You've obviously never played with an LED flashlight. I've got one that's no
bigger than a small Maglight and is fully bright enough to light my whole
driveway at night, and blind the neighbor's dog when he decides to mess with
my curbside trash cans. LEDs are much brighter FOR THEIR SIZE than any other
bulb I've been able to find. Plus, they come in more colors than red. My
flashlight has both white bulbs for use on the dog, and red for not killing
your nightvision. There's also blue, green, purple & amber, that I know of.
Murri

"Gene Schurg" wrote in message
news:6Mwcf.21981$Ny6.7782@trnddc06...
Pat,

I've seen the ads for LEDs in the Orchids Magazine. When I think of LED I
think of the little red light on the front of my PC. I can't imagine they
give off enough light for plants let alone to light a room.

Gene




"Pat Brennan" wrote in message
...
Hey Gene,

Here's my take on it. I think the 200W CF produces as much light as five
4'
tubes or 2.5 shop lamps (I still use the old 40W tubes). I know my 400W
HPS
produces way more light than that. I think the 400W HPS produces more
light
than 5 shop lamps (or two 200W CFs), but I do not know for sure. When
you
are trying to determine which is better, I think you have to consider how
much light you need. Deflectors also play into this because they
determine
how big an area you are trying to light from the source. Before I buy
new
fixtures, I am going to look into LEDs, I have read good things but I did
not think they were in cost effective production yet.

Pat

"Gene Schurg" wrote in message
news:sx9cf.22859$ip6.19656@trnddc07...
After reading the posts about the bulb y'all addressed all of my
questions
about heat and coverage but the total cost issue still has me puzzled.

If I buy a 200 watt bulb and fixture the energy consumption would be
the
same as a metal halide or HPS of the same wattage. It sounds as if the
200W
CF would cover the same area as the 400W MH so operational energy cost
would
be 1/2 to cover the same area. Since the compact flourescent generates
less
heat than MH or HPS the cost of cooling would be less.

The bulb replacement cost appears to be more than the 400W MH I used to
use.
It sounds as if the 200W CF would cover the same area as the 400W MH.

So the TCO (Total Cost of Ownership) would be the cost of the fixture
(lower
than MH), plus annual replacement of the bulb (about twice the cost of
MH),
plus energy costs (1/2 of MH), minus the reduction in cooling cost (CF
is
cooler than MH).

Overall it sounds like the CF would have the better TCO. Am I reading
this
right?

Good Growing,
Gene

Gene Schurg wrote:
Pat,

I've seen the ads for LEDs in the Orchids Magazine. When I think of LED I
think of the little red light on the front of my PC. I can't imagine they
give off enough light for plants let alone to light a room.


The LED plant bulbs contain a big cluster of very intense LED's. They
do indeed put out a lot of light.


J. Del Col

On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 00:46:58 GMT in 6Mwcf.21981$Ny6.7782@trnddc06 Gene Schurg wrote:
Pat,

I've seen the ads for LEDs in the Orchids Magazine. When I think of LED I
think of the little red light on the front of my PC. I can't imagine they
give off enough light for plants let alone to light a room.

Look at a traffic light that has had the light bulbs replaced with
an array of LEDs. In fact if it's a retrofit, you'll probably be able to
compare lightbulb and LED as they usually wait for the yellow lights
to burn out before replacing them :-).
Granted, the reason LEDs are going into those applications is useful
lifetime.

As for the person with the light intensity per watt.
My understanding is that the smaller the tube diameter, the more lumens
per watt.
But the other factors are
1) Cost of bulbs
2) bulb life
3) Cost of fixtures

The last time I looked up the relative costs, 4' and 8' T12 bulbs
were at a price point to make up for their added electricity consumption,
but that analysis was done before most offices went to T8 bulbs...
Anyone know of a more up to date analysis?


--
Chris Dukes
Suspicion breeds confidence -- Brazil

Ok...well you all peaked my interest.

I went to the ledgrowlights.com site and poked around.

This seems to be a very interesting concept for someone who has a small
collection and lots of money to spend.

http://ledgrowlights.com/GrowlightKits.htm

On this page they say that the basic system 22 watts covers 2-3 square feet
and 66 watt system covers 6-8 square feet. The 66 watt would be about equal
to a two tube shop light in coverage.

On the next page for VA they say that a 22 watt system costs $299.00! The
individual bulbs are $99 and $85 (red and blue).

A shop light from Home depot with two bulbs is less than $20.00

I see a lot of benefits from the LED lighting but I question what the
payback would be when you consider the high initial cost of deploying this
form of lighting.

Good Growing,
Gene

Beats me, I'm still using F40s.

Pat


The last time I looked up the relative costs, 4' and 8' T12 bulbs
were at a price point to make up for their added electricity consumption,
but that analysis was done before most offices went to T8 bulbs...
Anyone know of a more up to date analysis?


--
Chris Dukes
Suspicion breeds confidence -- Brazil