The sizing of a lake aeration/destratification system is critical. An undersized system can actually be detrimental to a lake and deadly to its inhabitants, and an oversized system will cost too much to buy, install and operate. Unfortunately, unreliable testing methods and exaggerated claims in the industry often lead to undersizing. This is more the rule than the exception! We highly recommend researching a manufacturer's testing methods before comparing, sizing and purchasing an aeration system.

When comparing systems, it's important to determine if a third party testing organization took their measurements without bubble plume confinement. Bubble plume confinement involves the positioning of a pipe, sometimes called a draft tube, above the air emitter/diffuser. This allows easy measurements, but it has a serious flaw. It will cause all tested devices with the same airflow to have about the same water flowrate, regardless of diffuser styles. Therefore, making a quantified comparison of their efficacy without the draft tube is impossible!

As a result, all manufacturers' claims that are based on the draft tube testing method are not valid. For example, an efficient diffuser design that really moves 1,000 gpm in a lake may measure 2,000 gpm with a draft tube. And the same air compressor without any diffuser at all could also measure 2,000 gpm with a draft tube, while in reality it only moves 50 gpm in a lake.

Confined aeration operates like an airlift, by placing a pipe or draft tube above the diffusing aerator. As the water in the pipe becomes more displaced with air, it makes the total weight within the pipe less than the weight outside the pipe. The pressure differential inside vs. outside the pipe causes the water (and air) inside the pipe to move up much more rapidly than without the pipe. This is known as the "Chimney Effect." We do not recommend using confined aeration systems in lakes because they have high capital, installation and maintenance costs. Simply put, they aren't practical.