Well to be honnest, I'm more upset for deletes. I don't think the negetive things being posted are trolling. People should be availed both sides to have responsible choice. Only one side stated and veiwed is PROPAGANDA ,,, pure and simple. I'm an eletrician and on some of the elecrical sites I'm on, they are talking about false claims about LEDs not just grow light LEDs either. Also on these sites (electrical) it is agreed that LEDs will some day be what is claimed that they are today, someday. I have no problem with anyone using them if the choice is their honnest choice. I think also there should be both sides talked about. I hate seeing our good farmers leaving here and /or being banned. I love freedom of speach and the abillity to hang here with great folks. I'd like to see Logic put up the deleted posts and unbann those that have been banned over this LEDgirl issue. Lets hope for a great harvest. Peace Dr.stickerdick
I too work in the industry as a project mgr for an electrical design/build company in So CA. Regarding LED lamps for general area lighting the Army and AF issued a memo in 03/10 that banned the use of LED for future base lighting projects as so many of the previously installed projects did not live up to the claims.
Most of the problems we saw had to do with sustained lumen output, life span failures, heat management but the other one was that pilots at several bases reported having a hard time seeing on approach with the LED.
This was a huge problem because on some of the projects we specified fixtures based on in situ photometric measurements that led us to believe the LED technology would be the best choice for the applications.
You can see the actual memo (pg 17) on the inda-gro.com website just see 'compare' on the home page and it's a hyper link on the next page.
I grow too and the big problem I see with LED is that canopy penetration is not as good as conventional or the current induction grow lights I'm using.
What growers who buy LED grow lights eventually find out for themselves is that it is the LED lamps narrow band spectrum itself which stunts growth during the crucial late flowering and bud stages where proper PAR spectrums and photomorphogenesis must be available to maximize chlorophyll A and B absorption and photosynthesis to occur. So while an HPS may not make 700 nm (induction grow lamps peak @ 380 & 700 nm) it is far better at photomorphogenesis and yields are commensurately higher then the LED.
We're all looking for ways to reduce overhead and operational costs and the amount of money I've spent on LED based on grow and yield claims is unfortunately gone but not to be repeated.
inda-gro has an easy 'what is light' under their FAQ that the grower should check out. It makes it easier to understand the important ways plant (PPF, YPF) and human light (lumens, lux, footcandles) needs differ. I ended up replacing 3 of the 1000 watt HPS with 4 of the 400 watt pro series and the kush yields have been no different averaging @ 300 gr/p/m.
