Ironically, that might work
against the argument to switch to LEDs. One reason that has been put forth for switching from HID lighting to LED is that the lifetime of the LED product is (
in theory*) such that the user will not have to replace any components, while the user of HID will go through several bulbs (which add to the cost of HID over time). HID technology is, while not completely stagnant, fully mature and therefore advances tend to be slow in coming and evolutionary rather than revolutionary. But, with LED lighting, being a much younger technology (the first practical visible LED was invented in 1962, whereas HIDs have been around in one form or another for over 100 years), it means that advances can tend to come much faster - and be more likely to be revolutionary in nature.
(*) I have seen a lot of reports of component failures in some LED product lines. While this is "only" inconvenient when the product is still under warranty - the grower may lose that light source during the time it takes to ship the product to the manufacturer and/or repair center, have it repaired, and for it to be shipped back, and may have to pay the shipping cost for at least one of those two shippings - it is still a PitA, and something to think about. In addition to this, it has been said (and quite often) that an LED product may last up to 50,000 hours - which would be almost 11½ years of continuous operation if used strictly for 12-hour/day flowering - the warranties I have seen are only typically three to five years in duration (and some... "economy" brands warranty their products for only two to three years and sometimes even less).
What all of that means is that... If one assumes that the average purchaser of LED lighting is someone who wants new technology, who is looking for some kind of "edge" - be it efficiency, performance, whatever - then they might be that much more likely to upgrade their equipment when the next generation (or at least the one after that) hits the market.
Sure, the grower has the option to sell his/her "old" LED product(s) to someone else, and this does happen. But this can be an uncertain thing... Not everyone wishes to purchase LED products. Then, too, not everyone wishes to purchase used lighting and/or growing equipment (for various reasons). And, with the situation that I mentioned in my aside ("
(*)"), I would think that those who
are willing to purchase used LED grow light products would not, on average, be willing to pay all that much for it, lol, since many companies may refuse to warranty equipment which was purchased used from third parties. Why purchase a used, likely expensive, out-of-warranty LED product when one can probably purchase a tried and true HPS setup NEW for the same or less money? Although some electronic HID ballasts are said to be somewhat fragile, C&C magnetic ballasts are the kinds of products that a person had best really want to see for a long time, lofl, because they hardly ever fail; I dropped one down a flight of stairs onto a concrete floor once - and then proceeded to use it for
years :rolleyes3 .
With all that being said, I am still a fan of LED grow light technology. There's one "in my possession" that is all set to be fired up just as soon as this heat wave breaks enough that I'll have some hope of keeping the grow area at 86°F or less (which seems to be the top of the optimum temperature range for grows that do not use supplemental CO₂, providing that there is enough light to max out the cannabis plants' ability under those conditions). It is "early 2015" technology, and the specific product has been replaced by a newer, more powerful one. Nonetheless, it seems to be a much better product than the average LED grow light panel (for the wattage - ~350 watts, actual) than the average LED product being sold today, both in quality, warranty (
five years, with three years of technical support), efficiency... and results. That product is the SE350+UVB which is one of our
sponsors' (
Amare Technologies). Here are a couple of charts (one with and one without the included 90° lenses in place):
In my case, it will be used in a 3'x3' area. If you are considering the purchase of an LED product, I suggest you obtain this kind of data for the product(s) you are thinking about buying. There have been tests like this performed on various HID (HPS, primarily) setups before that you might find if you spend enough time searching the web, so you ought to be able to compare the PPFD between what you are using now and the one(s) you are considering. (Photosynthetic Photon Flux Density (PPFD): A measurement of the light (photons) that reach the target each second. PPFD is measured over a one meter square area in “micromoles per square meter per second” and expressed as μmol/m2/s.)
Oh, and it probably wouldn't hurt if you can find evidence of how the LED product(s) you are considering have performed for others in an
actual cannabis grow. In my case, I was able to find such evidence in posts #112 and #113 of this thread (again, this is a previous generation of the product; I would assume the current version (SE450+UVB) - with 100 more watts, and newer technology including more efficient/powerful COBs, and emitting an estimated 70% more photons, to perform that much better). I
think I have linked directly to post #112. Notice the young lady included in one of the pictures for scale, lol (the plant is taller than she is and several times greater in diameter):
Amare Technologies: Questions, Answers & Results
I cannot say one way or the other whether this product will "blow away" HID on a watt-for-watt basis. Much, like everything else, depends on the grower - and the style of the grow. The penetration/footprint/etc. characteristics for one's light source needs to match the size/shape/number/spacing/etc. of the plant(s) for best results. Something that I knew before, in general - the first time I ever grew using a style that would later be called "scrog" was way back when I was using groups of 4' fluorescent tubes to grow with. I remember thinking, "I have managed to cram a good bit of light into this space, but there still isn't much in the way of penetration. What I need is a way to grow on more of a "flat pane" instead of trying to grow trees." I have recently seem some of
Icemud's posts, and they have reminded me how important it is to tailor one's growing style (and everything else) to one's lighting (and... everything else). I haven't grown in several years, don't have a budget, and - in all likelihood - will not be growing in such a way as to take full advantage of the LED panel. I know this will be a learning experience for me. I will not be growing "high production" strains, either, lol. If I harvest even as much as, IDK, .55 grams per watt then I will have to consider the grow a success (insofar as the LED's place in it is concerned) and if I get anywhere near .75 g/w I will be astounded - and those are numbers that I would have shaken my head at in the past, when using lighting technology that I had used for a number of grows and had a chance to explore, learn, and tailor my methods for to one degree or another.
They're all (where we are chiefly concerned) sources of illumination for indoor gardens. Airplanes and helicopters both take off, move through the air, and land again - but if I'm ever in a helicopter and the pilot climbs in and says, "I fly airplanes all the time, but I have never flown a helicopter," I'll be out of there so fast that my
shadow will still be there wondering WtF happened.
While I agree it's two years old, advances have been made not only in LED technology but also in HID. From what you're saying, one might get the impression that LED tehnology is going forward by leaps and bounds, and that HID's are stagnating, and this is just not the case. Good example is CMH (Ceramic Metal Halide).
...first sold commercially in 1994, lol.
In "recent" years, advances in HID technology have been evolutionary - not revolutionary. It is a fully mature technology and advances just do not tend to come at a rapid pace. Also, the general
market in regards to HID is mature - whereas the LED market is still growing by leaps and bounds (fueling R&D), expected to grow from a few billion dollars to ten times that in the next decade or so.
But even if that is the case, is it possible, in two years time, that LED's have managed to bridge the gap? Or, shall I say, the abyss. I mean, in the long term, they have been twice as much expensive to run than HID's.
Do you remember when metal halides started to become mainstream for growers? And, later, high pressure sodium lights? It was much the same... 35+ years ago, there weren't all that many people utilizing HID in the grow room. I think the biggest difference between then and now is... the Internet :rolleyes3 . Back then, I could tell a few friends, who'd tell a few friends, who'd tell...
me, lol - because the "circle" of acquaintances was smaller and news spread more slowly. Now, I could undoubtedly find a venue to post a picture of my most recent
bowel movement - and 25,000 people would have seen and commented upon it by lunch time. Such things have, perhaps unfortunately, enabled (caused, lol?) people to find out about LED grow products at a rapid pace - a pace which has outrun the technology in a lot of ways, IMHO. That, combined with the abundance of entities pushing out products of uncertain or, at best, somewhat less than premium quality (something else that has changed a bit in the past three or four decades), means that a LOT of LED grow panels have been sold that probably should not have gone to market to begin with.
I absolutely agree that one day LED's will get as good as HID's, but that day isn't here yet.
On this particular day, some people are still using fluorescent technology
. So there really are no clear-cut lines as far as different types of technology and periods of time go. But I think, on average, LED (grow-)light technology has advanced quicker than and has had less dead-ends than HID (grow-)light technology. Remember mercury-vapor lamps, LMAO?
Does that include HVAC?
