LEDs are NOT a cost effective way to light a reef... (at least not for me)

[hart24601]

Anyone else remember motorized MH mounts because there was so much concern with shadowing with MH? How about the huge fights over 15K being so blue all your coral would die from the days when 10k was considered pretty blue!

Just me?? *slinks away*

Anyway this debate has been going on a very long time...

 

[VJV]

Unless somebody on here can effectively explain all of the particles in a quantum, then let's all just sign a pact to never refer to a "photon is a photon" again. Given the infinite variations that a quantum can have, there are prize-winning theorists that will tell you that no quantum has ever been the same as another which also means that no photon has ever been exactly like another - they are like snowflakes. That statement was offered in theory, not practice. Although I never have asked him directly, I will wager that Dr. Joshi regrets ever writing that statement since it has gotten lost as theory and supposition and taken as fact.

No two MH bulbs produce EXACTLY the same spectrum and none can have the same photons. Expecting a different type of light to produce the same photons of another is even more crazy. Yes, it is true that if you produce the exact same thing, the coral will not know or care where it came from, but let's cross this philosophical boundary when we get there... we are not even close.

If anybody truly has studied quantums, they want to laugh and puke at the same time at this statement. BTW - I don't recommend that anybody study quantum mechanics... I hated them as much as theory of automata.

Sorry mate [emoji1].

 

[saltyfilmfolks]

BTW - I don't recommend that anybody study quantum mechanics... I hated them as much as theory of automata.

The cat still dies.
nothing is solid.
A 48k par 38 from Home Depot will grow coral.

 

[VJV]

The cat still dies.
nothing is solid.
A 48k par 38 from Home Depot will grow coral.

LOL [emoji23]

 

[Pmj]

@VJV, that was a great last post, so why didn't you name the thread, "Radions are not a cost effective way to light a reef..."
You could get four 32" photon v2s and double them front to back and be even cheaper.

 

[Lasse]

The difference between the told wattage and the real wattage for MH (and sometimes T8 tubes) depends on the actual construction of the ballast. If it is an old magnetic ballast – it consume wattage – many times more than 10 % of the rated value. MH and T8 can be driven by magnetic ballast. However – if you use a modern electronical ballast to your MH or T8 – the ballast itself consume very, very low wattage. LEDs always also use electronical ballasts (as ALL T5) – therefor the internal energy consumption in the ballast is low.

At least in Sweden– this is real fact – how it is in the US today – I do not know.

@saltyfilmfolks We have a similar saying in Sweden - there are a thousand ways to skin a cat

Sincerely Lasse

 

[jda]

Anyone else remember motorized MH mounts because there was so much concern with shadowing with MH? How about the huge fights over 15K being so blue all your coral would die from the days when 10k was considered pretty blue!

Just me?? *slinks away*

Anyway this debate has been going on a very long time...

Light movers. I know a guy who still uses them. He has 250W MH spread out ever few feet over his 16' tank and also moves a 1000W MH on a rail to get all of the gaps.

 

[saltyfilmfolks]

there are a thousand ways to skin a cat

Hahaha.
In Hollywood we say the same. And the cat is always very upset.

 

[VJV]

@VJV, that was a great last post, so why didn't you name the thread, "Radions are not a cost effective way to light a reef..."
You could get four 32" photon v2s and double them front to back and be even cheaper.

[emoji4] I believe that would apply to most puck style fixtures, not only Radions. I love Ecotech and that Apple like pride of ownership and “I must have this” they bring to the hobby. And to me an XR15 is a better proposition than say a kessil a360. So I am not bashing at Radions.

 

[MnFish1]

4 - I believe the problem with current LEDs is that over the past years the manufacturers have been fighting to increase Par levels so that it could match older tech, and by doing so they have ended up with the focused puck style that we currently have with Radions, Kessils, AÍ and the likes.

Except that all brands are not the same.

5 - It is obvious that different tanks will have different needs. So if you have a 2 island aquascape in a 5 foot tank you can get away with two Radions. Whether or not you like the shadows or the fact that you are always looking at the under illuminated side of your fish when they swim up to the glass is a mater of personal preference so not a factor for this discussion. However, that has cost you already 1800 to begin with, when a 8 bulb ATI sundowner would have cost 800 and leave you with 1000 to buy corals. And if at a later stage you want to put a third island you need to buy a third Radion. So again, not good value. In the same vein, a softie or LPS tank would have much different requirements

Right - I don't see the shadows you're talking about. My tank looks uniformly ok (TO ME). The 2 radions cost 1400$ not 1800. You're right - but - Since I want to keep some lower light LPS in the center - it works perfectly. Me (personally) I dont like the tanks with SPS from corner to corner - thats just my personal preference. I have fish that need to swim. I dont know if you realize it - but the light levels 'near the glass' are higher then inside the tank - due to reflection - so I can see my fish quite nicely.

And thanks for realizing that your general statement at the start did not reflect the huge number of people who do not have SPS only tanks (ie they also have LPS and softies).

No two MH bulbs produce EXACTLY the same spectrum and none can have the same photons. Expecting a different type of light to produce the same photons of another is even more crazy. Yes, it is true that if you produce the exact same thing, the coral will not know or care where it came from, but let's cross this philosophical boundary when we get there... we are not even close.

. the philosophy of the quark

According to the BRS video on the kessils for example, they concluded that for SPS heavy tank you would need 1 per each square foot. That would imply actually 12 kessils. Problem here would be front to back coverage, not lengthwise. It seems a bit exaggerated to me but on the other hand one line of kessils running down the middle would not create good front to back coverage. Also, in Europe they cost 500€ a pop, so 7 kessils would set me back 3500€, three AP700 3450€. 6 XR15 would be a cheaper option at just 2700€, but again would not provide the same front to back coverage as the other two I mentioned.

Well - there are many 'kessils' and many BRS Videos. There are also many BRS videos on other brands - the new Radion G4xr30 - they also say literally quoting - 4 xr15's on a 48 inch tank gives plenty of PAR plenty of coverage for an SPS intenstive tank - and is a good value for someone wanting to do this. There is also a new video showing how the new diffuser in development removes nearly all of your concerns.

Again - and im not trying to pick on you - you might be correct - that in Euros, with your electrical costs, and the tank you desire that LED's (the one brand - that is much more expensive than others) are not cost effective. However, this argument is no more 'real' than me saying 'I need 1 XR15 for a 4 foot tank - thats what I like and for what im growing its good ' so that means that LED's are extremely cost effective. Cost is one issue - I hate the idea of changing bulbs the timing thereof. I hate a huge fixture on top of my tank. I like the possibilities to control how the tank looks programatically. And - lets say this - at worst its a little more expensive - but my configuration eems to grow coral, etc as well. Have been doing this a long time as well have been through the salt creep on the MH the changing bulbs on the fluorescents and MH, and then burning the corals when adjusting. IM just done with that part of it. - Lost corals and time is money as well.

 

[saltyfilmfolks]

[emoji4] I believe that would apply to most puck style fixtures, not only Radions. I love Ecotech and that Apple like pride of ownership and “I must have this” they bring to the hobby. And to me an XR15 is a better proposition than say a kessil a360. So I am not bashing at Radions.

But doesn't that negate your original point by eliminating fixtures that you don't prefer but still meet the safety and power requirements?

 

[VJV]

But doesn't that negate your original point by eliminating fixtures that you don't prefer but still meet the safety and power requirements?

Care to elaborate?

 

[BoomCorals]

The difference between the told wattage and the real wattage for MH (and sometimes T8 tubes) depends on the actual construction of the ballast. If it is an old magnetic ballast – it consume wattage – many times more than 10 % of the rated value. MH and T8 can be driven by magnetic ballast. However – if you use a modern electronical ballast – the ballast itself consume very, very low wattage. LEDs always also use electronical ballasts (as ALL T5) – therefor the internal energy consumption in the ballast is low.

At least in Sweden– this is real fact – how it is in the US today – I do not know.

@saltyfilmfolks We have a similar saying in Sweden - there are a thousand ways to skin a cat

Sincerely Lasse

My electronic ballasts consume 418w for my 400w radium. Im not sure I follow in the very very low wattage for electronic ballast? Very very low compared to magnetic?

 

[MnFish1]

[emoji4] I believe that would apply to most puck style fixtures, not only Radions. I love Ecotech and that Apple like pride of ownership and “I must have this” they bring to the hobby. And to me an XR15 is a better proposition than say a kessil a360. So I am not bashing at Radions.

Then show some evidence for what you are saying (besides that its your personal preference - which is all good) - but dont make a general statement that only applies to you personally

 

[VJV]

Then show some evidence for what you are saying (besides that its your personal preference - which is all good) - but dont make a general statement that only applies to you personally

Evidence is in the file. Personal preference is not being discussed. You can use the file and draw your own conclusions.

 

[Bouncingsoul39]

The cat still dies.
nothing is solid.
A 48k par 38 from Home Depot will grow coral.

Back to the OP's original point, the question is not whether other lights will grow corals. The point is whether or not it makes financial sense to run LEDs with all things considered. And for my specific case, I'm primarily interested in which light is best for growing Acropora when no other factors are important (cost, electricity, heat) when only trying to go for max growth and color. A combination of halide and T5 still seems to be it. No one here has given proof or a convincing argument otherwise.

 

[saltyfilmfolks]

[emoji4] I believe that would apply to most puck style fixtures, not only Radions. I love Ecotech and that Apple like pride of ownership and “I must have this” they bring to the hobby. And to me an XR15 is a better proposition than say a kessil a360. So I am not bashing at Radions.

Care to elaborate?

Sorry I though it was plain.
It appeared that from that statement

If you don't like light quality of an expensive puck like Radion, but a similar led fixture that costs less with lower power consumption and similar intensity and coverage is available at a lower initial price , you seem to have eliminated it by preference rather than the original long thoughts on initial price and long term use costs.

 

[MnFish1]

Hi, this is my opinion and based on my observations, so it may not be an universal truth for every tank out there. But in mY opinion, the whole argument that LED's are a more cost efective option in the long run is not accurate. The problem with LEDs is that manufacturer's grossly overestimate the actual coverage of their fixtures, leading you to believe that too can get away with just two for the typical 4 foot tank. This is simply not true and if you follow this recommendation you end up with massive shadowing and uneven coverage that leads to coral colonies dying from the bottom up.

Back to the basics. Prove this statement (this is from VJV's original post). And if prove is too strong a word, defend your opinion. Give examples where manufacturers 'grossly' (what is that quantitatively) overestimate the actual coverage of their fixtures. You can compare their exaggerations to a BRS video for example(will except the BRS tests as 'true'). Probably need to do it for a couple - since you suggest all LED manufacturers do this. Then - show where this uneven coverage leads to corals dying from the bottom up. BTW on the reef - I was under the impression that this is how corals grew.

 

[BoomCorals]

By the way I don't think some are understanding the shadowing that LED have compared to T5/halide. It's because the source of the light comes from a small puck. Like the sun in a late afternoon sky. You get shaded areas on the tree or bush (coral) that is facing away from the sun (led puck) because the main body of the tree/coral is shading the side.

Where as T5 halide is a much larger source, like having a huge sun the spans the entirety of the sky, so all sides of the tree (coral) are getting light. To remedy this you have to add far more LED lights than is practical, to increase the points of source.

Now, to me, the shading never bothered me much because I added a lot of LED. I mean, I ran SIX radion G4 xr30 over my 6' x 2' 180g. (And later, six of the SBreef 16" fixtures) This helped tremendously with shading. Though I wager a T5 halide combo would still have been even better.

 

[saltyfilmfolks]

And for my specific case, I'm primarily interested in which light is best for growing Acropora when no other factors are important (cost, electricity, heat) when only trying to go for max growth and color. A combination of halide and T5 still seems to be it. No one here has given proof or a convincing argument otherwise.

Eh. I think that's pretty readily available in other what's best discussion. And not really on topic. They all do a pretty good job it seems. Lots of nice stuff is grown under both.