--- Heather J Gladney <hgladney@comcast.net> wrote: > . . . I understand that LEDs would be cooler, more > efficient & > durable than > either MH or CFs, which makes them less toxic than lots > of replacement > bulbs, but of course you're still putting in electrical > energy. I'm > only seeing very tiny ones, such as hoods with moonlight > bulbs. The kind of LEDs that you'd probably use - the ultrabright or superbright kind that come in a variety of colors including white - are actually a kind of fluorescent lamp. But not quite the same as your standard glass tube fluorsecent lamp. In the glas tube fluorescent, electrons traveling through a plasma of vaporized mercury, generate UV photons that cause phosphorescent paint to fluoresce. With the LEDs, the photons emitted from the diode cause material on the specially treated diode to fluoresce. The gross energy efficiency is no better than MHs or PCs and the effective efficiency (amount of usable light per input energy) might be worse given that the LEDs usually do not have a very "dispersal" of light. So there wouldn't be a heat or energy cost advantage. If run at the correct voltage, they would last longer than MHs and probably longer than PCs. Some day, someone with lots of time and solder will assemble a huge array of suprebright LEDs for their aquarium. By then, PCs or T5HOs or both probably will have come down in price significantly as mas production drives down the marginal costs. Let there be light, and aquatic plants to use it, Scott H. Plants and DVDs for sale at the AGA table at the ACA 2005 Annual Convention, Fort Worth, Texas on July 21-24, 2005. ACA Convention Details at http://www.aca2005.org/ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Share the fun; show your work. The AGA's Sixth Annual International Aquascaping Contest is open. Find about about here: http://showcase.aquatic-gardeners.org _______________________________________________ AGA-Member mailing list AGA-Member@thekrib.com http://lists.thekrib.com/mailman/listinfo/aga-member