteristics of the acid selected to neutralize the alkalinity to
Downloaded by [Monash University Library] at 17:12 03 February 2015

offer precise control of alkalinity.

Most plant tissue, soil, and solution analysis laboratories across the United
States are measuring alkalinity in irrigation water using the same procedure of
titrating samples to an endpoint pH of 4.6 (Chapman and Pratt, 1961; Fafard,
Personal Comm., 1993; Grace-Sierra, Personal Comm., 1993; Michigan State,
Personal Comm., 1993; Ohio State, Personal Comm., 1993; NCDA, Personal
Comm., 1993). An endpoint pH of 4.6 is also used with many of the colormetric
test kits used by greenhouse operators. The total millequivalents (meq) of acid
required to reach this endpoint pH is then reported as total alkalinity for the
solution. This titration measures the total of all ions which contribute to the pH
buffering capacity of the water, including hydroxides, carbonates, and
bicarbonates. Unfortunately, the end result of this titration is expressed in many
forms in the literature and by analytical laboratories: meq CaCO3, mg/L CaCO3
(Grace-Sierra, 1991; HACH Company, 1988; Peterson and Ludwig, 1984), meq
of Ca(HCO3)2 (Farnham et al., 1985), a combined meq sum of carbonates plus
bicarbonates (Chapman and Pratt, 1961; Fafard, Personal Comm., 1993; Matkin
and Petersen, 1971; NCDA, Personal Comm., 1993), or mg/L of bicarbonate ions
(Biernbaum, 1994b). Reporting alkalinity as mg/L of any one compound, such as
calcium carbonate or any one ion such as bicarbonate is speculative and is
extrapolation from a titration. Reporting alkalinity as carbonate, bicarbonate, or
calcium carbonate "equivalents" does not take into account that alkalinity can also be
derived from hydroxides in solution.
Little information is available on "acceptable levels" of alkalinity or the
established thresholds for toxicity. The target alkalinity level can vary with the type
and age of plants being grown as well as container size and type of substrate.
Farnham et al. (1985) report that concentrations of alkalinity >1 meq/L in irrigation
water will increase substrate pH. Styer and Laffe (1990) suggest upper levels of 1
to 1.3 meq/L alkalinity for bedding plant plugs and 1.6 to 2 meq/L alkalinity for
 962 WHIPKER ET AL.

finished bedding plants. Traditional recommendations for acceptable upper limits of

alkalinity in irrigation water range from 1.3 meq/L (Biembaum, 1994a) to 2 meq/L
(Grace-Sierra, 1991) for plugs and from 2.6 meq/L (Biernbaum, 1994a) to 3.6
meq/L (Grace-Sierra, 1991) for plants in 15 cm diameter containers.
The multiple options for acid injection make calculating acid addition rates with
varying alkalinity levels, proportioner settings and nutritional programs time
consuming. In addition, the percentage of each of the carbonate species present is a
Downloaded by [Monash University Library] at 17:12 03 February 2015

pH dependent reaction (Lindsay, 1979) which makes the mathematical calculations

difficult without the framework of a computer spreadsheet. This project provides a
convenient framework of a computerized spreadsheet (Microsoft Excel, 5.0) to
calculate acid additions for irrigation water, while providing a table of added
nutrients and the costs of each acid addition.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Program Development and Overview
The spreadsheet program provides a simple and convenient method to give
clientele a customized report of acid required to neutralize excessive alkalinity in
their irrigation water. The spreadsheet is divided into five sections; sample inform-
ation, table for calculated volumes of each acid to add, amount of major nutrients
added by each acid, treatment costs, and notes on acid use.
Measurement and Reporting Method of Solution Alkalinity
Acidification calculations must take into account the starting pH of the solution,
the alkalinity found in the initial solution, and the target alkalinity or pH level.
Water samples (100 mL) are titrated to an endpoint pH of 4.6 with an acid of
known concentration (N), with the required number of mL of acid used being
recorded. The total meq of acid required to reach this endpoint pH is then reported
as total alkalinity for the solution. Since the alkalinity reading is a composite of all
free hydroxides, carbonate, and bicarbonate ions in solution; and since the reading
is derived from an acid titration measuring the meq of acid needed to decrease the
solution pH to 4.6, we propose that alkalinity is best reported as meq/L alkalinity as
recommended by the American Public Health Association (Anonymous, 1966).
From a practical standpoint, acidification equations are based on meq of alkalinity to
be neutralized rather than mg/L or ppm of a single compound in the sample.
1) Sample Information: The spreadsheet customizes the report with the client's
name and address, sample number and date. In addition, the irrigation water
 CALCULATING ACID ADDITIONS 963

analysis values of pH and alkalinity level (which can be expressed in either meq/L
of alkalinity, mg/L bicarbonate, or mg/L CaCC^) is input. We propose that the
alkalinity level be expressed as meq/L of alkalinity, but we are aware that
greenhouse operators are accustom to having alkalinity being expressed as mg/L
bicarbonate or mg/L CaCC^. Therefore the spreadsheet has the option of expressing
alkalinity in any of the three forms. From these values, a target pH level or
alkalinity level is established based on the type of crop being grown. Because
Downloaded by [Monash University Library] at 17:12 03 February 2015

"acceptable levels" of alkalinity vary by crop age and container size, the spreadsheet
user has the option of changing the target alkalinity or pH level. The endpoint
chosen can be either an endpoint meq concentration of alkalinity or an endpoint pH.
Since these two factors are related as previously described (Lindsay, 1979), the
user cannot select both endpoints. To our knowledge, there is no working
acidification calculator based on the above essential criteria available.
The amount of alkalinity to be removed is calculated by subtracting the target
alkalinity from the sample alkalinity. These calculations account for the pH
dependent reaction which determines the relative percentage of each of the carbonate
species - carbonates, bicarbonates, and carbonic acid - present in the solution.
Molar fractions (MF) of each of the carbonate species are based on the following
equations (Lindsay, 1979):

MF of CO32- = (1(K-18-15> /10 (-PH) ) / [KX-1-45) + (10(-7-82> /

MF of HCO3- =

MF of H 2 CO 3 =

Molar fractions (MF) of each of the carbonate species are calculated at the
starting pH and the endpoint pH, with the MF sum of the carbonates and
bicarbonates at the initial pH, minus the MF of bicarbonates at the endpoint pH,
times the meq/L of alkalinity present, determining the amount of alkalinity that has
to be removed.
 964 WHIPKER ET AL.

2) Acid Rate Calculator: The acid calculator calculates the volume of acid
required to neutralize the alkalinity with three types of acid, each at two concen-
trations: H3PO4 (75 and 85%), H2SO4(35 and 93%), and HNO3 (61.4 and 67%).
The equivalent weight of the acid is determined by dividing the acid's molecular
weight by the number of hydrogen (H+) ions present. The specific density of the
dilute acid is calculated by dividing the specific density of pure acid by the
percentage strength of the acid used. This step allows for the option of modifying
Downloaded by [Monash University Library] at 17:12 03 February 2015

the spreadsheet due to local availability of dilute acids. The amount of acid required
to neutralize 1 meq/L of alkalinity is calculated by dividing the acid's equivalent
weight by the specific density of the dilute acid. This value is multiplied by the total
meq/L of alkalinity needing to be neutralized to obtain the total amount of acid
required. Dissociation of H2SO4 and HNO3 are relatively constant within the pH
range used for irrigation solutions [pH 4.0 to 8.0], but phosphoric acid dissociation
varies greatly with pH within the same range [pH 4.0 to 8.0]. Therefore the
spreadsheet incorporates the phosphoric acid dissociation equation to account for
this variation: = {1+ [0.5/(10- 7 -2-P H )]J.
The values calculated above output into a table that gives acid additions to adjust
irrigation water pH and alkalinity level (Fig. 1). The table provides the volume of
acid to add to the irrigation water. The volumes are based on fluid ounces/gal or
mL/gal for proportioner rates of 1:100,1:128, or 1:200.
3) Nutrients Added Calculator: Besides the benefit of modifying the
irrigation water alkalinity, acid injection provides nutrients (nitrogen, phosphorus,
or sulfur) for plant growth, depending upon the acid chosen. This calculation is
based on the following formula from Bunt (1988): acid volume (mL/liter) * acid's
specific gravity * (% acid/100) * decimal percent of element in acid's formula.
From the values presented in the table, growers can modify their fertility program to
account for the added nutrients.
4) Cost Comparison Calculator: An economic comparison of the different
acid options are provided to assist the user in selecting the acid to use. The cost
portion of the spreadsheet allows for the input of price of acids per gallon. Costs
are provided on the treatment cost per 1000 gallons and 1000 liter of irrigation
water.
5) Notes on Acid Use: General recommendations are given for the safe use and
handling of acids. Guidelines for the retesting of irrigation water are also provided.
 Alternative Acids to Add to Irrigation Water
Acids Phosphoric Phosphoric Sulfuric
n
Sulfuric Nitric Nitric
Amounts Acid (75%) Acid (85%) Acid (35%) Acid (93%) Acid (61.4%) Acid (67%) >
Downloaded by [Monash University Library] at 17:12 03 February 2015

For Small Volumes

0.384 0.315 0.526 0.132 0.354 0.317
ml per liter
0.049 O.040 0.067 0.017 0.045 O.O41
fl. 02. per gallon
1.454 1.193 1.992 0.499 1.338 1 .200
ml per gallon »< - '' - -
>
For a 1:1 OO Injector a
fl. oz. per gallon (cone.) 4.92 4.04 6.74 1.69 4.53 4.06 a
ml per gallon (cone.) 145.43 119.34 199.21 49.93 133.83 120.02 o
, - - ... ' ' ' '' z
For a 1:128 Injector 03
fl. oz. per gallon (cone.) 6.29 5.17 8.62 2.16 5.79 5.19

ml per gallon (cone.) 186.16 152.75 254.99 63.91 171.30 153.62

For a 1:200 Injector

fl. oz. per gallon (cone.) 9.84 8.07 13.47 3.38 9.05 8.12

ml per gallon (cone.) 290.87 238.67 398.42 99.87 267.66 240.03

i ** f '• " I

Nutrients Added by Each Type of Acid

Nutrients Added: Phosphorus Phosphorus Sulfur Sulfur Nitrogen Nitrogen
Amount Added (ppm): 143.9 143.9 76.2 76.2 66.1 66.1

Use the information above for modifying your fertility program .

FIGURE 1. Example output table for acid addition rates. Values based on an initial pH of 8.3, 5.72 meq alkalinity, and
a target endpoint alkalinity of 1 meq.
 966 WHIPKER ET AL.

System Requirements
The spreadsheet program runs on Microsoft Excel, 5.0 on a Macintosh or
IBM-compatable computer. The spreadsheet requires 59 K of memory.

MODEL VALIDATION
The mathematical basis of the model assumes that all of the alkalinity present in
the water sample is in the carbonates or bicarbonates form. Dissolved bicarbonates
Downloaded by [Monash University Library] at 17:12 03 February 2015

and carhonates are the major chemicals contributing to alkalinity, but other
dissolved chemicals like hydroxides, ammonia, borates, organic bases, phosphates,
and silicates can also contribute to alkalinity. Therefore, validation of the model was
required to check its accuracy in calculating acid addition rates.
Water samples were collected from six sites, three in Indiana and three in North
Carolina. Three 100 mL samples from each water source were used to determine
the initial pH and EC levels. The amount of alkalinity present in the water was
determined by titrating samples to endpoint pH of 4.6 using either 0.0IN HC1
(Purdue University) or 0.05N H2SO4 (North Carolina State University). The total
meq of acid required to reach this endpoint pH was reported as total alkalinity for
the solution. The mean pH and alkalinity values of the three replications were used
in the alkalinity calculator for determining acid addition rates.
For each water source, the acid addition rates were determined by the alkalinity
calculator for 1 liter of water for each of the treatments listed in Table 1. The
appropriate amount of acid was added to the sample, and the endpoint pH and EC
were measured within 10 minutes after the acid addition. The residual alkalinity
remaining in the sample was determined by titrating the sample to pH 4.6 using the
same acid as used in the initial alkalinity determination. Three replications were
used to test each of the treatments. Data were tested by analysis of variance by
general linear model procedures (SAS, 1990). Means were separated by least
significant differences (LSD) at P S 0.05.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Characteristics of the water samples were significant at the treatment level
(Table 2). The pH of the water from the six sources varied from 7.4 to 8.5.
Alkalinity levels ranged from 2.13 to 8.27 meq/L of alkalinity, with the standard
errors of the readings being less than 0.05 meq/L of alkalinity. The highest
alkalinity levels did not correspond to the samples with the highest pH levels and
 CALCULATING ACID ADDITIONS 967

TABLE 1. Acid treatments used to validate the alkalinity calculator spreadsheet.

Treatment Acid Endpoint

1 35% H 2 SO 4 pH6.2
2 pH5.8
3 pH5.4
Downloaded by [Monash University Library] at 17:12 03 February 2015

4 75% H3PO4 pH6.2

5 pH5.8
6 pH5.4
7 67% HNO3 pH6.2
8 pH5.8
9 pH5.4
10 35% H2SO4 1.5 meq alkalinity
11 1.0 meq alkalinity
12 0.5 meq alkalinity
13 75% H3PO4 1.5 meq alkalinity
14 1.0 meq alkalinity
15 0.5 meq alkalinity
16 67% HNO3 1.5 meq alkalinity
17 1.0 meq alkalinity
18 0.5 meq alkalinity

the correlations between pH and alkalinity were not significant. EC levels ranged
from 0.22 to 1.32mS/cm,with EC being significantly correlated with alkalinity (r
= 0.79).
The actual water pH after the acid addition resulted in pH values that were
similar to the predicted pH values for the sets of treatments based on either a target
endpoint pH or for a pH value derived from a target endpoint alkalinity level (Fig.
2). The degree of variation between the actual pH values minus the predicted pH
values varied by acid treatment (Fig. 3), with the greatest variation occurring with
the 35% H 2 SO 4 acid addition at pHs 5.33 and 5.4. Even though the variations
 968 WHIPKER ET AL.

TABLE 2. pH, alkalinity, and EC of water used to validate the alkalinity calculator.

Location of Alkalinity EC
water source PH (meq) (mS-cnv1)

Indiana, West Lafayette 8.3Z 5.72Z 0.68z

Downloaded by [Monash University Library] at 17:12 03 February 2015

Indiana, Hope 8.5 7.50 0.63

Indiana, Ladoga 8.5 7.22 0.60
North Carolina, Plymouth 7.9 8.27 1.32
North Carolina, Raleigh 8.5 2.13 0.22
North Carolina, Creswell 7.4 7.27 0.80

Significancey *** *** ***

z
Values are means of 3 replications.
y "* Significant at P < 0.001 by water source.

between the acid treatments at each target pH level were statistically significant,
from a practical standpoint, an LSD of 0.035 pH units is commercially
inconsequential. Also, when the degree of variation is compared between the sets of
treatments based on a target endpoint pH or a pH value derived from a target
endpoint alkalinity level, the degree of variation was similar.
The actual alkalinity values were similar to the predicted alkalinity values for the
sets of treatments based on either a target endpoint alkalinity or for an alkalinity
level derived from a target endpoint pH (Fig. 4). The actual alkalinity levels varied
significantly from the predicted alkalinity levels by acid treatment (Fig. 5), with the
greatest variation occurring with the 35% H 2 SO 4 acid addition. The variation could
be from measuring error inherent in micropipeting small volumes of acid. For
 CALCULATING ACID ADDITIONS 969

pH based on the target pH derived from the target

endpoint pH treatments alkalinity treatments
Downloaded by [Monash University Library] at 17:12 03 February 2015

75%H 3 PO 4

Predicted pH Predicted pH

Predicted pH

pH after acid addition

FIGURE 2. The predicted and actual pH values for each of the acid addition
treatments. Values are means from all six water sources.
 970 WHIPKER ET AL.

0.10-
• 35%H2SO4
0.05- E2 75%H3FO4
D 67%HNO,
Downloaded by [Monash University Library] at 17:12 03 February 2015

-0.20
5.4 5.8 6.2
Predicted pH

5.33 5.69 5.93

Predicted pH

FIGURE 3. The variation of actual pH minus predicted pH of the three acid

treatments for (a) pH based on the target pH treatments, and (b) pH derived from
a target endpoint alkalinity. The variation of actual pH minus predicted pH values
significant for acid treatment at P < 0.001. LSD (a < 0.05) is 0.035.
Downloaded by [Monash University Library] at 17:12 03 February 2015

Predicted alkalinity (meq/L)

—•— Predicted meq alkalinity based on target pH value
—fy— Actual meq alkalinity based on target pH value
...-O---. Predicted meq alkalinity based on target alkalinty leve
—tt— Actual meq alkalinity based on target alkalinity level

FIGURE 4. The predicted and actual alkalinity (meq/L) level for each of the acid
addition treatments. Values are means for all six water sources. The alkalinity
values are significant for acid treatment at P < 0.001. LSD (a < 0.05) is 0.04.
 972 WHIPKER ET AL.
Downloaded by [Monash University Library] at 17:12 03 February 2015

-0.25
0.65 1.41 2.66
Predicted alkalinity level

o.oo-

-0.05-

•
ted

1
o
0>
>
Si
-0.10-

-0.15-
•| •• •
1
kalii
tual

-0.20-

u «s B
0.5 1 1.5

Predicted alkalinity level

• 35%H2904 0 75%H3FO4 O 67%HNC(3

FIGURE 5. The variation of actual minus predicted alkalinity levels of the three
acid treatments for (a) alkalinity levels derived from the target pH treatments, and
(b) alkalinity levels based from a target endpoint alkalinity level. The variation of
actual minus predicted alkalinity levels significant for acid treatment at P < 0.001.
LSD (a < 0.05) is 0.04.
 CALCULATING ACID ADDITIONS 973

example, when a 1:10 dilution was made of the acids and rerun on the water sample
from Raleigh, NC, variance between the actual and predicted alkalinity was reduced
by 80% (data not shown).
The results of the acid additions on EC values were significant by acid type. EC
values decreased in magnitude with the use of 75% H 3 PO 4 . The 35% H 2 SO 4
resulted in slight increases in EC, while the 67% HNO3 increased EC even more
(Table 3). The different endpoint ECs are consistent with relative conductivity
Downloaded by [Monash University Library] at 17:12 03 February 2015

differences between the ionic species lost [bicarbonate and carbonate] and the ionic
species added [phosphate, sulfate, and nitrate].
The test of the validity of the computerized model resulted in actual alkalinity
and pH values after acid addition being similar to the predicted target alkalinity and
pH values. We expect less error from measuring when commercial greenhouse
operators are adding larger volumes of acid to larger volumes of water. This
computerized model accounts for the dissociation characteristics of H2SO4, HNO3,
and H3PO4 and the pH dependent reaction of the carbonate species present in the
solution. Even though we assumed all alkalinity was due to bicarbonate and
carbonate, it accurately calculates the amounts of acid to inject into irrigation water
without having to incorporate a "correction factor" to compensate for the cation
activity coefficients (Ludwig, 1985) or rely on a linear approach to acid addition
(Biernbaum, 1992, 1994b, and 1994c).

CONCLUSION
Excessive alkalinity levels in greenhouse irrigation water can lead to increased
substrate solution pHs, resulting in nutrient deficiencies. The multiple options
available for acid injection make calculating recommended acid addition rates for
growers with varying alkalinity levels, proportioner settings and nutritional
programs time consuming. This spreadsheet using Microsoft Excel 5.0 offers a
quick and practical method to calculate recommended volumes of HNO3, H3PO4,
and H2SO4 to add to irrigation water, the amount of nutrients added by the acid
addition, and treatment costs. The spreadsheet takes into account the pH dependent
reaction which determines the relative percentage of each of the carbonate species -
carbonates, bicarbonates, and carbonic acid - present in the solution and the
dissociation characteristics of the acid selected to neutralize the alkalinity, which
make the mathematical calculations difficult without the framework of a computer
 974 WHIPKER ET AL.

TABLE 3. Influence of acid treatment on water EC levels. Values are means from
all six water sources.
EC
Acid Treatment (mS-cnr1)

Non-treated Water 0.71

Downloaded by [Monash University Library] at 17:12 03 February 2015

35% H2SO4 Target pH

6.2 0.72
5.8 0.73
5.4 0.74
Target Alkalinity
1.5 0.73
1.0 0.74
0.5 0.74
75% H3PO4 Target pH
6.2 0.68
5.8 0.68
5.4 0.68
Target Alkalinity
1.5 0.68
1.0 0.68
0.5 0.68
67%HNO3 Target pH
6.2 0.76
5.8 0.79
5.4 0.79
Target Alkalinity
1.5 0.78
1.0 0.79
0.5 0.79

EC was significant at P < 0.01 for each acid treatment. LSD (a = 0.05) = 0.017.
 CALCULATING ACID ADDITIONS 975

spreadsheet. The spreadsheet provides a chemical basis for acidification and

provide results useful for making grower recommendations for acid additions to
irrigation water to neutralize alkalinity.
Program Availability
The alkalinity calculator is available via the internet at the following address:
http://www2. ncsu.edu/nscu/cals/hort_sci/floriculture/. For additional information,
contact Doug Bailey at: Doug_Bailey@ncsu.edu or P. Allen Hammer at:
Downloaded by [Monash University Library] at 17:12 03 February 2015

pah@purdue.edu.

REFERENCES;

Anonymous. 1966. Standard Methods of the Examination of Water and

Wastewater. American Public Health Association, Inc., New York, NY.
Biernbaum, J. 1992. Water and media testing essential to managing the root zone
with minimal leaching. PPGA News. 23(6):2-5.
Biernbaum, J. 1994a. A delicate balance. Greenhouse Grower. 12(1):88, 90, and
93-94.
Biernbaum, J. 1994b. Treat your water right. Greenhouse Grower. 12(2):31,33-
35.
Biernbaum, J. 1994c. Water quality. IN: Tayama, H., T. Roll, and M. Gaston
(eds.). Tips on Growing Bedding Plants. Ohio Florists' Association,
Columbus, OH.
Bingham, F. 1963. Relationship between phosphorus and micronutrients in plants.
Soil Sci. Soc. Amer. Proc. 27(3):389-391.
Bunt, A.C. 1988. Media and Mixes for Container Grown Plants. 2nd edition.
Unwin Hyman, Boston, MA.
Chapman, H.D. and P.F. Pratt. 1961. Methods of Analysis for Soils, Plants, and
Waters. Agr. Sci. Pub. #4034. University of California, Berkley, CA.
Farnham, D.S., R.F. Hasek, and J.L. Paul. 1985. Water quality: its effects on
ornamental plants. University of California Coop. Ext. Ser. Lflt. #2295, Davis,
CA.
Grace-Sierra. 1991. Solution Analysis. Grace-Sierra Testing Laboratory,
Allentown, PA.
HACH Company. 1988. Alkalinity Test Kit. HACH Co., Loveland, CO.
 976 WHIPKER ET AL.

Hammer, P.A. 1983. Adding phosphoric acid to your water. Focus on

Floriculture, Purdue University, 11:3-4.
Hammer, P.A. 1985. Growing ideas. GrowerTalks 48(12):14.
Kidder, G. and E.A. Hanlon. 1985. Neutralizing excess bicarbonates from
irrigation water. Notes in Soil Science, No. 18. Florida Extension Service,
Gainesville, FL.
Koranski, D.S. 1983. Growing plug annuals. GrowerTalks. 46(11):28-32.
Downloaded by [Monash University Library] at 17:12 03 February 2015

Lindsay, W.L. 1979. Chemical Equilibria in Soils. John Wiley and Sons, New
York, NY.
Lindsay, W.L. and D.W. Thorpe. 1954. Bicarbonate and oxygen as related to
chlorosis. Soil Sci. 77:271-279.
Ludwig, L.S. 1985. Influences of water pH, alkalinity and acid additions upon
floral crop growth and nutrient relationships. M.S. Diss., The Ohio State
University, Columbus, OH.
Lunt, O.R., H.C. Kohl, and A.M. Kofranek. 1956. The effect of bicarbonate and
other constituents of irrigation water on the growth of azaleas. Proc. Amer.
Soc. Hort. Sci. 68:537-544.
Matkin, O.A. and F.H. Petersen. 1971. Why and how to acidify irrigation water.
Amer. Nurseryman 133(12):14, 73.
Peterson, J.C. 1984. Current evaluation ranges for the Ohio State floral crop
growing medium analysis program. Ohio Florists' Association Bui. 654:7-8.
Peterson, J.C. and L.S. Ludwig. 1984. The relationship between water pH and
alkalinity. GrowerTalks 48(8):30, 32, and 34.
SAS. 1990. SAS/STAT User's Guide, volume 2, verison 6, 4th edition. SAS
Institute, Cary, NC.
Styer, R.C. and S. Laffe. 1990. Is high pH coloring your plugs yellow?
GrowerTalks 54(6):70, 72, and 74.
Wadleigh, C.H. and J.W. Brown. 1952. The chemical status of bean plants
afflicted with bicarbonate induced chlorosis. Bot. Gaz. 113:373-392.
Whipker, B.E. and P.A. Hammer. 1994. Determination of injurious phosphorus
levels in poinsettias. HortScience 29:85-87
Yeager, T.H. and J.E. Barrett. 1985. Influence of incubation time on phosphorus
leaching from a container medium. J. Environ. Hort. 3(4):186-187.