HID vs fluorescent

Hello List:

Glider commented about the economic efficiency of HID lighting, and s/he is
absolutely correct on a few points:

1) HID systems are very cost-comparable to fluorescent systems;

2) HID systems are in fact far more energy-efficient.  My 18 40 watt tubes
consume 720 watts, and I doubt very much that they illuminate a larger area
than a 250 watt HID unit.  Also, everything I've read & heard from other
horticulturists agrees that HID produces a better spectrum, particularly if
the new Philips HPS bulbs are used.

3) I do more than 'just' start seeds under my lights.  I grow mainly
succulent species, many of which are exceedingly slow growers.  Many of them
stay under the lights for 12 months or more before I move them into the cool
greenhouse.  Comments from other cacti & succulent growers have convinced me
that for growing on succulents, HID is by far superior.  Comments from a
range of growers of other types of plants have convinced me that HID is
superior for most, if not all, applications.

The reason I do not have HID yet is the same one for not replacing by tubes
with Verilux.  I simply haven't budgeted to save the money to afford the
larger initial expense.  I also haven't quite figured out how I'll deal with
the waste heat problem; obviously it's not _that_ much of a problem,
otherwise more folks would have burned down their houses.

I'm looking forward to the day when I can contribute my own experience with
HID to the discussion.

Best regards,
Phillip Allen
Coastal Connecticut, USDA zone 7a



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To sign-off this list, send email to majordomo@mallorn.com with the
message text UNSUBSCRIBE PROPAGATION
Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index